Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022/04/04 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA APRIL 4, 2022 The St. Louis Park City Council is meeting in person at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. Members of the public can attend in person or watch on local cable (Comcast SD channel 17 and HD channel 859) or via webstream at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil. Visit bit.ly/slpccagendas to view the agenda and reports. Due to technical challenges, courtesy call-in public comment is not available for this meeting. You can provide comment on agenda items in person at the council meeting or by emailing your comments to info@stlouispark.org by noon the day of the meeting. Comments must be related to an item on the meeting agenda. The city recognizes the value of the call-in opportunity to provide access to those who can’t attend meetings in person and is working on a reliable solution. 5:15 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION Discussion item 1. Legal compliance refresher 6:10 p.m. Room setup/change over for EDA and City Council meetings 6:20 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – council chambers 1.Roll call 2.Approval of EDA agenda 3.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.) 3a. Accept for filing EDA disbursement claims for the period of Feb. 26 through March 25, 2022. 3b. A dopt EDA Resolution supporting the provision of an Affordable Housing Trust Fund loan in an amount not to exceed $450,000 for Project for Pride in Living’s proposed Union Park Flats development. 4.Approval of EDA minutes 4a. EDA meeting minutes of March 7, 2022 5.Unfinished business – None 6.New business – None 7.Communications – None Meeting of April 4, 2022 City c ouncil agenda 6:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – council chambers 1. Call to order 1a. Pledge of allegiance 1b. Roll call 2. Presentations 2a. Recognition of donations 3. Approval of minutes 3a. Closed executive meeting minutes of March 7, 2022 3b . City council meeting minutes of Feb. 7, 2022 3c . Special study session minutes of Feb. 7, 2022 3d . Study session minutes of Feb. 14, 2022 3e . City council meeting minutes of Feb. 22, 2022 3f . Special study session minutes of Feb. 22, 2022 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. A ccept for filing city disbursement claims for the period of Feb. 26 through March 25, 2022. 4b. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,091.75 donation from George Foulkes for the purchase and installation of a bicycle repair station at Westwood Hills Nature Center. 4c . Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance 2635-21 correcting omissions for recording and approve summary ordinance for publication. 4d. Designate Ti-Zak Concrete, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, and authorize execution of a contract w ith the firm in the amount of $347,061.25 for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003. 4e . Adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of $7,920.83 for the annual concrete replacement project with Standard Sidewalk, Inc. - Project No. 4021-0003, City Contract No. 28-21. 4f . Designate Bituminous Roadways, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $6,833,385.89 for the 2022 Pavement Management Project No. 4021-1000. 4g. Adopt Resolution authorizing conveyance of city property located on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard to the Economic Development Authority (EDA) in connection with the Beltline Station Development. 4h . Adopt Resolution renewing a mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. 4i . Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a monetary donation from the National Association of Government Web Professionals (NAGW) in an amount not to exceed $1,500 for all related expenses for Jason Huber, information technology manager, to attend the 2022 NAGW National Board Retreat in Little Rock, Ark. Meeting of April 4, 2022 City c ouncil agenda 4j . Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of 15 portable solar battery charger pack donation to the building and energy department valued at $166.20 total. 4k. Approve Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17, between the city and T-Mobile Central, LLC for communication antennas, and related equipment, on the city’s water tower at 5100 Pak Glen Road. 4l . Approve a temporary on -sale intoxicating liquor license for the Church of the Holy Family at 5925 West Lake Street for an event on April 23, 2022. 4m. Approve for filing planning commission minutes of Feb. 16, 2022. 5. Boards and commissions -- None 6. Public hearings 6a. Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take testimony, and then close the hearing. Motion to approve proposed use and policy on unmanned aerial system operations. 6b . Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development (Ward 1) Recommended action: Open the public hearing, take testimony and close public hearing. • Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating various highway easements on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard and set the Second Reading of an Ordinance for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes); • Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating various street easements on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard and set the Second Reading of an Ordinance for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes); • Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating various alley easements on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard and set the Second Reading of an Ordinance for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes); • Motion to approve first reading of Ordina nce vacating various easements on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard and set the Second Reading of an Ordinance for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes) 6c . Off-sale in toxicating liquor license – TMS Alpha, LLC dba Westside Wine & Spirits (Ward 3) Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close public hearing. Motion to approve application from TMS Alpha, LLC dba Westside Wine & Spirits for an off -sale intoxicating liquor license located at 8016 Minnetonka Blvd. 6d . Roadway easement vacation for Wooddale Avenue Apartments (Ward 2) Recommended action: Open the public hearing, take testimony, and close the public hearing. Recess (at approximately 7:45 pm) -- The city council will take a short recess so that those who observe Ramadan may break their fast. Recommended action: Motion to recess the meeting for 15 minutes. Upon reconvening, the mayor shall call the meeting back to order. Meeting of April 4, 2022 City c ouncil agenda 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – None . 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items 8a. Wooddale Avenue Apartments (Ward 2) Recommended action: • Motion to adopt Resolution approving the amendments to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Plan Map, as well as related figures and tables (requires 5 affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating a roadway easement located between Highway 100 and Wooddale Avenue and set the second reading for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes); and • Motion to adopt Resolution approving the preliminary and final plat for Wooddale Avenue Apartments (requires 4 affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance adding section 36-268-PUD 23 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from R3 – Two-Family Residential to PUD 23 and set the second reading for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes). 8b . Beltline Station Development (Ward 1) Recommended action: • Motion to adopt Resolution approving the preliminary and final plat for Beltline Station (requires 4 affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance adding section 36-268-PUD 22 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from IG – General Industrial to PUD 22 and set the second reading for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 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: Special study session Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Discussion item : 1 Executive summary Title: Legal compliance refresher Recommended action: No action at this time. Policy consideration: Not applicabl e. Summary: City Attorney Soren Mattick will be in attendance to go over topics related to legal compliance requirements, including open meeting law, data practices, conflict of interest and gift acceptanc e. Financial or budget considerations: Not applicabl e. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Training materials from Campbell Knutson Pre pared and approved by: Kim K eller, city manager Special study session meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 2 Title: Legal compliance refresher TRAINING MATERIALS for St. Louis Park City Council April 4, 2022 Special study session meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 3 Title: Legal compliance refresher I. OPEN MEETING LAW A. OPEN MEETINGS. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 13D.01 - .07, almost all meetings of the City Council must be open to the public. A meeting exists when a quorum of the city council is together and: 1. Make a decision concerning city business; or 2. Discuss city business; or 3. Obtain information on city business. Be wary of serial communications: do not use the “reply all” function in emails. If a discussion occurs on social media, then that discussion must be open for participation by the public. B. OTHER ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION. Serial communication occurs when one councilmember consults another, who consults another, and so forth. This is not permitted under the Open Meeting Law. One of the main goals of the Open Meeting Law is to ensure that deliberations take place in a public setting. 1. It is not advisable to substantively discuss City matters via text message even with one other councilmember. Text messaging and/or other electronic communication to other councilmembers during a meeting about City matters is also not permitted. Be careful about engaging in discussions on your personal devices. Discussions about city matters are generally public data, subject to mandatory retention periods and accessible to the public upon request. Deliberations and discussions must occur in a public forum. 2. Similarly, a quorum of members having a discussion about public business on social media, such as in the comment section of a private Facebook page, could constitute a meeting in violation of the Open Meeting Law. Minn. Stat. §13D.065. C. NOTICE REQUIREMENTS. The City Council must give the following notices: 1. A schedule of the regular meetings shall be kept on file at the Council’s primary offices. Regularly scheduled meetings on your adopted meeting schedule require no additional notice. 2. Special meetings require mailed & posted or published notice at least three days before the day of the meeting. 3. Emergency meetings - as soon as reasonably practicable. D. CLOSED MEETINGS. Notice of the meeting is required stating why the meeting will be closed and the subject of the meeting. The meeting is still recorded. Closed meetings are allowed in limited circumstances: 1. Labor negotiations. 2. Pending litigation. 3. Preliminary consideration of charges against an employee. 4. Evaluation of a person subject to its authority. 5. To determine the asking price of property being sold. 6. To review confidential appraisal data. 7. To develop counteroffers for the purchase or sale of property. 8. To discuss active investigative data. 9. If it would identify victims or reporters of crimin al sexual conduct, domestic abuse, or maltreatment of minors. Special study session meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 4 Title: Legal compliance refresher D. PENALTIES. If a court finds that an individual intentionally violated this open meeting law, penalties include: 1. Individual fine of $300.00 per occurrence for an intentional violation, which may not be paid by the City. 2. Three intentional violations in three separate actions can result in removal from office. 3. Additional costs and attorney's fees may be imposed up to $13,000.00. The City may pay this amount. II. DATA PRACTICES A. DATA. The Data Practices Act (Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 13) presumes that all government data are public. . The Data Practices Act obligates all levels of state and local government besides the legislature and the courts to preserve created data and respond to data requests. 1. “Government data” means all data collected, created, received, maintained or disseminated by state or local government, regardless of its physical form, storage media, or conditions of use. Data includes: paper documents, emails, CDs, videotapes, and computer files. B. CLASSIFICATION. To balance the need for transparency with the need to protect individual rights, state and federal law provide for classifications to limit access for private or confidential data. 1. Requests for data can come from the subject of the data (such as an employee) or a member of the public. Responses to data requests depend on how the data is classified. C. THE LIFE CYCLE OF A REQUEST. 1. A person submits a data request to the Responsible Authority in the City. If the request is for private information, the City may ask for proof of identity. It is impermissible to request for a member of the public’s identity when fulfilling a request for public data. 2. If the request is from the member of the public, the City must respond within a “reasonable amount of time.” 3. If the request is from the data subject, meaning the data is about the requesting individual, then the City is required to respond within ten business days. 4. The City staff then retrieves the data responsive to the request, if there is any. 5. Then the City review the data and determines if there is a justification to deny access to some or all of the data. If responsive data is withheld the City must inform the requestor and cite to the specific law that allows the redaction. 6. The City provides access to the data and collects copy costs, if requested. Special study session meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 5 Title: Legal compliance refresher III. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST A. CONTRACTS. Under Minn. Stat. §471.87, with limited exceptions, a c ouncil member may not have a personal financial interest in a sale, lease, or contract with the City. This law applies to all public officers who are "authorized to take part in any manner in making any sale, lease, or contract in official capacity." Exceptions and special approval procedure may be available in a given fact situation. Simply abstaining from voting is not enough. Violation of this prohibition is a crime. B. NON-CONTRACTS. The general rule is that any official who has a personal financial interest in a non -contract action is disqualified from participating in the action. Courts evaluate certain factors to determine when a conflict requires disqualification. These include: • the nature of the decision being made • the nature of the financial interest • the number of interested officials • the need, if any, for the interested official to make the decision • other means available, if any, such as an opportunity for review of the decision, that serves to insure that the officials will not act arbitrarily to further their selfish interests. C. BEST PRACTICE. If you have an actual or potential financial interest in a decision to be made, disclose the conflict, abstain from voting, and do not participate in the discussion. If you have any concerns, discuss them with the city attorney. Avoid even the appearance of a conflict. D. ABSTAINING. Abstaining means to refrain from a vote. In this case, a member of a body would be present at the meeting but would not partake in discussion or voting of the issue before the body. E. CHARTER PROVISIONS. PERSONAL FINANCIAL CONFLICTS OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS. 1. Contracts void. Except for any contract permitted by M.S.A. § 471.88, any public official who is authorized to take part in any manner in making a sale, lease, or contract in their official capacity shall have no personal financial interest in that sale, lease, or contract or personally benefit financially therefrom unless the effect on the public official's personal financial interest is no greater than on any other person and/or property similarly situated. Any sale, lease, or contract entered into by the city with regard to which a public official has acted in violation of this section is void. Any money which is paid by the council in violation of this paragraph may be recovered from any and all persons interested therein. Any vote pursuant to M.S.A. § 471.88 must be unanimous by council. 2. Noncontractual transactions voidable. Any public official who in the discharge of their duties would be authorized to take an action, vote, or make a decision concerning a noncontractual transaction of the city which would affect the public official's interests, unless the effect on their interests is no greater than on other persons and/or property similarly situated, shall disqualify themselves from such action, vote or decision. Any transaction entered into by the city with regard to which a public official has acted in violation of this paragraph is voidable at the Special study session meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 6 Title: Legal compliance refresher option of the council. Any money, which was paid by the council in violation of this paragraph, may be recovered from any and all persons interested therein. FINANCIAL CONFLICTS OF ASSOCIATES OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS; CONTRACTS AND TRANSACTIONS VOIDABLE. Any public official who in the discharge of their duties would be authorized to take an action, vote or make a decision concerning a contractual or non-contractual transaction which would affect the interests of their associates, unless the effect on the interests of their associates is no greater than on other persons and/or property similarly situated, shall disqualify themselves from such action, vote or decision. Any contract or transaction entered into by the city with regard to which a public official has acted in violation of this section is voidable at the option of the council. Any money, which was paid by the council in violation of this section, may be recovered from any and all persons interested therein. F. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. CONFLICT OF INTEREST. No member of a board or commission shall: 1. Enter into any contractual arrangement with the city during the term serving as an appointed board or commissioner member and for a period of one year after leaving office, unless authorized by Minnesota Statutes § 471.88. 2. Use their position to secure any special privilege or exemption for themselves or others. 3. Use their office or otherwise act in any manner which would give the appearance of or result in any impropriety or conflict of interest. IV. GIFT LAWS. A. Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 471.895, "An interested person may not give a gift or request another to give a gift to a local official. A local official may not accept a gift from an interested person." • “Local Official” means an elected or appointed official of a city. • “Interested Person” means a person who has a direct financial interest in a decision that a local official is authorized to make. • “Gift” means money, real or personal property, a service or loan, forgiving a debt or a promise of future employment without the giver being paid equal value. Exceptions include: • campaign contributions • plaques or mementos recognizing service • trinket or memento of insignificant value • food if you appear to make a speech • gifts given because of your membership in a group, a majority of whose members are not local officials • gifts by a member of your family Special study session meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 1) Page 7 Title: Legal compliance refresher When the City receives a gift/donation, it must be accepted by a two-thirds v ote of the City Council (i.e. 5out of the 7 members). Minn. Stat. § 465.03. B. CHARTER PROVISIONS GIFTS AND FAVORS. No public official shall accept any valuable gift, whether in the form of money, service, loan, thing or promise, from any person, firm or corporation which to their knowledge is concerned, directly or indirectly, in any manner whatsoever in business dealings with the city; nor shall any public official (1) accept any gift, favor or thing of value that may tend to influence them in the discharge of their duties; or (2) grant in the discharge of their duties any improper favor, service, or thing of value or accept an offer which would not have been given if they were not an official; or (3) accept or receive anything of value through sale or gift of goods or services which would result directly or indirectly from their position as a public official of the City of St. Louis Park. Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 3a Executive summary Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Recommended action: Motion to accept for filing EDA disbursement claims for the period of Feb. 26 through March 25, 2022. Policy consideration: Does the EDA desire to approve EDA disbursements in accordance with Article V – Administration of Finances, of the EDA bylaws? Summary: The finance division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the EDA to review and approve. The attached reports show both EDA disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable. Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of the information follows the EDA ’s charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: EDA disbursements Prepared by: Kari Mahan, accounting clerk Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:25:30R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 15,750.00BOLLIG & SONS MTKA BLVD PROPERTIES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 690.006211 CEDAR LK RD (DAHL PROP)OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16,440.00 1,343.00CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES 1,343.00 49.00CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A TRAINING 235.00DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 284.00 572.10EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC 4900 EXC BLVD TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 572.08WEST END TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 572.08CSM TIF DIST G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 572.08MILL CITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 572.08PARK COMMONS G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 572.08HWY 7 BUSINESS CENTER G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,432.50 5,000.00FRANZEN LAW & POLICY GROUP LLC HRA LEVY G&A LEGAL SERVICES 5,000.00 3,000.00PRIMACY STRATEGY GROUP LLC.DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LEGAL SERVICES 3,000.00 24,941.48SHERMAN ASSOCIATES DEVELOPMENT - EDA G&A LAND IMPROVEMENTS 24,941.48 32,660.70ST LOUIS PARK CONV & VISITORS BUREAU CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU COST REIMBURSEMENT-CVB 32,660.70 35,000.00ST LOUIS PARK FRIENDS OF THE ARTS PUBLIC ART OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 35,000.00 Report Totals 122,101.68 Economic development authority meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3a) Title: Approval of EDA disbursements Page 2 Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 3b Executive summary Title: Resolution in support of an Affordable Housing Trust Fund loan –Union Park Flats (Ward 2) Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution supporting the provision of an Affordable Housing Trust Fund loan in an amount not to exceed $450,000 for Project for Pride in Living’s proposed Union Park Flats development. Policy consideration: Is the EDA willing to consider approving a resolution of financial support from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) in an amount not to exceed $450,000 to support Project for Pride in Living’s (PPL) application for a deferred loan through Minnesota Housing Finance Authority (MHFA) and other public funders? Summary: On July 6, 2020, the EDA approved a re solution of support for tax increment financing assistance (TIF) in an amount not to exceed $600,000 to support PPL’s proposed all-affordable housing development at 3700 Alabama Avenue , Union Park Flats . The city continues to support the Union Park Flats development and approved a plat and PUD allowing for the development’s construction. In January 2022, PPL was awarded tax credits from MHFA , however several factors , including tax classification changes, interest rate adjustments, rising construction costs and the need for TIF have changed and have altered the project’s financial proforma and feasibility . Instead of utilizing TIF assistance to make the project financially feasible , it’s now being recommended to provide a deferred loan in an amount of $450,000 from the AHTF. Per the city’s financial consultant, Ehlers, this would be more cost efficient to the project and would help lower the project’s total development costs. Recently, PPL submitted another application to MHFA for additional funds for their project and requested the EDA provide an updated resolution of support with the amount of financial assistance and the mechanism proposed. This action does not constitute a formal approval of funding by the EDA. Financial or budget considerations: The attached resolution states that the EDA supports providing PPL’s Union Park Flats development with a deferred loan from the AHTF in an amount not to exceed $450,000. This assistance would be provided through a 40-year deferred loan from the AHTF. It is recommended that the EDA establish a housing TIF district to repay the loan, which would repay the loan in approximately 13 years utilizing 100% of the annual tax increment generated from the new housing TIF district. This process would allow the AHTF to be repaid much sooner than 40-years. Should PPL sell, refinance , or resyndicate the project prior to the deferred loan being repaid, PPL will repay the loan in full plus interest. Once PPL receives additional funding commitments from MHFA and/or other funders, and its need for financial assistance is further confirmed by Ehlers, staff will work with PPL to prepare formal business terms regarding the AHTF assistance for the EDA’s review. Staff will also prepare for the establishment of a new housing TIF district for the EDA ’s consideration. 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: Jennifer Monson, redevelopment administrator Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, economic development mgr; Karen Barton, CD dir/EDA executive dir Approve d by: Kim Keller,city manager Economic development authority meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b ) Page 2 Title: Resolution in support of an Affordable Housing Trust Fund loan–Union Park Flats EDA Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution expressing support for the proposed use of a deferred loan for a multifamily housing development by an entity formed by Project for Pride in Living, Inc. Whereas, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) and the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”) previously approved a resolution of support for Project for Pride in Living, inc. (or an affiliated entity, the “Developer”) in connection with its application to Minnesota Housing for tax credits; and Whereas, the Developer intends to submit another application to Minnesota Housing for a deferred loan; and Whereas, the EDA received a request from the Developer to provide an updated resolution of support for construction of an approximately 60 unit affordable multifamily rental housing development within the City, to be known as Union Park Flats (the “Project”) and indicate its support of the use of funds from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund; and Whereas, a stated goal of the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy is the creation of diverse and affordable housing options for the community; and Whereas, the success of the Developer’s application for low-income housing tax credits from Minnesota Housing Finance Authority (“MHFA”) in connection with the Project is predicated on local support of the proposal; and Whereas, Authority staff has reviewed the proposal and recommends that the Board of Commissioners of the Authority (the “Board”) support the use of approximately $450,000 in financing assistance for the Project should it be proven financially necessary as confirmed by the City’s municipal advisor. Such financial assistance shall be provided through a deferred loan from the City’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund which will be repaid from tax increment generated from the Project. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority as follows: 1.The Board supports the Project and the deferred loan from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund for the Project to be repaid from tax increment and the Developer; provided, however, that authorization of financing for the Project is solely within the discretion of the City and of the Board following all legally required proceedings pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 through 469.1794, as amended, in cluding (i) a public hearing and approval by the City Council of the City; (ii) a determination, based on an analysis performed by the City’s municipal advisor, that tax increment financing assistance is necessary for the Project; (iii) verification of dev elopment financing need, based on an analysis performed by the City’s municipal advisor, that substantiates that “but for” the use of tax increment financing, the Project would be unable to proceed; and (iv) Economic development authority meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b ) Page 3 Title: Resolution in support of an Affordable Housing Trust Fund loan–Union Park Flats the negotiation of a development agreement including (among other things) the conditions under which the City or the Authority will provide financial assistance . 2. The Board supports the Developer’s application to MHFA for a deferred loan for the Project. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority April 4, 2022 Karen Barton, executive director Margaret Rog, president Attest Melissa Kennedy, secretary Meeting: Economic development authority Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Minutes: 4a Unofficial minutes EDA meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota Mar. 7, 2022 1. Call to order President Rog called the meeting to order at 6:20 p.m. 2. Roll call Commissioners present: President Rog, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd, Lynette Dumalag, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Jake Spano Commissioners absent: none Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller) and Interim IR Director (Ms. Smith) 3. Approval of consent agenda and items on EDA consent calendar 3a. Approval of EDA disbursements Commissioner Dumalag recused herself from this vote noting she has a conflict as she serves on the board of the Urban Institute Land Ownership. It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to approve filing EDA disbursement claims for the period of Jan. 29 through Feb. 25, 2022. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Commissioner Dumalag abstained). 4. Approval of EDA minutes 4a. EDA meeting minutes of Feb. 7, 2022 It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to approve the EDA meeting minutes of Feb. 7, 2022, as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Unfinished business – none 6. New business – none 7. Communications – none 8. Adjournment Economic development authority meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Page 2 Title: EDA meeting minutes of March 7, 2022 The meeting adjourned at 6:25 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, secretary Margaret Rog, president Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Presentation: 2a Executive summary Title: Recognition of donations Recommended action: Mayor to announce and express thanks and appreciation for the following donation being accepted at the meeting and listed on the consent agenda: From Donation For George Foulkes $2,091.75 A bicycle repair station at Westwood Hills Nature Center National Association of Government Web Professionals (NAGW) Up to $1,500 Travel expenses for Jason Huber, information technology manager, to attend the 2022 NAGW National Board Retreat in Little Rock, Ark in April Partners in Energy Value of $166.20 15 portable solar battery charger pack donation to the building and energy department Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, administrative services office assistant Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Minutes: 3a Unofficial minutes Closed Executive Session St. Louis Park, Minnesota March 7, 2022 1. Call to order Mayor Spano called the closed executive session to order. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd, Lynette Dumalag, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: none Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller) Guests: J. Forrest, Consultant 2. Presentations The City Council met in closed executive session to review and discuss the information from the 6-month performance evaluation for the city manager. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Minutes: 3b Unofficial minutes City council meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota Feb. 7, 2022 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, Sue Budd, Lynette Dumalag, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: none. Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), City Attorney (Mr. Shepherd), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Finance Director (Ms. Schmitt), Deputy Community Development Director/Housing Manager (Ms. Schnitker), Housing Supervisor (Ms. Olson), Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Planning Manager (Mr. Walther), Communications Manager (Ms. Smith), Office Assistant (Mr. Peterson-Etem), Project Engineer (Mr. Wiesen) Guests: Steve Guimont, Board President at Bridgewalk and residents of Bridgewalk; Doug Strandness, Consultant 2. Presentations 2a. Recognition of donations Mayor Spano acknowledged the following donations: • $300 from Lucille Tellett for fire prevention programs and equipment • An amount not to exceed $1,500 from MN American Waterworks for all related expenses for Austin Holm, Lead Plant Operator, to attend and compete in the 2022 Annual Conference and Exposition (ACE) training in San Antonio, Texas. • $300 from Lund’s & Byerly’s, dedicated to the police reserves program 3. Approval of minutes 3a. City council meeting minutes of Dec. 6, 2021 It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve the Dec. 6, 2021, meeting minutes as presented. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 The motion passed 6-0-1 (Councilmember Budd abstained). 3b. Special city council meeting minutes of Dec. 13, 2021 Councilmember Kraft noted on page 5, 2nd paragraph, should read, “…he will support these two levies…” It was moved by Councilmember Kraft, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve the Dec. 13, 2021, meeting minutes as amended. The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Budd abstained). 4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar 4a. Accept for filing city disbursement claims for the period of Dec. 24, 2021 through Jan. 28, 2022. 4b. Adopt Resolution No. 22-019 accepting donation to the fire department from Lucille Tellett for fire prevention programs and equipment. 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 22-020 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from Minnesota American Water Works Association (MN AWWA) in an amount not to exceed $1,500 for all related expenses for Austin Holm, Lead Plant Operator, to attend and compete in the 2022 Annual Conference and Exposition (ACE) training in San Antonio, Texas. 4d. Adopt Resolution No. 22-021 authorizing a special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 3105 Idaho Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 17- 117-21-12-0209. 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 22-022 authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line at 3267 Blackstone Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 16-117-21-23-0021. 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 22-023 accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of $131,287.46 for project no. 4018-1050, which is the Historic Walker Lake Phase 2 improvement project with Eureka Construction Inc., Contract No. 67-20. 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 22-024 approving labor agreement between the city and the police sergeant employee bargaining group, establishing terms and conditions of employment for three years, from Jan. 1, 2022 – Dec. 31, 2024. 4h. Adopt Resolution No. 22-025 approving the acceptance of a monetary donation from Lunds & Byerlys dedicated to the police reserve program. 4i. Adopt Resolution No. 22-026 authorizing the Hennepin County Grant Agreement to partially fund the city’s residential waste reduction, curbside recycling and organics programs and multifamily waste reduction and recycling programs. 4j. Adopt Resolution No. 22-027 approving the preliminary and final plat of Central Park West P.U.D. No. 121 Third Addition. 4k. Direct staff to submit a letter of interest to acquire land that Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has deemed to be excess right-of-way. (This item was removed from the consent calendar and considered as regular agenda item 8b) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 3 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 4l. Approve for filing fire civil service commission minutes of Nov. 8, 2021. 4m. Approve for filing planning commission minutes of Dec. 8, 2021. Councilmember Dumalag noted she will abstain from voting on the consent calendar as she has a conflict with item 4j. Mayor Spano requested that consent calendar item 4k be removed and placed on the Regular Agenda as item 8b. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Budd, to approve the agenda and items listed on the consent calendar as amended to move consent calendar item 4k to the regular agenda as item 8b; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 6-0-1 (Councilmember Dumalag abstained). 5. Boards and commissions – none. 6. Public hearings 6a. Bridgewalk Condominium Homeowners’ Association Housing Improvement Area (HIA) Ms. Olson presented the staff report. Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. Steve Guimont, Board President at Bridgewalk, stated they are very enthusiastic about this project and hope it is approved. He noted there are families, single people, and disabled persons who live here, and he thanked the council in advance. Doug Strandness, consultant for Bridgewalk, stated this project is a complete lifesaver for the building, as well as the financing. He stated the work being done will reduce the energy consumption at the building, including the new roof. He noted all the materials will be durable and this will completely reset everything at Bridgewalk. Elizabeth Carlson, 450 Ford Rd., stated she moved into the building in 2017. She liked that there was going to be a rehab on the building and the location of the building, near businesses, Ridgedale, and Minneapolis. She stated the building was 50 years old, neglected, and needed maintenance. She added they need the city to help. She also noted the building has a pool and hot tub and other facilities that are very nice. She thanked the council for their help with this. Scott Severson, 450 Ford Rd., #217, thanked the council for considering this work. He stated he has been living here 8 years, has seen deterioration of the property, and noted it will be great to have it all done now. He noted the roof is in bad shape and a City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 4 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 wall is ready to come down. He is looking forward to the maintenance being completed, even though taxes will go up as a result of the imrovements. Sonja Lentz, 450 Ford Rd., #306, had questions for staff and they will follow up with the caller. Kaitlyn Link, 450 Ford Rd., #102, Bridgewalk board member, thanked the council for this discussion. She bought her unit based on location. She stated the bus is 1 block away and the amenities are great. She noted she was not aware of some of the issues related to roofing and the wall that needs to be repaired. She stated those living there thank the council for considering this, noting this will be the best option for making this place livable and more affordable. Gary Jetpack, 450 Ford Rd., #355, stated he has been a resident at Bridgewalk for 9 years. He learned of the maintenance issues when he became involved with the board, and he is glad to see the work will be done. He stated without this work, the building will have significant problems. Mayor Spano closed the public hearing. Councilmember Rog stated she is pleased to support this home ownership opportunity in the community, and it is wonderful these folks can build wealth as homeowners. She asked staff if people were made aware of the increase in fees for the work that will be done here. Ms. Olson stated part of the petition packet did include the maximum amount of fees, and all tenants are aware. Councilmember Rog asked if there are any risks to the city in making this loan. Ms. Olson stated there is relatively low risk to the city and part of the outreach was to look at hardship deferral so the city will use bonds and loans to cover any deferrals. Ms. Schmitt stated the loans will be paid back, but it may take some time. However, she added it is highly unlikely the funds would not be recaptured. Councilmember Brausen asked if this counts against the city’s overall debt limitation. Ms. Schmitt stated no. Councilmember Brausen thanked the residents and owners for undertaking this substantial financial obligation to reinvest in their homes. He added it is unfortunate the association deferred repairs for so many years, but he is glad they are stepping forward now and addressing the deficiencies from the past 50 years. He added each owner is willing to take on an obligation from $50,000 to $112,000 per unit, and that is going to be paid over a 20-year period and they will pay interest to the city for the monies borrowed at a very low risk. He stated he supports this and encourages the owners to continue to look at reserve studies to be sure they are covered for future maintenance. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 5 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 Councilmember Mohamed agreed with Councilmember Brausen’s comments, and she supports this loan from the city to the HIA and sees the city as helping to build a quality of life for the owners and reinvesting in the community. Councilmember Kraft stated he is happy to live in a city where this can be done. He noted affordable housing as homeownership is so critical and being able to preserve affordable housing is so important. He added the association gets into situations like this because of not properly assessing and making mistakes and he stated this is not something they will want to be doing repeatedly. He asked what is being done so this does not happen again in the future. Ms. Olson stated that is the purpose of the reserve study and the financial plan, so the association is looking out into the future to determine what future projects are needed and how they will be funded. The HIA is a onetime only tool, and they will need to plan future improvements on their own. She added they will have to submit their annual audit analysis for 20 years as part of the loan obligation. Councilmember Kraft thanked Ms. Olson and stated he will support this. Councilmember Dumalag thanked staff and the homeowners for their work on this. She asked if this is conduit bonding, and the rest is EDA. Ms. Schmitt stated it is not a conduit bond, but the repayment source is a special assessment. Councilmember Dumalag stated she is grateful they are working on the reserve plan and whatever can be done to help residents keep their homes in great condition, she is supportive of. Councilmember Budd stated this is a great fit for using an HIA. She noted this property is affordable at a 50% AMI rate, and asked if reserve funding is implemented, will this still be affordable after the improvements are made. Ms. Olson stated they are currently affordable and even with the assessments, they will all still be affordable at 80% AMI and lower. She added the way the fees are structured is based on ownership values and the assessments, and it will be a spectrum of affordability. Councilmember Budd asked about eligibility for young families and who determines eligibility criteria. Ms. Olson stated eligibility includes the elderly, disabled, and those with low income, adding she will need to look into the city’s hardship policy related to this. Councilmember Budd stated she will support this. Mayor Spano stated he will support this as well noting he is glad the city can assist with this, and tools exist to do this. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mohamed, to approve the first reading of ordinance establishing the Bridgewalk condominium Homeowners’ Association Housing Improvement Area pursuant to Minnesota statutes, sections 428A.11 to 428A.21 and to set the second reading date for Feb. 222, 2022. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 6 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 The motion passed 7-0. 6b. 2022 Pavement Management Project – Fern Hill (4021-1000) Mr. Wiesen presented the staff report. Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. Donald Hirasuna, 2821 Ottawa Ave. S., stated he is concerned about sidewalks added to Ottawa Avenue, which will not be safe in the wintertime and with ice buildup, it will be dangerous. He stated he is legally blind and has concerns about this and noted injuries can happen with ice buildup, so he is not supportive. Dan Larson, 5201 28th Street, stated he is a fourth-generation resident, and is addressing the proposed west side sidewalk on Salem Avenue and stated he will lose two mature oak trees because of the sidewalk. He noted the climate resolution of the city and hopes the city will work to preserve these trees. He also emailed all council members with a petition to save the trees. He wants to work with council to stop the sidewalk short of the trees and thanked the council for their consideration. Wendy Goldberg and Dan Halpern, 2843 Raleigh Ave. S, noted they have lived in St. Louis Park for 30 years. Ms. Goldberg stated they like the plans including the bike lane, but on Quentin and Raleigh, they are concerned the streets are already too narrow and will make them impassable and dangerous. Kelly Burroughs, 2930 Raleigh Ave. S., stated she sent an email to the council and stated she and her neighbors are all against sidewalks on Raleigh Avenue, noting none of them received a survey from the city. She added no one was warned about this previously and given time to address this issue. She stated they are most concerned about the loss of oak trees, gardens, the amount of money it will cost and safety and traffic concerns. She added most of the traffic through the neighborhood are folks that do not live there, from Benilde and the synagogue, and if people want to walk on sidewalks they can go to Quentin or Salem Avenues and noted that none of the east and west streets are being done, so what is the point of doing north south sidewalks. She added there is also the question of the project done last summer but they were not required to have sidewalks five blocks from her area. She is wondering why that is. She stated she submitted a petition of over 20 people and the $7 million could be used elsewhere for other projects such as at the high school or parks and stated they do not need sidewalks on Raleigh. Blake Hegerle, 2821 Quentin Ave., stated he loves trees, and they are important for the environment, but this is a net gain for the environment as it lowers cars going through the neighborhood. He added the traffic from Benilde is too fast, so the answer is not widening the road, and this project addresses that. He stated narrowing the street makes it inconvenient to drive fast, noting traffic calming and speed limits will also help. He stated the traffic circles were too narrow to travel around. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 7 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 Esther Goldberg Davis, 2724 Raleigh Ave., stated she has lived in Fernhill for 22 years. She thanked council for their time. She reiterated a concern about narrowing streets, but she does like the idea of sidewalks. She is concerned about narrowing streets for parking and for emergency vehicle access. Gary Reierson, 2725 Toledo Ave., stated he likes this and the design. He added he does support the comments of Dan Larson regarding the west side of Salem Avenue and having the sidewalks end at his property line or driveway, to save the two oak trees on his property and he hopes the council would see this as a compromise. Tom Quinn, 2925 Raleigh Ave., stated his concern is that even with sidewalks, pedestrians might still walk on the street. He added this would be unsafe and he does not know if adding sidewalks will make people use them. He stated he does not see the need for sidewalks and folks can walk on Salem or Quentin Avenues if they want to walk on sidewalks. He also suggested lowering the speed limits in the area as well and recommended no sidewalk on Raleigh Avenue. Terry Meiland, 5118 West 28th St., stated he has lived here for 40 years. He thanked the council for not doing traffic circles on the street. He added the council should ask residents of each block if they want a sidewalk or not. He stated most of his Jewish neighbors walk to synagogue on Friday nights and they typically walk on the street. He is not in favor of this blanket sidewalk project and thinks it is a waste of money. Karen Dorn, 2817 Quentin Ave. S, complimented staff for the communication and transparency of the meetings and their responses when she emailed. She is in favor of the project and narrowing the street, reducing the traffic speed, and discouraging her area as a traffic cut -through. She stated her neighborhood is an easy cut-through for folks to reach Highway 100. She added they have enough driveway to support both of her cars, and she hopes others will park in their driveways as well. She stated she walks a lot on the street and chooses her route based on if there are sidewalks. She is hoping the city will find a way to satisfy the needs of the neighborhood for the future. She also appreciated the comments on tree loss. Eoin O’Hara, 5032 West 29th St., stated he has lived in the neighborhood for 14 years, always felt comfortable walking in the neighborhood, and overall does not see a great need for sidewalks. He stated there are certain areas that do not need sidewalks that would impede older trees in the area. Elsa Linke, 2859 Ottawa Ave, stated she has lived in her neighborhood for 22 years and is an avid walker who has always felt safe walking. She asked the council to look at using alternatives to sidewalks like permeable pavers and asked the city to conserve as many trees as possible. Tracey Minder, 5101 28th St. W, stated she is not opposed to sidewalks. Her concern is moving people closer to her home if adding a sidewalk, as her windows are on that side of the street. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 8 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 Shelly Houghton, 5200 28th St W, stated she is not in favor of sidewalks in an established neighborhood, especially with so many trees. She had lived in the Bronx Park area in the past and enjoyed the sidewalks there. She has concerns about losing trees in her current area but would like to address traffic concerns. Mayor Spano closed the public hearing. Councilmember Rog stated she has received emails and comments from neighbors and is reviewing her notes and will work with staff to propose a plan that meets as many of the goals and expectations of the community as possible. She added the city does have an overall commitment to making the community more walkable, which is something the city has wanted for over a decade and anytime sidewalks are added there is always some level of controversy. She stated in Birchwood when a sidewalk was added, there was much opposition but, in the end, they do like it and enjoy it. She encouraged neighbors to continue to engage with her and thanked everyone who called in to share comments. Councilmember Brausen agreed with Councilmember Rog and appreciated those calling in to share their concerns. He stated the most cost are the streets in the area, not only the sidewalks, and noted most folks do not like changes in the city right-of-way. He also noted the tree loss component and added historically, staff has worked hard to find solutions for this and will continue to do that. Councilmember Kraft added he agreed on comments about the trees. He stated the city does their best to conserve trees and very rarely loses them. He added he is concerned about the intersection at Barry and 26th Street and the share-the-road network. He asked staff to look further into that. He noted the neighborhood traffic circles can be concerning and maybe could be larger in areas where needed. Mayor Spano added that just because neighborhood traffic circles are tried, does not mean they will be added there, noting test measures just mean they are being looked at and tested in a location. No action was taken at this meeting. Council will take action on the project at the Feb. 22, 2022, meeting. 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – none 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions, and discussion items 8a. Westside Wine and Spirits Conditional Use Permit (CUP) Resolution No. 22-028 Councilmember Dumalag recused herself from the discussion and vote, noting a conflict of interest with this application. Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 9 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 Councilmember Kraft noted many signatures on the petition stating people do not want another liquor store in the neighborhood. He asked if this could be referenced when allowing a CUP. Mr. Morrison stated it can be acknowledged, however it is not grounds for denial. The application meets all the conditions for granting a CUP, so that is why staff recommends approval of the application. Councilmember Budd stated she saw the petition as this site is in her ward. She looked at the criteria, she noted neighborhood objectives, adding these neighbors do not support this. She stated when the neighborhood was asked about what they want to see in the area, it was more restaurants and more green areas. She added the community want to embrace Texatonka’s diversity and noted the existing liquor store is owned by diverse folks who have worked hard during the pandemic to keep their store open. She added it is important to consider the neighborhood and those with other businesses there and she will not support this. Councilmember Brausen stated in the past, the council had discussions about liquor stores and decreasing size and limiting their numbers. He added there are currently fewer liquor stores in the city and the market decides what they want and that is why we have less. He added there are no limits on liquor licenses within the city and they are granted each time. He noted this seems arbitrary in deciding who has a license or not, when the customers decide. He appreciates the existing owner of the liquor store asking his customers to sign the petition, but they are limiting competition and in the limited free-market system consumers can do that. He is not comfortable denying the applicant’s right to compete, noting the connected store will have other product besides liquor which will make it a different business than the existing liquor store. He stated he will support this application. Councilmember Rog asked if this will be a combo liquor and food store as two stores, and not a standard liquor store. Mr. Morrison stated yes. Councilmember Rog asked if the city would be liable if the CUP were denied based on the petition if it meets all other criteria. Mr. Shepherd stated neighborhood opposition alone is not enough to deny the CUP. He added if the council does consider not going forward, he recommended a motion to have legal counsel prepare motions for denying and bringing this back to council at a later date. Councilmember Rog asked why this is not done administratively. Mr. Shepherd stated council must approve all CUPs and added council has already approved the land use designation in this location. Councilmember Rog stated she will support this but does understand Councilmember Budd’s concerns about the neighborhood and challenges with what they prefer in the area. Councilmember Kraft also thanked Councilmember Budd for her comments as well and the perspective of the business owner. He stated he will, however, support this application. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 10 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 Councilmember Mohamed stated she agreed with Councilmember Brausen’s comments and noted consumer choice is noted, however pointed out there are many Muslims in the area that will not use this liquor store as they do not consume alcohol. However, it is up to residents to decide, and it is up to the city to ensure businesses flourish in the area, so she will support this application. Mayor Spano added he will also support this CUP adding the comments from Councilmember Budd are appreciated. He added some will like businesses within their neighborhood and some will not and noted the council has wanted to encourage smaller businesses versus big box retailers in the past. He stated he understands the concerns around competition, but sometimes they are overstated. He added ultimately the land use is allowed and legal and he will support it. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to adopt Resolution No. 22-028, approving a CUP to operate a liquor store at 8016 Minnetonka Blvd. The motion passed 5-1-1 (Councilmember Budd opposed, Councilmember Dumalag recused). 8b. Direct staff to submit a letter of interest to acquire land that Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has deemed to be excess right-of-way Mayor Spano asked to remove this item from consent agenda. He noted there has been interest in this land and a turn taken in this issue and wanted to hear staff’s feedback. He stated he is supportive of sending the letter to MnDOT but wanted staff to review the background on this for the neighborhood’s knowledge. Mr. Walther presented the land at Toledo and 28th Street which includes two proposed parcels, a north and a south parcel. He noted together the parcels total 1.7 acres and MnDOT has not formally offered for the city to purchase the land, yet. He stated staff met with MnDOT in January 2022 and MnDOT decided there is no need for transportation purposes for the land and from MnDOT’s perspective the risk of environmental concerns with the property are low. He stated there were some changes in MnDOT’s position from November when this was last presented to council. He added MnDOT previously indicated a letter from the city includes the city’s intended purpose and proposed use of the land, and then later withdrew that condition and said that providing a general letter of interest was adequate communication before MnDOT would offer it broadly at auction. He stated the direction this evening would hold open all available options to the city and continue the city communications with MnDOT. Mr. Walther added MnDOT previously indicated if the city had a public purpose for the land, the city could acquire it for no public cost; however, that changed for the northern parcel. MnDOT’s position is that they want to offer the north parcel at fair market value and would now need to commission an appraisal to provide fair market value estimation. He stated this was a change and staff will have additional conversations with MnDOT about this. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 11 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 Mayor Spano pointed out the parcels on the map, noting the south half is still being offered for public purpose at no cost. Mr. Walther added if the city acquired the land for private development purposes there would still be some limitations that would need to be resolved. Mayor Spano pointed out this process would be around 8 months or more to complete. Mr. Walther agreed that was correct. Mayor Spano asked if there is a meeting on the calendar with staff and MnDOT, and if this is new or was this there all along. Mr. Walther stated there is no meeting on the calendar, and MnDOT’s position may not be new, rather MnDOT is just further along in their internal processes. Mr. Walther noted MnDOT had many staff from multiple divisions involved in the earlier meetings and it may have led to some confusion. He stated MnDOT was clearer about their position in the January meeting, and the city does not have control over their process. Councilmember Rog stated there is a lot of community interest in these parcels. She asked why the northern section is different and the rationale behind this. Mr. Walther stated he did not know and did not want to speculate. Councilmember Rog asked what the fair market value appraisal might be. Mr. Walther stated he did not know but the city assessor can review it, noting it would not take very long to do this, but he declined to share that information broadly, since there could be part of future real estate negotiations. Councilmember Rog noted that there were low-level environmental issues with the parcel and no historical restrictions for use. Mr. Walther stated there is low risk based on historical uses of the land and while the environmental review was not of concern to MnDOT as the seller, this did not resolve all questions related to environmental review and due diligence for any buyer or future users of the property. Councilmember Rog asked if there is a first right of refusal on this or a risk factor. Mr. Walther stated the letter of intent helps the city to get the first opportunity to acquire the land and allows some time to make decisions about how the city might use the property and understand and negotiate the terms of potentially acquiring the property. Councilmember Rog stated it was the Works Progress Administration and not the Civilian Conservation Corps that built this park originally and asked that the records be updated. Councilmember Brausen stated he appreciated the public is interested in this property and the work staff is doing. He added there will be robust community discussion about uses if the property is acquired. It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to direct staff to submit a letter of interest to acquire land that Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has deemed to be excess right-of-way. The motion passed 7-0. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3b) Page 12 Title: City council meeting minutes of February 7, 2022 9. Communications Ms. Keller stated a second shipment of masks is coming in for businesses and staff will reach out to businesses. She added that Texa-tonka Apartments are now accepting applications. Councilmember Rog noted this Thursday, Feb. 10, is an online neighborhood meeting at Beltline Boulevard and CSAH 25 and information is on the city website. She also noted the community story telling forum, sponsored by Friends of the Arts, is also on Thursday, Feb. 10, from 6:30- 7:45 p.m. via zoom and if interested email ALLINCZ@aol.com. Councilmember Budd stated if councilmembers want to attend, they need to note open meeting law, so she will watch it later so numbers are not affected. Councilmember Brausen stated there will be virtual meetings regarding preliminary planning for Cedar Lake Road and Louisiana Avenue in 2023 and 2024, so be aware of notices. Councilmember Mohamed wished everyone a Happy Black History Month. Mayor Spano noted he received several emails from people asking about repealing the mask requirement in the city. He stated council will discuss this further at next week’s meeting. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:05 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Minutes: 3c Unofficial minutes City council special study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota Feb. 7, 2022 The meeting convened at 5:20 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd, Lynette Dumalag, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), City Attorney (Mr. Shepherd), Deputy City Manager/Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Fire Chief Koering, Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton), Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Planning Manager (Mr. Walther), Communications Manager (Ms. Smith), Elections Specialist (Mr. Sund) Guests: None. 1. Encouraging vaccine and booster use in St. Louis Park Mr. Sund presented the report on policies and procedures encouraging vaccine use in St. Louis Park. The policy questions before council include should staff and local partners pursue programmatic approaches to encourage vaccine and booster use or should staff pursue a regulatory approach to encourage vaccine and booster use. Councilmember Rog stated she concurred with staff’s recommendation to use a programmatic versus regulatory approach. She stated she works in non-profit and noted there are financial incentives being offered for vaccines throughout the state, through the end of February, adding this could be helpful. She referenced an app called Docket that folks can use to show their vaccination status, and this would be useful versus taking a photo of a vaccine card. She asked if this structure would be used for flu shot or other pandemics going forward and if this is a structure for the long-term. Ms. Keller stated staff does not know how much of this work will be borne by our partners and if this is a long-term strategy or if it is sustainable. At this point, she noted, this partnership is with healthcare professionals. Chief Koering agreed this is the beginning stages of discussions. Councilmember Rog added the state just made funds available for vaccine clinics, recovery centers, and for community-based and religious organizations. Mayor Spano encouraged staff as they are going through this process to document these discussions and processes so they could be referred to again in the future. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3c) Page 2 Title: Special study session minutes of February 7, 2022 Councilmember Budd asked if there has been any consideration to set up metrics as triggers, and as certain levels are hit, then move to hybrid work or learning in schools. She asked if the city could have a plan in place so when a certain level hits, there is a trigger for certain action to begin. Mr. Sund stated having a specific metric marker is not an action that municipalities have taken. Chief Koering added the challenge is getting accurate and timely information and where data is at a certain time. He stated it is problematic going in and out of certain mitigations, noting there needs to be a bigger and broader range picture and this has not been created at a state or federal level, thereby creating some confusion. Councilmember Brausen stated he supports staff’s approach. Councilmember Kraft stated he is in favor of the programmatic approach and would like to see this done regionally or at the state-wide level. He added there are a lot more people who are willing to get vaccinated if we help them to do so, and getting the vaccination rate over 90% would be fantastic. Councilmember Kraft stated the city does not have a public health department, but he is supportive of staff’s recommendations, noting the city should also add goals to improve our position, such as vaccination rates as compared to other cities or areas, and use that as a metric, noting others could learn from St. Louis Park. Councilmember Dumalag agreed adding she is supportive of the programmatic approach. She stated the city is not on the same scale as Minneapolis and noted their mandates will be ending soon as well, so it makes no sense for St. Louis Park to be an island. She likes the partnership approach and commended staff’s efforts, adding she is in favor of a more innovative programmatic approach. Councilmember Mohamed stated she is in favor of a programmatic approach as well. She wanted to see how many more people would be vaccinated, adding she liked the coupon or discount ideas to support the business community and the creativity around this. She added she is happy to see results, without any damage to businesses. Mayor Spano stated he is also supportive of the programmatic approach. He noted community health is important and while the city does not have a health department, cities are very helpful in this area. He feels this is in line with what the community has come to expect from the city. He noted that what works for some cities may not work in St. Louis Park and vice versa, adding this approach helps the city work with businesses and community. He also noted a metric tool is helpful, he would like more information from staff on this, and it would help to have more people vaccinated within the city. Mayor Spano thanked the governor’s office for allowing exemptions for city EMT’s to administer vaccines. He asked about costs associated with this and what they might be. Ms. Keller stated much of this is in-kind and staff time, but the incentives themselves will include a dollar amount and staff is looking at funding sources, as well as ARPA funds. She asked if council City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3c) Page 3 Title: Special study session minutes of February 7, 2022 was comfortable with the proposed $15,000 allocation for this programming, which includes incentives for businesses. Mayor Spano stated he is fine with $15,000 and up to $30,000 if needed. Councilmember Rog stated she is supportive of the $15,000. She asked if there were any liability concerns with vaccinating the public, especially with incentives being offered. Ms. Keller stated the city works under medical direction. Chief Koering stated all the vaccinations are under a physician’s medical license and those receiving the vaccine must sign a release and consent prior to vaccination. He stated he has no concerns with this process or with incentives. He stated no incentives can be given if someone already has a vaccination and this is being checked. Councilmember Rog asked about vaccinating infants to 5-year-olds. Chief Koering stated he feels this is best done through the health care system, but for the underserved this might be an area the fire department along with Park Nicollet can assist. Councilmember Kraft stated he is supportive of the $15,000 and agrees with Councilmember Rog. He would like to see this be successful if the money is spent, but because it impacted another metric, not because the money was spent. It was the consensus of the council to approve staff’s request for $15,000 to pursue the programmatic approach. Mayor Spano asked if staff will come back with a final report. Ms. Keller stated staff will use a comprehensive communication approach to ensure the community is aware of this opportunity, and ongoing updates will be provided to council. The meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Minutes: 3d Unofficial minutes City council study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota Feb. 14, 2022 The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Sue Budd, Lynette Dumalag, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Rog Councilmembers absent: none. Staff present: Deputy City Manager/Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Fire Chief Koering, City Clerk (Ms. Kennedy), Communications Manager (Ms. Smith), Elections Specialist (Mr. Sund) Guests: Becky Bakken, Discover St. Louis Park 1. Discover St. Louis Park (DSLP) update Ms. Bakken presented the update. Councilmember Brausen noted the challenging times recently, adding Ms. Bakken had to take drastic measures to address the budget shortfalls. He asked how many employees DSLP had last year. Ms. Bakken stated they had 5, but at their lowest they were at 2. She added an employee focusing on sales will be starting later in February. Councilmember Brausen asked what DSLP needs from the city. Ms. Bakken stated the support and collaboration with the city is very helpful. Councilmember Brausen asked how DSLP works with the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce. Ms. Bakken stated the Twin West Chamber was folded into the Minneapolis Chamber, noting that DSLP has a membership still within this group. Councilmember Rog stated she appreciates the new website and the promotion of St. Louis Park’s local businesses, especially during the pandemic. She asked about hotel workers given the city’s diversity goals and that many working in hotels are people of color. She stated it is important we support the laborers that work in the hotel industry and asked about any housing challenges or employees getting to work. Ms. Bakken stated she does talk with employees directly, noting this is a problem and a large challenge. She noted front line skills are the most difficult to find and this all ties together and will be more apparent as things build back, assuming they do. Councilmember Rog asked about Minneapolis, noting that occupancy is down, and Minneapolis is facing some image problems around safety. She stated it feels that St. Louis Park’s tourism seems to rise and fall with Minneapolis. Ms. Bakken stated we do better when Minneapolis City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3d) Page 2 Title: Study session minutes of February 14, 2022 does better, and Minneapolis is our greatest asset. She added the overflow from Minneapolis helps St. Louis Park, noting that St. Louis Park has a niche including the Icon Theatre, free parking, and other assets. She added Minneapolis needs to be whole again, when they rise, St. Louis Park rises. Ms. Bakken noted many corporations are not returning to in person work yet, which is also an issue in St. Louis Park. Councilmember Rog suggested folks might enjoy a walking tour about the history of St. Louis Park, adding this might be an exciting and fruitful project. Councilmember Kraft stated an art walking tour is another idea for tourism to the city. He asked if the trends seen in the last couple of months indicate that numbers could be like 2019. Ms. Bakken stated they are hopeful for this in 2022 and budget is based on 62% of 2019, which is still very conservative. Councilmember Dumalag mentioned the super bowl and final four events and asked if there are any other events DSLP is tracking now. Ms. Bakken stated in partnership with Sport Minneapolis, there have been bids for USA Volleyball, US Soccer, and several NCAA final four basketball events. She added the bids are out there through 2031, but most things are getting pushed out. Councilmember Rog referenced short-term rentals and asked what that means. Ms. Bakken stated this refers to anything under 30 days in hotel space, but not Airbnb. Councilmember Rog asked if they do tours of the Nature Center. Ms. Bakken stated yes, they do and work closely with the city on this. Councilmember Mohamed noted REM5 which does a virtual reality experience related to racial inequities within the nation and Minnesota. She asked if DSLP might collaborate with REM5 on this. Ms. Bakken stated they do work closely with REM5 and will look into this further, adding the owner sits on the DSLP board. Councilmember Budd asked if DSLP has a goal around racial inclusion. Ms. Bakken stated it is very important for DSLP to mirror the efforts of the city and be as inclusive as possible. She noted the new website is a great step in doing this and they continue to want to be inviting to all groups and promotion of this. Ms. Bakken noted DSLP collaborates with the Thai community, and they are a great group to work with, adding the Thai community is very loyal to St. Louis Park. She mentioned their upcoming festival and that their dignitaries will be staying in St. Louis Park hotels. Mayor Spano asked for more information on how DSLP partners with Minneapolis on events. Ms. Bakken stated they have an official partnership with Meet Minneapolis and DSLP gets leads from them for hotels. She added Minneapolis markets St. Louis Park events and DSLP markets Minneapolis events. She noted when large groups come to the area, they typically need more City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3d) Page 3 Title: Study session minutes of February 14, 2022 hotel space than what they find only in Minneapolis, so both cities work together in support of each other’s events. Mayor Spano appreciated the efforts of DSLP and stated as events grow, it will be important to have a robust process in place within the city for all of the details. He asked how the process is managed now for large-scale events. Ms. Walsh stated the city has a work group that meets and works with DSLP on planning for large events, including items related to traffic, policing, and business marketing. Ms. Bakken added the city has worked hard to put together a very robust process and partners with groups to make sure events run smoothly. Mayor Spano stated as events grow and St. Louis Park continues to be a destination, event marketing will be very important, as well as marketing the city itself to those who visit. 2. COVID-19 update Mr. Sund presented an update to the council. He noted various metrics and the lower covid cases this past week and pointed out the city’s mask mandate will expire Tuesday, Feb. 22, 2022, at 11:59 p.m. without further action from the council. Mayor Spano asked for feedback from the boards and commissions on returning to in person meetings. Ms. Kennedy stated one commission feels it may be too soon if they have a larger group of members of the public attending their meeting. She noted the city asked if there is anything more staff can do to mitigate health and safety concerns, beyond the protocols already in place. Most of the responses received indicated there was nothing more the city could do at this point, it really was a matter of personal accountability in terms of masking and distancing. Mayor Spano asked if the commissions went back to meeting in person, could some commissioners still participate remotely. Ms. Kennedy stated once the resolution expires, all meetings would go back to in-person. The open meeting law does not provide for remote participation from non-public locations, outside of an emergency declaration or a finding that it is not practical or safe to meet in-person. She noted a member could participate remotely, provided they do so from a place that is open and accessible to the public and that location is disclosed in the legal notice of the meeting. Councilmember Mohamed asked what is classified as a public location, such as an apartment lobby. Ms. Kennedy stated if the lobby remained unlocked and was accessible to anyone from the public, that would meet the requirement. Councilmember Mohamed stated she would be comfortable coming back to in-person meetings as she is happy to see the metrics presented. She added she would like to hear what other councilmembers think. Councilmember Budd stated she is also supportive of returning to in-person meetings and is encouraged by the current metrics. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3d) Page 4 Title: Study session minutes of February 14, 2022 Councilmember Dumalag stated she likes seeing these numbers and does like coming in to meet in-person but does understand the concerns of commission members. She asked if there are any more measures that can be done. Ms. Kennedy stated staff will continue to offer mitigation measures and will work with commissions to do everything possible to provide a safe meeting environment. Councilmember Rog stated she is supportive of letting the mask mandate expire on February 22 and the emergency remote meeting rule to expire as well. Councilmember Kraft asked if the city could require masks in city buildings for an amount of time. Ms. Kennedy stated that would be a policy decision of the council and would require an amendment to the existing regulation. Chief Koering stated if the council or commissions wants to use N95 masks, the fire department can provide this for them, as these masks offer the highest level of protection. Mayor Spano stated he is supportive of letting the mask ordinance expire on February 22, as well as moving back to in-person meetings. He added the amount of risk and precautions being taken are in alignment with each other. He noted when the mask ordinance was passed, there was mention of another variant and asked if there is any other information on this. Chief Koering stated a few weeks back, there was talk of a sub-variant of Omicron. He stated that it has been spreading, but it cannot be tested, and is very much controlled by the vaccines. He added it appears to be running its course and there have been no red flags on it. Mayor Spano noted that as these variants continue to mutate, as more folks get it, and as more herd immunity is built, the symptoms seem to be less intense. Chief Koering stated that is true and as these continue to mutate and the more it spreads, it becomes less severe and more endemic in society versus more pandemic. He added this is what the WHO is seeing over the next 6 months noting, however, this would not preclude another virus coming along. Councilmember Kraft stated the endemic comments relate to those vaccinated, while for those unvaccinated, it can still be a dangerous situation. He was encouraged to see the data about emergency calls and compliance in the community, without confrontation. He added he is not in a rush to let this lapse, but he is fine with expiration on February 22. Councilmember Brausen stated he would prefer going a couple more weeks with the mandate and meeting in-person. He has concerns about service employees and the inequitable situation with them having to wear masks all day when customers do not have to. He stated he has spoken with staff in city facilities about this and is concerned for their well-being. Mayor Spano stated with businesses such as Target, it is their own corporate policy on masking. Ms. Walsh stated staff’s recommendation would be to continue to follow the CDC recommendations and guidelines. Chief Koering added the city needs to drive the energy around vaccines, prioritize vaccination in the community, and keep that as the focus. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3d) Page 5 Title: Study session minutes of February 14, 2022 It was the consensus of the council to allow the mandate to lapse on February 22, 2022, at 11:59 p.m. 3. Federal issues in legislative priorities Mr. Sund presented the report. He noted the areas of interest of the council to be added as priorities of the city to the legislature as follows: • Medicare for all/universal health care • National Vote Interstate Compact • Legalization of adult-use cannabis Councilmember Brausen noted his interest in the legalization of cannabis would be to use a portion of the taxes generated from sale to adults, for law enforcement and mental health, because folks in municipal areas will be the ones to need assistance related to this. Councilmember Brausen stated he is in favor of adding all three of the initiatives to the legislative priorities. Councilmember Mohamed stated she is also in favor of all three as well. Councilmember Dumalag stated she is also in favor of all three being included in the legislative priorities. She asked on the Medicare for All if the draft resolution in the packet is the one the council will approve. Mr. Sund stated the resolution in the packet mirrors the resolution given to staff by residents and will be up for approval at a regular council meeting in the future. Councilmember Rog stated she is willing to collaborate with staff on the Medicare for All draft resolution and incorporate elements of universal health care into the draft. Councilmember Budd stated she is supportive of all three and is encouraged that they will all help the community. Councilmember Kraft is supportive of all three as well. He noted on the cannabis issue, this will be the support of the legalization of cannabis and directing funding generated through the legalization to local uses centered around mental health support and programming. He stated he is in favor if this is legal and well-regulated, especially because this is an area of concern for teens and can be a path to other drug usage. He added he also agrees on the Medicare for All Act. He asked if there is any other approach on these issues with the legislature other than doing resolutions only. Mayor Spano stated this is simply adding these three items to the city’s legislative priorities. Mr. Sund stated he will add these items, noting the Medicare for All resolution originates from constituents. Mayor Spano asked if the Medicare for All Act does not pass and another bill comes up next year with slightly different provisions, would it make sense to have a resolution in case a new resolution would need to be passed the next year. Mr. Sund stated this could be a statement of general principle and refer to a specific piece of legislation or it can be left out. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3d) Page 6 Title: Study session minutes of February 14, 2022 Mayor Spano asked how much a provision like Medicare for All might save the city in costs and the impact on the budget. Ms. Walsh stated she does not have any information on that and will look into it and report back. Mayor Spano stated he is broadly supportive of the ideas behind these three items. He noted he is curious about how people feel about the spirit of Medicare for All versus a specific resolution. Councilmember Brausen stated he prefers to put everything into the legislative list, but not do resolutions, especially when we focus on national issues that the city has little control over. Councilmember Mohamed stated she is not convinced a resolution is needed, and these three items are priorities for the city. She noted resolutions are just words on paper and agreed with the idea of the spirit behind this versus a resolution. Councilmember Rog stated there is general support for adding the Medicare for All into the legislative priorities, and the question is how is this different than a resolution. She stated there are many items in the city’s legislative priorities list, but this item of universal healthcare rises to the level of the climate emergency issue and should be pulled out. She noted there is momentum building around this issue and many cities are also considering a resolution, which is a tool to communicate the importance of this to the state and federal government. Councilmember Rog stated the media is reporting on resolutions passed within the city. She noted that thanks to the persistence of several residents, she sees this as a goal for the community, adding there is a need for the council to support this resolution and to let our state leaders know we are very supportive of this issue. She noted healthcare costs too much and is inaccessible to many in St. Louis Park and across the nation, especially people of color. Councilmember Rog explained why this affects St. Louis Park including racial equity, city budget, focus on mental health, business growth, job creation, and overall public health and community wellness. She explained in zip code 55416, 9% of black people and 7% of Asian, are uninsured versus 2% of white people. Overall, 12% of immigrants are uninsured and 26% of non-citizens are uninsured. She noted how disparities fall hard on the city’s BIPOC population. She pointed out this is one reason to get serious about this issue and take a public stand. Councilmember Rog stated 8% of the city budget is spent on health coverage and there may be reductions on that. She added mental health issues related to police and emergency resources and the time they consume are difficult, and under this universal healthcare plan, mental health assistance would be available in the way it should be. She noted many businesses cannot grow because they cannot afford the insurance costs their employees would need. She added more healthcare care workers in the community are needed and with a hospital in the community, there is more opportunity for job creation. Councilmember Rog stated passing a resolution aligns with what St. Louis Park stands for as a community, similar to the climate emergency resolution. She noted this is a timely discussion as last week a bill to introduce a MN health plan was presented and over 50 legislators from the senate and house will be working on this, so it is a good time to support this issue and bring City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3d) Page 7 Title: Study session minutes of February 14, 2022 forth a resolution. She noted St. Louis Park has an opportunity to lead in the southwest metro to work on providing healthcare coverage for all Minnesotans, and specifically those who are underserved, and to add to the momentum of Medicare for All. Councilmember Kraft stated he had seen data that healthcare expenditures in St. Louis Park are $3 million. He is supportive of this and would be in favor of focusing on the principle and using this information as examples, which are now represented in bills such as Medicare for All and MN Health plan. Councilmember Budd thanked Councilmember Rog for her comments and for the zip code data, which helps us all remember this element of the issue. Mayor Spano stated he does not have a strong feeling either way on doing a resolution or not. He added it should speak to the spirit and principle of what we are trying to achieve, and he would like to see some data in the resolution to show the impacts to St. Louis Park and how much could be saved in costs. He added there are many reasons to support universal healthcare, including ensuring that people’s lives are not tied to their wealth. He added before it comes back to the council for a vote, it would be helpful to see the final version of the resolution. Councilmember Rog stated since the council is generally in agreement, she would hope staff does not need to spend too much time on this. Mayor Spano stated the draft should come back for a quick review to council and discussion before it goes for approval. Ms. Walsh stated staff will work on it and bring it back to the February 28 study session and then it can be voted on at the March 7 meeting. It was the consensus of the council to add the three items to the city’s legislative priorities list. Councilmember Kraft raised the idea of getting state backing or matching funds for the climate investment fund. He stated after meeting with staff, Mr. Hoffman mentioned it might be worth meeting with the city’s legislators to discuss further, and he wanted to bring this forward to council. Mayor Spano stated he is fine with these discussions and asked if anyone else would be interested in assisting. Councilmember Brausen stated he would be interested. Written Reports Councilmember Kraft noted the written report CDBG funds and if being on the waiting list is 10- 15 years long, he would be interested in learning more about this and what else could be done, to help people keep their homes. Councilmember Dumalag agreed and added she would want to know how behind the city is on this. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3d) Page 8 Title: Study session minutes of February 14, 2022 Ms. Walsh stated Ms. Olson can come back to discuss this further with council or include another update to the written report. Councilmember Rog asked if the affordable housing trust fund allows for transfer to rehabilitation, noting it could make a big difference in that fund. Ms. Walsh stated she will look into this. Communications/meeting check-in (verbal) Councilmember Brausen noted the Cedar Lake Road listening sessions will be coming up soon and to please look for more information on the city website. Councilmember Rog noted the Children First Breakfast, which is scheduled for March 3 and is virtual again this year. She stated more information is available on the Children First website. Mayor Spano noted STEP is in need at this time, and the Baseball Association is raising funds to send kids to Cuba for an exchange program The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 4 Proposed allocation of 2022 Community Development Block Grant funds 5. Update on Wooddale Station LLC’s proposed Wooddale Station Redevelopment ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Minutes: 3e Unofficial minutes City council meeting St. Louis Park, Minnesota Feb. 22, 2022 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, Sue Budd, Lynette Dumalag, Larry Kraft, Nadia Mohamed, and Margaret Councilmember Rog Councilmembers absent: none. Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), City Attorney (Mr. Shepherd), Project Engineer (Mr. Wiesen), Director of Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Director of Community Development (Ms. Barton) Housing Supervisor (Ms. Olson), Communications Manager (Ms. Smith), Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison) Guests: Stephanie Drews, Erica Bennett and members of the community calling into the meeting 2. Presentations 2a. Proclamation – Colorectal Cancer Awareness Month – March 2022 Mayor Spano read the proclamation recognizing March 2022 as Colorectal Cancer Awareness month in St. Louis Park. 2b. Recognition of donations Mayor Spano recognized Discover St. Louis Park’s donations of up to $2,000 for Jason West to attend the Sports Events and Tourism Association symposium. 3. Approval of minutes – none. 4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar 4a. Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2643-22 establishing the Bridgewalk Homeowners’ Association HIA. Adopt Resolution No. 22-029 approving a housing improvement fee for the Bridgewalk Homeowners’ Association HIA City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 2 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 4b. Adopt Resolution No. 22-030 approving renewal of liquor licenses for license term March 1, 2022, through February 28, 2023 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 22-031 accepting donation from DSLP for Jason West to attend the Sports Events & Tourism Association (ETA) symposium 4d. Adopt resolution approving the final plans and specifications and authorizing ad for bid for 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements project 4022-6000 (This item was removed from the consent calendar and considered as regular agenda as item 8d.) 4e. Replace Rec Center arena flooring 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 22-032 approving off-site gambling for Community Charities of Minnesota 4g. Human rights commission meeting minutes of November 9, 2021 4h. Planning commission meeting minutes of January 19, 2022 Councilmember Dumalag requested that consent calendar item 4d be removed and placed on the Regular Agenda as item 8d. It was moved by Councilmember Kraft, seconded by Councilmember Dumalag, to approve the agenda and items listed on the consent calendar as amended to move consent calendar item 4d to the regular agenda as item 8d; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and commissions – none. 6. Public hearings 6a. Public hearing to consider allocation of 2022 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds Resolution No. 22-033 Ms. Olson presented the staff report. Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Spano closed the public hearing. Councilmember Rog asked if the $30,000 for the land trust is for a buyer or landowner in St Louis Park. Ms. Olson stated the St. Louis Park allocation is for a home in St. Louis Park. Councilmember Rog asked about the availability of affordable homes that the land trust is looking for, if they are now in short supply, and how is the land trust doing in finding homes eligible for the program. Ms. Olson said the land trust has purchased tax forfeiture homes and there is a non- profit looking at selling a couple homes they were using and that they are working with the county on this. Ms. Olson added the legacy program then reaches out to owners of City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 3 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 NOAH properties in case they were interested in selling their NOAH multi-family building. She added they have communicated with the community to sell their single- family home to the land trust through the legacy program. Councilmember Kraft stated $30,000 is not enough to buy a house. He asked how this works on the Homes within Reach program. Ms. Olson stated Homes within Reach has a variety of sources including home funds, funds through the county, and CDBG is another form of funding the city allocates, plus city funds are used to contribute. She added the land trust fills the gap between what new buyer can afford and the cost of homes and rehabilitation, so there are multiple sources available. Councilmember Kraft asked if there is a waiting list for this and if this is due to a hold up in processing at Hennepin County. Ms. Olson stated the waiting list is in reference to the deferred loan program and there are a couple reasons for this. One being the deferred loan program is now an online application system, which has increased the number of applications. This is being done with the Health Homes program as well. She stated Hennepin County administers this program for several suburban cities, and they are working with 50 loan applicants, and do not have the capacity to increase the number of loans they are processing. She stated they do triage based on emergency need. Ms. Olson explained if someone wants to rehab their home, but it is not urgent, they will be behind others that might have a dire situation on their hands, for instance where a home might be uninhabitable. She pointed out other communities are seeing the increase in need as well and soon all cities will most likely come together to work with Hennepin County on the waitlist situation. She stated other avenues might be an option to address needs in St. Louis Park. Councilmember Kraft stated he is supportive of this and looks forward to hearing more. Councilmember Mohamed stated generally she is in support of this as the spending is going to help affordable homes and investing. She asked what this looks like with preservation of the city’s 37 NOAH homes and if the funding goes directly to those homes. Ms. Olson stated the funding does not go to public housing single-family homes. She added these are homes owned by low- to moderate-income households that have a need for improvements and maintenance where without this funding, they cannot make them. She added, this allows them to stay in the home. Councilmember Mohamed stated she is in support of this. Councilmember Budd asked if the wait list of 65 is exclusively in St. Louis Park. Ms. Olson stated yes. Councilmember Budd stated she supports this and pointed out what a good deal this is in preserving a home for $30,000. Councilmember Dumalag stated she is supportive of this and glad to be talking about home ownership and preservation of current assets, particularly for homeowners that have homes needing a lot of maintenance, not only cosmetic, but structural. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 4 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 Mayor Spano added he is also supportive. It was moved by Councilmember Dumalag, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to adopt Resolution No. 22-033 approving proposed use of 2022 Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and authorize execution of sub- recipient agreement with Hennepin County and third-party agreements. The motion passed 7-0. 7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – none 8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions, and discussion items 8a. Shops at West End PUD major amendment. Resolution No. 22-034 Councilmember Dumalag recused herself from this discussion and the vote due to a conflict related to a client she is working with in this area. Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. Councilmember Brausen stated this all makes good business sense adding he sees no negative impacts for Ward 4. Mayor Spano noted the balance and blend at West End has been adjusted over the years. He stated new owners have worked on ways to come up with creative and full opportunities and did a good job bringing fun activities to the area during the holidays. He added he appreciates their creativity that reflects the reality of the space. Councilmember Rog asked what the current occupancy rate is at Shops at West End. Ms. Bennett stated it was 83% at end of the holiday season. Councilmember Rog asked if St. Louis Park resident Tammy Cabrera is at building 32. Ms. Bennet stated no, she is at building 23. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Mohamed, to adopt Resolution No. 22-034, approving a major amendment to the Shops at West End planned unit development (PUD). The motion passed 6-0-1 (Councilmember Dumalag abstained). 8b. 2022 Pavement Management Project – Fern Hill (4021-1000) Resolution No. 22- 035 Mr. Wiesen presented the staff report. Councilmember Rog asked about the process to protect trees near a sidewalk project. Mr. Wiesen stated all options are looked at to preserve trees and limit impacts to tree City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 5 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 roots. Sometimes this means moving the sidewalk away from the tree and look at street narrowing, for trees and for traffic calming as well. Councilmember Rog asked about treatment used on trees to promote the health of trees when undertaking projects like this. Mr. Wiesen explained that prior to construction, roots can be exposed to help minimize impacts and do clean root cutting, which is a safe way to preserve roots. He added they can also use cambistat treatment post construction to slow canopy growth and tree watering also helps with tree survival. Councilmember Rog asked in the 8 years of Connect the Park, how many trees have we predicted to preserve that we did not. Mr. Wiesen stated he is not aware of any trees that had to be removed after the fact. Councilmember Rog asked about landscaping installed in public right-of-way and how is this managed. Mr. Wiesen stated the city will take care of walls, fences, and pavers that are impacted, but sprinkler systems or dog fences are the property owner’s responsibility. Councilmember Rog noted the bikeway and asked why the 26th Street bikeway was not included in the project as well as options for the future to add a safe bike facility along 26th Street. Mr. Wiesen stated it has a level stress 3 and a design was evaluated there for a shared use trail. He noted staff evaluated that design and found it had extensive impact on private property and tree removal. Councilmember Rog asked if going forward, there might be an on-street bike trail for 26th Street. Mr. Wiesen stated that can be evaluated in the future. Councilmember Rog referenced the community sidewalk designation on Toledo Avenue between 26th and 28th Streets and wondered if this can be taken up at another time. Mr. Wiesen stated the Toledo Avenue designation is based on the current definition of community sidewalk and it is staff’s recommendation that it does meet the definition of a community sidewalk at this time. Councilmember Rog stated her rational for the bike facility to run up Toledo was the Highway 100 pedestrian bridge as well as the MnDOT parcels there, which are under discussion. She added there is a conversation to take place at a future date on this. Councilmember Rog asked about the public process for this project, how it started, and how it compares to past project engagement programs. Mr. Wiesen stated the public process began in January 2021 with a survey sent to the whole neighborhood and interactive map, to gain feedback on traffic, drainage and bikeways, and sidewalks where there were challenges, along with gaps in the network. He also noted there were two open houses held in the fall and a video posted on the city website, with information on what to expect. He added the city also installed sidewalk signs on the boulevard, which listed the website and asked for feedback, as well as a QR code where people could access information and provide feedback. He noted 66 people responded to the survey, 45 noted the map, and 193 views were noted on the video. He stated City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 6 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 there are now 1,700 people on the email list, which is very high compared to other projects. They did postings on Next Door as well. Councilmember Rog asked how this compares to past engagement. Mr. Wiesen stated the open houses had 40+ people attend, which is more than in past years, along with email sign-ups. He stated the public process was built on successes from past projects, adding there was a good turnout for public engagement. Councilmember Kraft asked if the letters and postcards went out to the full neighborhood and how many times these were sent. Mr. Wiesen stated 3 postcards and 5-6 letters went out to the neighborhood, and also 1 letter to those on Salem and Raleigh Avenues to notify them about sidewalks being added. Councilmember Rog asked Mr. Wiesen to share key ways the project has changed from the initial draft plan based on public input. Mr. Wiesen stated the continuous sidewalks and design on Salem as well as the narrowing of streets, pilot traffic management installations, and potential solutions were all changes based on resident feedback. He added changes on the width of 28th Street from Princeton to Monterey were also made in response to feedback. Councilmember Rog stated some residents are concerned about a violation of open meeting laws and lack of internet access. City Attorney Shepherd stated staff did conduct everything consistent with open meeting laws and consistent with past practices. He added there were numerous ways residents could respond in addition to the public hearing and he strongly disagrees there was something that did not follow open meeting laws. Councilmember Rog noted some residents had concerns that an environmental impact study was not done on the project. Mr. Wiesen stated a pavement management project does not meet the threshold of an environmental impact study, noting that is more for a new road construction project, larger industrial or development project, or if roadway is near a shoreline. Councilmember Rog asked what kind of study is done in a project like this. Mr. Wiesen stated staff works with a water resources manager to discuss potential contamination areas and address how storm water can be improved. Councilmember Rog added staff does careful tree counting and preservation as well. Mr. Wiesen stated yes, noting a tree inventory is also conducted and an important part of the process. Councilmember Rog asked the rationale for not using pervious pavers and if they can be used in the future. Mr. Wiesen stated pervious pavers are very labor intensive and have costs which are higher than concrete. He also noted their longevity is not good and they only last half the time of concrete, while maintenance costs are higher than concrete. He pointed out that safety is an issue as each paver is individual, and with freeze and City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 7 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 thaw, pavers can become uneven for walkers, bikers, and wheeled individuals. He noted at this time, there is no improved technology for this. Councilmember Rog noted that instead of using the term ‘street narrowing’ we are using the term ‘reduction in impervious surfaces.’ She asked about benefits of reducing impervious surfaces, why the city has adopted that policy, and how it benefits the environment. Mr. Wiesen stated narrow streets are safer for pedestrians, with shorter crossing distances, there is more space to plant trees, they provide traffic calming, and there is less storm water runoff. He also noted with the use of less pavement, there are lower costs and less future maintenance. Councilmember Rog stated there are concerns about emergency vehicles getting through narrow streets, especially in the winter. Mr. Wiesen stated that public safety is involved in this process, noting staff have reviewed this issue, and are not concerned about the 28 feet with parking on both sides. Councilmember Rog stated she heard from residents on the issue of cleaning sidewalks of snow, especially with people who may have disabilities or are seniors and not able to do this work, or not able to pay for someone to do this work for them. She asked what type of support the city can provide to residents for this. Mr. Wiesen stated senior community services, as part of the homeowner program services, provide assistance for individuals 60 and older based on a sliding fee scale. He noted residents should contact staff for more details. Councilmember Rog commented on traffic from Benilde with speeding and stop signs being ignored and asked what the city will do to address this. Ms. Heiser stated the police have met with the school, put speed boards there, and will coordinate with the city on this project. She noted meetings have been conducted with parents and students on these issues, especially pointing out the reduced speed limits and stop signs. She also added flyers and announcements have gone out from the school to reinforce those behaviors. Councilmember Rog stated she appreciates this noting it is difficult to change driver behavior adding there is more that can be done to slow down traffic. She asked if this project is approved, what can residents expect and when. Mr. Wiesen stated staff will continue to engage and work with the neighborhood on their concerns. He noted the schedule will be shared in April, and residents can sign up for weekly email updates to know what to expect. He stated the project will begin in early May and be completed in October. Councilmember Rog stated she supports the modifications that staff included in the packet, especially those that support the mature trees. Shraga Smith, 2738 Raleigh Ave., stated he grew up on 26th and Quentin, there were no sidewalks there, and he is happy there are plans for a sidewalk. He noted students at Benilde do drive very fast and he felt the sidewalk would be better on the west side to City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 8 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 Minnetonka Boulevard. He stated it is important to be safe here because there are a lot of kids in the neighborhood. Councilmember Kraft stated he got interesting feedback on this. He asked how this process works, how often the city does pavement management, and how streets are picked within that area each time. He noted some residents suggested there was an inequitable process in how the city picks locations. Ms. Heiser stated the city has a pavement management program and each year, staff surveys the condition of roads and in Pavement Area 8 there were concerns so a two- phase project needs to be conducted. She stated pavement surveys are conducted and the CIP is based on condition so when conditions are failing, there must be projects such as this, especially when they are too far gone, and mill and overlay have been exhausted. Councilmember Kraft asked if staff then generally looks at an area once every 8 years and whatever roads are like is the basis of when construction is done. Ms. Heiser stated yes, adding this project could not be put off any longer, adding they will not be back in the Fern Hill area now until 2030. She added these projects are purely condition driven. Councilmember Kraft stated he wanted folks to know there is a science behind how this is done. He asked how areas are chosen for sidewalk projects. Ms. Heiser stated staff has a plan in place based on council direction and if gaps exist in sidewalks, staff recommends filling in those gaps. She added staff reaches out to residents often to ask what sidewalks they would like reviewed, and staff then takes feedback from residents. She noted many residents have been interested in north south connections. Councilmember Kraft asked what was learned from the surveys. Ms. Heiser stated surveys are just one tool, a couple of specific locations were noted, and the rest of the feedback was from emails staff received. Mr. Wiesen stated the initial survey noted specific locations such as Monterey Parkway, and Raleigh and Salem were added after emails were received. Councilmember Kraft asked how some streets came off the project. Mr. Wiesen stated staff looked at impact and costs and determined from there. Councilmember Kraft stated he has learned these pavement management projects can be challenging and emotional, as they are changes in front of people’s homes, but the city must maintain its infrastructure. He added these projects are consistent with city values and priorities, while there are also tradeoffs. He is convinced this is being done well and added he received emails from residents asking him not to approve this project due to the removal of trees and use of impervious surfaces. He stated while he hates for any trees to come down, this plan will be conducive to more non-car traffic. Councilmember Kraft added while he recognized some are against this project, the council’s job is to represent all the community and be responsive. He commended Councilmember Rog for her work on this and staff’s work, and the fact that concerns City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 9 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 from the community were incorporated as much as possible into the process. He stated he is supportive of this. Councilmember Budd stated she is new to this process and did get to look further into this with Ms. Heiser and staff. She stated a lot of careful planning goes into this and sophisticated analysis that must be coordinated. She also thanked Councilmember Rog for her questions, while showing due diligence was met. She noted this will be coming up in her ward soon and she appreciates how much goes into the process, adding she will support this. Councilmember Mohamed stated she will also support this, noting the people of Fern Hill are thrilled to have Councilmember Rog as their representative. She added she likes how staff found the right balance and is being responsible. She noted a lot of work and effort goes into the process. She thanked those who reached out to her this past week, noting this is the right move for our city. Councilmember Dumalag also thanked staff for their work on this, adding this is happening in people’s neighborhoods and change can be destructive. She noted, however, that sidewalks are an infrastructure item allowing for safely going from one block to the next, and she will also support this. Councilmember Brausen thanked Councilmember Rog for her detailed questions. He noted there will also be changes in Ward 4 next year on Cedar Lake Road, stating change is hard, but infrastructure is important, and the city needs to continue to do these projects and do them in a responsible manner. He added when the city makes these types of major investments, it will get a good return in the long run. He stated people feel proprietary about the right-of-way in front of their house, but noted the city makes accommodations for homeowners, while narrowing the street to protect oak trees. He stated this project is very worthwhile, the city plants more trees, and trees do grow back. He hopes neighbors will give this a chance and stated they will definitely like the changes in a few years, noting he will support this. Shelly Hanson, 2824 Raleigh Ave., stated this project was based on a survey of 66 people, all in Fern Hill, and the council is ignoring petitions with 93 signatures and 65 signatures from those who do not want these sidewalks. She noted the earlier discussion with council providing funding for affordable housing, but noted the city is not interested in funding an environmental study. She stated misinformation was given to the council as her tree, which staff said will not be affected with one-third of it cut down. She stated the council is basing this on a survey from last year and many did not understand the pathway would change. She asked the council to table this until an independent arborist is consulted. She added that more than 14 trees are affected and after the roots are cut off her tree, it will go down in a storm. She stated if the council is responsive to the community, they would not ignore the petition, adding this project will not help the climate and to declare a climate emergency and then cut down trees does not make sense, as this will have a drastic effect. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 10 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 Mayor Spano stated pavement management programs impact people’s property and there is no single solution. But for a city that was designed around the car, the city will need to divert roads and sidewalks around trees. Mayor Spano stated the city tries to focus on providing opportunities for dialogue with residents, adding some will like the project and some will not. He noted the city’s engagement process is as good as it can be in getting the word out and getting feedback so staff and council can make the best decisions. He noted all the ways staff reached out to the community on this issue and that Councilmember Rog mentioned the project five times in her newsletters. He also noted there were 10,891 interactions that went out or came into the city alone, and that is a tremendous amount of engagement going in and out of the city. He stated the solution will not always be perfect for all, but the process is important, and while some will not like the outcome of this vote, staff has gone above and beyond with robust outreach. He referenced the city’s visioning process over many years and stated he appreciated all the feedback on the project. He stated he will support this. Councilmember Rog asked Mr. Shepherd about the city right-of-way. Mr. Shepherd stated city right-of-way is an easement for transportation services, noting it is platted. He stated this project with sidewalks and roads is within the right-of-way and the city is not taking land or contemplating eminent domain to get the right-of-way. He noted if people have put items in the right-of-way, staff will work with them to remove the items, but residents have no right to have personal items in the right-of-way, and they should be mindful of this going forward. Councilmember Rog asked if the city right-of-way is generally about 10-14 feet from curb. Mr. Shepherd stated yes, typically this is the amount. Councilmember Rog noted the items that residents had questions on, such as Ms. Hanson on Raleigh Avenue, have been answered this evening by staff. She noted the $186,000 figure per block in not correct and it is only about $50,000 per block. Councilmember Rog also noted the city allocates millions of dollars for affordable housing through the housing levy at $1.5 million per year, $300,000 per year for the BIPOC first generation home ownership program, and through TIF requests, while pavement management is something that funds are allocated for as well. Councilmember Rog stated after 14 months of deep public engagement we are at the final approval stage. She noted there has been a lot of support shown and some confusion but all in all, this is an excellent project design which will upgrade critical infrastructure and improve the safety and livability of the community. She reminded folks that the bulk of this project is critical infrastructure work, adding that 85% of the total cost is for water main, sewer, storm water, reconstruction, and rehabilitation, and 15% is sidewalk and bikeway installation. She stated and yet sidewalks get the most attention, adding that most folks who originally balk at sidewalks ultimately like them. She stated sidewalks have a way of building community and she wishes there could have been more with this project. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 11 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 Councilmember Rog stated, as Mayor Spano noted, the community has repeatedly made it clear that walkability is a priority and a goal of the community and during the 2040 Comp Plan, the council made this a priority as well. She added the city’s strategic priorities are committed to expanding the network of sidewalks, trails, and bike facilities. She added community walkability cannot be achieved if left to individual residents to petition or vote for or against a sidewalk on their particular block. This is not how sidewalks, roads, or any other infrastructure system can be created within a city. She stated she regrets some residents are left with this impression when they provide input on pavement projects, which are based on many factors. She added the city might need to revisit its approach to make it crystal clear to all that its strong commitment to walkability will always utilize the public right-of-way for sidewalks and bikeways where it makes sense for the neighborhood and community for all. She thanked Mr. Wiesen for his patience, creativity and expertise. She also thanked Ms. Heiser for her leadership of engineering and development of this plan. Additionally, she thanked residents for their comments, concerns, good plans and ideas and also the council for their support of this project. It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to adopt Resolution No. 22-035 accepting the project report establishing the 2022 Pavement Management Project (4021-1000), approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids. The motion passed 7-0. 8c. Adopt resolution approving health care for all Resolution No. 22-036 Mr. Sund presented the staff report and resolution. Mayor Spano read the resolution into the record. Hillary Bastien, 3654 Glenhurst Ave., stated when she was a young adult, she was not concerned about not having health insurance between 18-23 years old, and since that time she and her husband have always had insurance because of their jobs. She noted a time when they had to pay $11,000 per year for insurance and now, she is on Medicare. She noted she has been so fortunate but has known for a long time that she did not deserve to have insurance more than others that work for McDonalds, Walmart, or those who are unemployed. She added most bankruptcies in the US are connected to medical bills, and GoFundMe sites are the place to go to fund healthcare. She stated there have been over 650,000 GoFundMe sites to fund healthcare and people end up competing with each other to fund tragic medical issues. She stated this must change. Her daughter at 49 was uninsured last year and her partner was unemployed. She added many who are freelance workers must go uninsured and must work part-time jobs, which cuts into their creativity. She stated healthcare has to be de-coupled from employment and this is holding back our economy. She stated the solution is universal health care and thanked the council for their consideration of the resolution. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 12 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 Councilmember Rog asked about the emails to city hall regarding the resolution. Mr. Sund noted there were 14 messages received in support of adopting the resolution and after the 14 emails were sent to the council, an additional comment was received that was supportive. Councilmember Rog stated local government has a role to play in elevating issues that matter to residents, at the state and national levels. She added the city is a player on the local level and in the larger system on issues such as this. She stated the council should be discerning around the passing of resolutions, just for the sake of passing them, and not to dilute their value. Councilmember Rog noted in the resolution being considered tonight will significantly heighten awareness of and build momentum around serious discussion at the state level about universal health care. She added the legislature needs to hear from cities, and many have already passed similar resolutions, noting if the resolution is passed tonight by the council, this will make St. Louis Park the first west metro city to do so. Councilmember Rog stated the city will be leaders then to an issue important to all city residents, and especially to BIPOC residents, who are likely to lack health coverage and even if insured are more likely to face barriers to health access due to being disproportionately low income. This resolution aligns with the city’s strategic priority to be a leader and create a more just and inclusive equity for all. Councilmember Rog stated this also aligns with the city’s goals to be more fiscally responsible with the city, when spending $2.8 million on city employee health coverage. This coverage will help to create more funding within the budget for cities, so funds can be used for other programs and projects, and/or lower tax levies, which makes this hyper-relevant to the city and residents. Councilmember Rog thanked all residents who worked on this, stating she hopes to pass this resolution in order to let the legislature know where St. Louis Park stands on this issue. Councilmember Kraft thanked Councilmember Rog for her comments. He noted the US spends per capita almost double that of comparable countries on healthcare in Western Europe of similar GDP status and yet the US has worse outcomes. He added US patients have shorter hospital stays and fewer physician visits per capita, and yet we still pay twice as much, and the difference is they have universal healthcare. Mayor Spano stated he is fortunate to have healthcare coverage adding the amount of time spent on filing paperwork to be reimbursed is very time consuming, and a laborious process. He added he will support this because he does not believe a person’s life should be tied to your wallet, stating this is morally wrong. It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Kraft, to adopt Resolution No. 22-036 in support of the Minnesota Health Plan and Medicare for All Act. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 13 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 The motion passed 7-0. 8d. Final plans and specifications and authorizing ad for a bid for 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements project 4022-6000 Resolution No. 22-037 Councilmember Dumalag noted this is the last phase in a 3-phase project. She stated she is grateful for staff scheduling the open house for this item, adding a resident asked her about this item in an open house. She pointed out that council wants to ensure folks can bike and walk safely to businesses and other destinations including the ROC. Councilmember Brausen stated he walked from Ward 4 to Micro Center and over to Steel Toe Brewery recently, noting this project will enhance walkability and biking ability in the area. He noted this was incorporated into the city’s 2019 plans, will come to fruition soon, and he will be supporting this. It was moved by Councilmember Dumalag, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to adopt Resolution No. 22-037, approving final plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for a bid for 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue improvements project 4022-6000. The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Mohamed absent during this vote). 9. Communications Ms. Keller stated a snow emergency was declared in the city beginning this evening at 10 p.m. She also noted community COVID clinics start this weekend at the Icon Theatre at West End, February 26, from 2-6 p.m. and on February 27 at The Block from 2-5 p.m. Ms. Keller noted the upcoming Shamrock Ice Bowling event on March 12, with only 34 team spots remaining. She also noted upcoming open houses for Louisiana and Cedar Avenue construction and the Wooddale station neighborhood meeting on March 3, with more details on the city website. Councilmember Brausen stated there are two upcoming virtual open houses regarding Cedar Lake Road construction in 2023, and community outreach is already underway. He added road signs are up and there will be open houses on February 23 at 2 p.m. and February 24 at 6 p.m. with more details on the city website. He encouraged Ward 4 residents to attend and be part of the process from the beginning. Councilmember Rog also reminded everyone of the Children First fundraiser virtual event on March 3, with more information to be found on the city website. She explained that due to audio issues on tonight’s meeting, Judith Moore did not get to speak this evening, while she thanked Hillary for her comments. She also thanked everyone that has advocated for Minnesota Healthcare this past year. 10. Adjournment City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3e) Page 14 Title: City c ouncil meeting minutes of February 22, 2022 The meeting adjourned at 8:54 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Minutes: 3f Unofficial minutes City council special study session St. Louis Park, Minnesota Feb. 22, 2022 The meeting convened at 5:20 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen (arrived 6 p.m.), Sue Budd, Lynette Dumalag, Larry Kraft, and Margaret Rog Councilmember absent: Nadia Mohamed Staff present: City Manager (Ms. Keller), Deputy City Manager/Director of Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison), City Clerk (Ms. Kennedy), Communications Manager (Ms. Smith), Elections Specialist (Mr. Sund) Guests: none 1. Redistricting status update Mr. Sund presented the report. Councilmember Budd asked if there is a change between Districts 46A and 46B. Mr. Sund stated yes and noted Senate district 46 includes all of St. Louis Park, the Senate district is split into two house districts. The line was shifted south by state redistricting authorities. Councilmember Budd noted she represents Ward 3 and asked if the boundary between precincts 8 and 9 is a trail or a main road. Mr. Sund stated the boundary is Cedar Lake Regional Trail. Councilmember Kraft asked, in conforming with legislative guidelines, if that means precincts cannot be split among different districts. Mr. Sund stated they are required to conform to the legislative line drawn by the state. No precinct may be split by a legislative line. Councilmember Kraft asked how racial equity is incorporated into these decisions. Ms. Kennedy stated the inclusion of demographic data based on race as reported by the census, and the additional considerations outlined in the staff report relate to the way voters seek service in St. Louis Park. An effort was made to not unnecessarily divide community of interest and to streamline overall voters services for various populations. Staff also looked at qualitative information that has been shared with staff in recent election cycles or in the annual voter survey to see if any of the feedback received could be incorporated into the plan. She noted this is the first opportunity for staff to be able to tie 2020 census data to known data related to voting behavior and data collected through annual voter surveys to identify gaps in participation and start to learn more about why the gaps exist. She noted a map will not fix everything. Elections are one opportunity to develop a connection with people and create a sense of belonging or place within the community. When relationships are built and an effort is City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 3f) Page 2 Title: Special study session minutes of February 22, 2022 consistently made to foster inclusion, the hope is that voter engagement and participation across all populations will continue to increase. Councilmember Kraft stated prior to being on council, he did not have the view of elections he has now. He noted staff’s depth of analysis is great, adding this will contribute to the great voter turnout in St. Louis Park. Councilmember Rog stated the report is comprehensive and she appreciated the maps around demographics and will benefit from the information in servicing Ward 1. Mayor Spano stated St. Louis Park’s election staff is held in high esteem across the state and are highly regarded for the work they do. He thanked staff for their work on elections and indicated he will support staff recommendations. Councilmember Brausen added he also appreciates all the work staff has done and is supportive of the proposals. Councilmember Budd asked if staff would send out a postcard to people asking for participation in the survey. Mr. Sund answered yes and stated this will be done before the final adoption of the redistricting plan so that council can see the feedback provided. The meeting adjourned at 6:04 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Jake Spano, mayor Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 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 Feb. 26 through March 25, 2022. Policy consideration: Does the city council desire to approve city disbursements in accordance with Section 6.11 – Disbursements – How Made, of the City’s Charter? Summary: The Finance Division prepares this report on a monthly basis for the city council to review and approve. The attached reports show both City disbursements paid by physical check and those by wire transfer or Automated Clearing House (ACH) when applicable. Financial or budget considerations: Review and approval of the information follows the city’s charter and provides another layer of oversight to further ensure fiscal stewardship. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: City disbursements Prepared by: Kari Mahan, accounting clerk Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 1Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 38.46A-1 OUTDOOR POWER INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 38.46 2,250.00AARON DAVIS PRESENTATIONS, INC.HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2,250.00 1,530.00ABRITER PLLC BLDG & ENERGY G & A 1&2 SINGLE FAM. RENTAL 1,530.00 4,500.00ACROSS THE STREET PRODUCTIONS FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING 4,500.00 377.77ADAMEK CASSANDRA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 377.77 917.17ADVANCED ENG & ENVIRONMENTAL SRVCS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 917.17SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 629.00SEWER UTILITY G&A ENGINEERING SERVICES 917.16STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,380.50 261.53ALADTEC INC POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 261.53 3,750.00ALL TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS, INC.EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT POLICE EQUIPMENT 3,750.00 3,485.00ALLIANCE MECH SRVCS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,281.00PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,766.00 1,819.05ALLIANT INC.SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,775.532023 MSA STREET PROJECT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,725.872024 MSA STREET PROJECT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 174.63WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 45.73SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 186.69STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,727.50 2,717.63ALLSTREAMIT G & A TELEPHONE 2,717.63 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 2 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 2Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 149.00AMAZON CAPITAL SERVICES FINANCE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 78.71FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 207.65POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,140.00POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 210.00COMMUNICATIONS/DISPATCH OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 31.98E-911 PROGRAM OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 379.20FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 49.79CABLE TV G & A OTHER 190.39TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 2,436.72 17,234.75AMERICAN ENGINEERING TESTING INC SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 17,234.75 27,165.76ANCHOR PROMOTIONS, APPAREL & SIGNAGE FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 27,165.76 218.98ANCOM COMMUNICATIONS POLICE G & A RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 218.98 3.04ANDERSON THOMAS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 3.04 299.00APPLE INC CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 299.00 627.90ARC DOCUMENT SOLUTIONS, LLC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 627.90 205.20ARROW LIFT FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 205.20 131.05ASPEN EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 131.05 135.90ASPEN MILLS FIRE OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS 3,031.11FIRE OPERATIONS UNIFORMS 97.90FIRE OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING 3,264.91 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 3 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 3Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 204.23ATIR ELECTRIC CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 204.23 225.00AUROMIRA ARCHITECTS LLC MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 225.00 215.74AUSTIN HARDWARE & SUPPLY, INC.WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 215.74 77.50AUTOWASH SYSTEMS INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 77.50 1,214.00AVI SYSTEMS INC CABLE TV G & A OTHER 1,214.00 46,840.00AVOLVE SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 46,840.00 110.00B&J EVERGREEN, INC.GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT 110.00 56.37BANDY ISACC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 56.37 50.00BAQUERO ANTHONY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 95.36BARAJAS MARCO WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 95.36 272.00BARNA, GUZY & STEFFEN LTD HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 272.00 313.75BARNUM COMPANIES, INC.FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 313.75 40.38BATTERIES PLUS BULBS ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 40.38 63.00BCX PRINTING INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 63.00 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 4 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 4Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 1,835.00BEACON ATHLETICS PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,835.00 886.00BECKER ARENA PRODUCTS REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 886.00 4,236.98BEDFORD TECHNOLOGY LLC PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 4,236.98 1,160.32BINGER DEAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 1,160.32 4,445.31BLOOMINGTON CITY OF REILLY G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,445.31 350.00BLUE NET, INC.IT G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 587.50IT G & A TRAINING 937.50 11.20BOLTON & MENK INC SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9.80STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 103,487.50WOODDALE REHAB PROJ (TIF) G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 64.40PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 37.80WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5.60SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11.20STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 103,627.50 191.01BOONE JOE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 191.01 707.39BOUND TREE MEDICAL, LLC POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,090.57FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,797.96 207.37BOYCE ANTHONY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 207.37 287.82BOYER TRUCKS GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 287.82 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 5 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 5Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 61.08BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,146.25SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 53.45STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 571.80CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 351.20PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 231.75WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 97.34SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 119.88STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,632.75 99.51BREDEMUS HARDWARE COMPANY INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 99.51 65.00BREDENBERG, JASON BLDG & ENERGY G & A LICENSES 65.00 9,000.00BREMER BANK N.A.ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 9,000.00 119.46BRENCHLEY ELLEN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 119.46 50.00BROXEY DANIELLE BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 285.59BTR OF MINNESOTA LLC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 285.59 107.00BUDGET SIGN POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 107.00 58.09BUSINESS ESSENTIALS ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 58.09 1.00BWS PLUMBING HEATING & AC BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 70.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 71.00 13,289.36CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROF ASSOC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES 51.00ENGINEERING G & A LEGAL SERVICES City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 6 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 6Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 392.23SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 408.00STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A LEGAL SERVICES 136.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A LEGAL SERVICES 14,276.59 173.13CANADIAN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES 173.13 287.10CANON FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 287.10 5,000.00CARE RESOURCE CONNECTION FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,000.00 72.88CDW GOVERNMENT INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 72.88 1,750.00CENTER FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT MOVE-UP PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 833.34TRANSFORMATION LOAN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 36,733.33DOWN PYMT ASSISTANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 833.33FIRST GENERATION HOMEOWNERSHIP OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 40,150.00 17,984.46CENTERPOINT ENERGY FACILITIES MCTE G & A HEATING GAS 3,024.15FACILITY OPERATIONS HEATING GAS 2.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 70.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 80.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL 6,259.11WATER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS 554.19REILLY G & A HEATING GAS 667.56SEWER UTILITY G&A HEATING GAS 2,279.45PARK MAINTENANCE G & A HEATING GAS 10,524.65REC CENTER BUILDING HEATING GAS 41,445.57 12.75CENTRAL MCGOWAN CONCESSIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 12.75 11,400.00CENTRAL PENSION FUND EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT OTHER RETIREMENT 11,400.00 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 7 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 7Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 525.00CENTURY COLLEGE FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING 525.00 545.84CENTURY LINK CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 545.84 750.00CHECHIK JOEL LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 750.00 239.98CHET'S SAFETY SALES INC PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 239.98 393.75CHUX PRINT WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 393.75 136.85CINTAS CORPORATION FACILITIES MCTE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 210.07FACILITIES MCTE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 97.80REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 223.17VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 667.89 2,576.97CITIZENS INDEPENDENT BANK ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 957.04ADMINISTRATION G & A MEETING EXPENSE 2.15HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE SUPPLIES 107.51HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL SUPPLIES 60.65HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 350.00HUMAN RESOURCES RECOGNITION 215.00HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 10.98COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 80.05COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 154.72COMM & MARKETING G & A ADVERTISING 410.00COMM & MARKETING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 406.44IT G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 210.00ASSESSING G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 1,197.00ASSESSING G & A TRAINING 70.00FINANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 80.05FINANCE G & A INTEREST/FINANCE CHARGES 360.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A TRAINING 64.95FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,299.51POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 5.88POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 8 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 8Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 2,500.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 364.00POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 2,615.00POLICE G & A TRAINING 2,555.74POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 58.97POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE 68.78POLICE G & A BANK CHARGES/CREDIT CD FEES 16.06FIRE OPERATIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES 318.56FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 81.10FIRE OPERATIONS FIRE PREVENTION SUPPLIES 452.12FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 27.95FIRE OPERATIONS SMALL TOOLS 873.97FIRE OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 397.89FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING 5,243.44FIRE OPERATIONS SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1,794.81BLDG & ENERGY G & A MEETING EXPENSE 75.00SUSTAINABILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 223.08PUBLIC WORKS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 507.63PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 51.53PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A MEETING EXPENSE 725.61ROUTINE MAINTENANCE OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 13.98ROUTINE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 47.94SANDING/SALTING EQUIPMENT PARTS 59.95CABLE TV G & A OTHER 1,225.74POLICEOFFICE EQUIPMENT 313.88WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 444.09WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,091.38WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 220.10WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 171.38SEWER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 23.57SEWER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 300.00SOLID WASTE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 826.78SOLID WASTE G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 1,399.98TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 11.78ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 300.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 160.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 25.97PARK MAINTENANCE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 20.00NATURAL RESOURCES G & A TRAINING 960.93WESTWOOD G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 16.12REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 208.94REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 9 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 9Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 215.00REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 64.96REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 200.00REC CENTER BUILDING SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 684.68INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 299.99VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 499.00VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 38,376.28 156.46CLEVELAND CRYSTAL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 156.46 495.00COLE PAPERS FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 495.00 17,031.81COLICH & ASSOCIATES ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES 17,031.81 275.00COLLIGNON SCOTT WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 275.00 3,686.87COLLINS ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION CO SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 7,610.65CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 340.74WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 889.11SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 782.63STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 13,310.00 129.62COMCASTFIRE OPERATIONS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 116.48CABLE TV G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 86.62OTHER CITY DEPARTMENTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 30.27REC CENTER BUILDING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 362.99 1,718.00COMMERCIAL REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS INC REC CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 1,718.00 37,032.85COMPASS MINERALS AMERICA SANDING/SALTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 37,032.85 921.79CORE & MAIN LP WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 921.79 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 10 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 10Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 6,397.42CORPORATE MECHANICAL REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 6,397.42 30.00COSTCO WHOLESALE MEMBERSHIP PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 150.00ORGANIZED REC G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 120.00WESTWOOD G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 300.00 65.25CROWN MARKING INC.FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 65.25 58.90CRYSTAL CLEAR INVESTMENTS, LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 58.90 10,500.00CTW GROUP, INC.ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 3.55WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 10,503.55 449.10CUSTOM HOSE TECH INC GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 449.10 231.50DALCO ENTERPRISES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 231.50 211.75DELEGARD TOOL CO PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 211.75 9,749.70DEPARTMENT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 9,749.70 62,434.03DEPT EMPLOYMENT & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTEMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A UNEMPLOYMENT 62,434.03 2,091.75DEROPARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT OTHER 2,091.75 6,772.00DIXON RALFORD BASKETBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,772.00 683.83DJ ELECTRIC SERVICES INC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 11 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 11Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 683.83 3,200.55DO-GOOD.BIZ INC ADMINISTRATION G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,793.04COMM & MARKETING G & A POSTAGE 227.00COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 443.63SUSTAINABILITY G&A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 1,112.14SOLID WASTE G&A POSTAGE 8,776.36 186.61DONAGHUE PATRICIA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 186.61 207.68DONNA HECKER REVOCABLE TRUST WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 207.68 124.00DOUBLETREE MPLS PARK PLACE POLICE G & A MEETING EXPENSE 124.00 475.00DTN, LLC.PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 475.00 71.02E A INVESTMENTS WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 71.02 102.50EAMES CAITLIN CLIMATE INVESTMENT FUND G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 102.50 1,299.25ECM PUBLISHERS INC ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL NOTICES 1,299.25 600.00EHLERS & ASSOCIATES INC ESCROWS UNION PARK APTS 3,450.00ESCROWSSEMBLE EXCAVATING 3,380.00ESCROWS3801 WOODDALE (ALDERSGATE) 900.00ESCROWSBigos Management-1351-1361 Ham 8,330.00 23.65EITRHEIM JACOB WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 23.65 200.00ELECTRIC PUMP INC PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 12 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 12Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 176.07ELLANSON, LUKE POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 176.07 101.68EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 101.68 5,700.59ENTERPRISE FM TRUST EQUIP/VEHICLE REPLACEMENT RENTAL EQUIPMENT 5,700.59 1,239.52ENVIROTECH SERVICES INC PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,345.34SANDING/SALTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 2,584.86 3.38ESTATE OF DANIEL J. ROY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 3.38 180.00ESTATE OF ZACHARY A ZANIEWSKI WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 180.00 18,037.50EVERBRIDGE INC COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 18,037.50 658.75FACTORY MOTOR PARTS CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 29.34GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 688.09 821.00FASTSIGNSLARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE ADVERTISING 821.27LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE PRINTING & PUBLISHING 1,642.27 4,150.00FAUL PSYCHOLOGICAL PLLC HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 4,150.00 10,133.60FERGUSON WATERWORKS WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 13,897.02WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 10,133.60SEWER UTILITY G&A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 34,164.22 258.75FERRELLGASREC CENTER BUILDING MOTOR FUELS 22.08VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A MOTOR FUELS City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 13 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 13Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 280.83 885.00FIELD TRAINING SOLUTIONS POLICE G & A TRAINING 885.00 98.25FINANCE & COMMERCE, INC.PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 17.95SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 15.71STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 189.56PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 60.58WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 8.98SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 131.10STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 522.13 54.85FIRE SAFETY USA INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 54.85 292.65FIRST ADVANTAGE HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 292.65 1,797.00FIRST ARRIVING LLC POLICE G & A OFFICE EQUIPMENT 1,797.00 25.00FLADLAND DEREK FIRE OPERATIONS TRAINING 25.00 441.00FORCE AMERICA, INC.SANDING/SALTING EQUIPMENT PARTS 441.00 34,227.75FORD OF HIBBING VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 34,227.75 32.00FRANCIS, ERICK STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 19.31STORM WATER UTILITY G&A MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 51.31 69.67FRATTALLONE'S/SAINT LOUIS PARK WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 188.96REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 258.63 316.92FUN EXPRESS HOLIDAY PROGRAMS GENERAL SUPPLIES City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 14 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 14Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 316.92 7,895.84GALLS, LLC - DBA UNIFORMS UNLIMITED POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 56.00POLICE G & A POLICE EQUIPMENT 7,951.84 275.00GATHJE THOMAS CLIMATE INVESTMENT FUND G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 275.00 5,000.00GILBERT BRYN ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 5,000.00 231.33GILBERT JONATHAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 231.33 .43GILBERT MECHANICAL BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 161.34BLDG & ENERGY G & A BUILDING 161.77 528.00GOLDEN VALLEY, CITY OF VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A POLICE EQUIPMENT 528.00 271.35GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 271.35 2,800.00GORDON PRICE & RILEY JINES ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 2,800.00 112.10GRAINGER INC.GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 229.80FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,675.83PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 2,017.73 403.75GUARDIAN FLEET SAFETY CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 403.75 4,329.00H & L MESABI GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 4,329.00 2,048.84HACH CO WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,048.84 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 15 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 15Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 105.26HAMMOND PAUL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 105.26 83.54HAUN KYLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 83.54 25,492.02HAWKINS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 25,492.02 572.00HEALTHPARTNERSHUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 572.00 1.00HEARTH & HOME TECHNOLOGIES BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 80.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL 81.00 47.50HENNEPIN COUNTY RESIDENT & REAL ESTATE ASSESSING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 47.50 203.00HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER IT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 200.00ASSESSING G & A POSTAGE 268.00FACILITIES MCTE G & A LICENSES 3,449.16POLICE G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 10,663.69POLICE G & A JAIL/DETENTION SERVICES 2,728.44FIRE OPERATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 6,000.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 241.32PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 401.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LICENSES 67.00REC CENTER BUILDING LICENSES 24,221.61 2,220.00HENNEPIN HEALTHCARE FIRE OPERATIONS HEALTH & WELLNESS 2,220.00 75.93HENRY GILES WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 75.93 65.00HEUISER KAREN BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 16 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 16Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 1,587.60HIRSHFIELD'S PAINT MFG INC PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,587.60 1,032.00HOLM AUSTIN EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A TUITION 1,032.00 102.28HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,282.08WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 252.94PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 2.56PARK MAINTENANCE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 2,091.74PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 443.03PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 107.80PARK EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 5.23GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 4,287.66 50.00HORTON CHELSEA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 401.78HOTSY MINNESOTA PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 398.47GENERAL REPAIR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 800.25 1,715.00I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES 1,715.00 12.00ICE SPORTS INDUSTRY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 12.00 650.00IMA GROUP MANAGEMENT CO.HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 650.00 1,654.84IMPACT POWER TO CONNECT WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 1,654.84SEWER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 1,654.84SOLID WASTE G&A POSTAGE 1,654.84STORM WATER UTILITY G&A POSTAGE 6,619.36 335.82INDELCOWATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 22.80VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 358.62 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 17 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 17Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 145.00INTERNATIONAL CODE COUNCIL INC BLDG & ENERGY G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 145.00 667.46INVER GROVE FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 209.99GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 877.45 25.00ISI SPORTS INDUSTRY INSTRUCTIONAL SKATING LESSONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 25.00 510.50I-STATE TRUCK CENTER GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 510.50 6,687.41IZONE IMAGING PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 6,687.41 86.40J & F REDDY RENTS WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 10.80PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 97.20 13.95JACOBSON JOYCE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 13.95 764.10JERRY'S HARDWARE SNOW PLOWING EQUIPMENT PARTS 6.80DAMAGE REPAIR OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 32.43WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 9.40PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 10.33PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 823.06 497.85JOHNSON PAPER & SUPPLY CO.REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 497.85 10.66KENNEDY & GRAVEN ESCROWS 5605 W 36TH (AMER LEGION SITE) 214.34ADMINISTRATION G & A LEGAL SERVICES 225.00 15.00KENWOOD/ALDRICH PTRNS LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 15.00 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 18 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 18Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 50.00KLEFSAAS, MAGGIE BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 11,326.60KLEIN UNDERGROUND LLC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 11,326.60 200.00KLUG MARILYN GREEN REMODELING PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 17.33KNOLLWOOD PROPERTIES WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 17.33 1.00KODIAK ELECTRIC, LLC BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 70.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 71.00 2,619.00KODRU-MOONEY WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 2,619.00 8,888.56KRAEMER MINING & MATERIALS INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 8,888.56 670.75KRISS PREMIUM PRODUCTS INC REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 670.75 1,908.00KRUELLE, BRYAN EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A TUITION 1,908.00 362.51LANGUAGE LINE SERVICES INC POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 362.51 3,898.28LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES 3,898.28 26.90-LAWSON PRODUCTS INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 164.82VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 112.33GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 250.25 12,739.00LEAGUE OF MINNESOTA CITIES ADMINISTRATION G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 20.00ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 19 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 19Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 12,759.00 75.00LEAGUE OF MN CITIES FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 75.00 100.00LEAGUE OF MN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSIONS POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 100.00 705.00LEGEND TECHNICAL SERVICES REILLY G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 705.00 34.99LEONARD DEREK PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 34.99 43,750.00LEOTEK ELECTRONICS USA LLC INSTALLATION OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 14,375.00PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 58,125.00 292.10LIFE SUPPORT INNOVATIONS FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 292.10 684.90LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 684.90 338.00LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP REILLY G & A LEGAL SERVICES 338.00 258.24LOFFLERIT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 258.24 2,944.15LOFFLER COMPANIES IT G & A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,944.15 10,038.01LOGISIT G & A COMPUTER SERVICES 400.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT 54,045.00TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT COMPUTER SERVICES 64,483.01 3,210.16LUBE-TECH & PARTNERS LLC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 3,210.16 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 20 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 20Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 5,199.54M&M HYDRAULIC COMPANY WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 5,199.54 708.78MACQUEEN EQUIP CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 74.10SANDING/SALTING EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,002.34SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 691.68GENERAL REPAIR EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,476.90 45,480.15MANSFIELD OIL COMPANY OF GAINSVILLE, INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 45,480.15 3,595.00MARIE RIDGEWAY LICSW LLC POLICE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,595.00 87.28MATHESON TRI-GAS, INC.VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 87.28 150.00MAXIM'S LANDSCAPE & SNOW REMOVAL SNOW PLOWING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00 65.00MCCABE TARA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 433.25MCGLAMERY JANELLE WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 433.25 425.00MCMAADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 75.00FINANCE G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 500.00 425.00MCPHERSON PATRICIA CLIMATE INVESTMENT FUND G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 425.00 15.93MENARDSFACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 7.90PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 24.00INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 47.93WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 100.94WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 4.99PARK MAINTENANCE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 66.80PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 21 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 21Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 114.03WESTWOOD G & A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 382.52 500.00METRO BLOOMS STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 500.00 11,205.00METRO BLOOMS DESIGN + BUILD LLC STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11,205.00 100.00METRO CHIEF FIRE OFFICERS ASSOC.FIRE OPERATIONS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 100.00 963.00METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS ASSOC.VOLLEYBALL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 963.00 624,878.10METROPOLITAN COUNCIL BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 6,228.11WATER UTILITY G&A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 361,200.27OPERATIONSCLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 992,306.48 186.00MHABLDG & ENERGY G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 186.00 848.16MINNESOTA CHILD SUPPORT PYT CTR EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT WAGE GARNISHMENTS 848.16 12.00MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10.50STREET CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 69.00PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 40.50WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 33,035.00WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6.00SEWER CAPITAL PROJ G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 12.00STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 33,185.00 400.00MINNESOTA DEPT PUBLIC SAFETY SUSTAINABILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,275.50CAPITAL REPLACEMENT B/S INVENTORY 2,675.50 1,674.00MINNESOTA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC ORGANIZED REC G & A TRAINING 170.00PARK MAINTENANCE G & A TRAINING City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 22 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 22Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 170.00NATURAL RESOURCES G & A TRAINING 170.00WESTWOOD G & A TRAINING 735.00ENTERPRISE G & A TRAINING 2,919.00 120.00MINNESOTA SECRETARY OF STATE- NOTARY POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 120.00 35.00MINUTEMAN PRESS COMM & MARKETING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 35.00 1,062.00MINVALCO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,062.00 115.30MITCHELL INVESTMENT PROPERTIES, LLC. WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 115.30 10.00MN DEPT LABOR AND INDUSTRY WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10.00 315.00MN HELICOPTERS INC NATURAL RESOURCES G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 315.00 123.70MOELLER ANDREA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 123.70 126.00MOST DEPENDABLE FOUNTAINS PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 126.00 145.00MR CUTTING EDGE REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 145.00 1,500.00MRA-THE MANAGEMENT ASSOC HUMAN RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 1,675.00HUMAN RESOURCES SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 3,175.00 125.00MRPALARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE ADVERTISING 125.00 160.00MS RELOCATION SERVICES BLDG & ENERGY G & A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 160.00 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 23 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 23Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 15.10MSC INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY CO.GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 384.51PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 399.61 317.59MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 317.59 212.00MVTL LABORATORIES REILLY G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 212.00 32,222.57NAC MECHANICAL & ELECTRICAL SERVICES MUNICIPAL BLDGS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 32,222.57 246.99NALEZNY JEFFERY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 246.99 3,433.32NAPA (GENUINE PARTS CO)GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 173.07ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SMALL TOOLS 198.23PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 213.43PARK GROUNDS MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 11.69VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 336.08GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 4,365.82 71.88NARDINI FIRE EQUIPMENT FIRE OPERATIONS FIRE ALARM & SPRINKLER 71.88 60,000.00NASHEN, LLC.ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 60,000.00 1,440.00NATOACABLE TV G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 1,440.00 55.00NEISKE NATE BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 55.00 123.76NELSON ANN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 123.76 400.41NESCO LLC VEHICLES & EQUIPMENT G&A MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 24 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 24Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 400.41 164.80NEVER ENOUGH THYME WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 164.80 189.95NOKOMIS SHOE SHOP ENTERPRISE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 189.95 5,500.00NORD MICHELLE ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 5,500.00 221.62NORDWALL JOHN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 221.62 53.98NORTHERN TOOL AND EQUIPMENT WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 53.98 451.50NORTHLAND MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 451.50 900.00NORTHLAND NUTRITION CONSULTING, LLC.HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 900.00 18,845.99NYSTROM PUBLISHING COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 5,882.23SOLID WASTE G&A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 24,728.22 124.50OAK KNOLL ANIMAL HOSPITAL POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 124.50 98.00OAKS ELECTRIC BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 98.00 2.86OFFICE DEPOT ADMINISTRATION G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 2.31COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 69.43FINANCE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 167.84COMM DEV PLANNING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 98.62POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 52.98POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 146.83BLDG & ENERGY G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 280.98PUBLIC WORKS G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 25 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 25Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 59.39ENGINEERING G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 25.59WATER UTILITY G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 196.70ORGANIZED REC G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 119.50REC CTR DIV NON DPT BUDGET OFFICE SUPPLIES 106.93VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,329.96 65.00OLEISKY ANDREA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 65.00 578.30OLSON, DON WATER UTILITY G&A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 578.30 26,682.49OMNI CONTRACTING INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 26,682.49 114.00ON SITE SANITATION NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 308.00LARGE EVENTS - ADMIN FEE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 220.00OFF-LEASH DOG PARK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 642.00 450.00ONELOVEYOGAHUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 450.00 190.41O'REILLY FIRST CALL GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 11.98GENERAL REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 202.39 50.00OSEI TIA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 283.90OVERHEAD DOOR CO FACILITIES MCTE G & A BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 283.90 347.76OXYGEN SERVICE COMPANY INC FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 347.76 1,227.00PACE ANALYTICAL SERVICES INC REILLY G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,227.00 928.62PARK CHRYSLER JEEP GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 26 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 26Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 928.62 30.00PETTY CASH POLICE G & A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 30.00 11.70PICKATIME, INC.COMM & MARKETING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 11.70 54.76PILGRIM DRY CLEANERS FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 54.76 3,198.00PINK CONSULTING, LLC.ADMINISTRATION G & A SEMINARS/CONFERENCES/PRESENTAT 3,198.00 927.44POMP'S TIRE SERVICE INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 3,114.62PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 4,042.06 62.50POSTHUMUS MIRANDA BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 62.50 269.99POWERPLAN OIB TREE MAINTENANCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 269.99 333.50PRECISE MRM, LLC.PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 333.50WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 333.50SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 333.50STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,334.00 247.57PREMIUM WATERS INC FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 247.57 704.00PUBLIC SAFETY SOFTWARE GROUP POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 704.00 8,000.00PULSEPOINT FOUNDATION FIRE OPERATIONS EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS 8,000.00 424.70PWF SOLUTIONS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 424.70 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 27 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 27Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 691.75R & R SPECIALTIES OF WISCONSIN, INC.REC CENTER BUILDING GENERAL SUPPLIES 705.00REC CENTER BUILDING OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 784.30REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,181.05 4,500.00RAE & RAY PROPERTIES ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 4,500.00 732.25RAILROAD MANAGEMENT COMPANY III LLC WATER UTILITY G&A LICENSES 732.25 573.49RANDY'S ENVIROMENTAL SERVICES PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 573.49 494.13RED WING BUSINESS ADVANTAGE ACCOUNT WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 238.49ENTERPRISE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 732.62 490.47RED WING STORE PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 468.84WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 959.31 215.01REGENCY OFFICE PRODUCTS, LLC.POLICE G & A OFFICE SUPPLIES 215.01 36,904.10REHRIG PACIFIC CO SOLID WASTE G&A OTHER 36,904.10 132.57RENO DAVID WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 132.57 975.61REPUBLIC SERVICES FACILITIES MCTE G & A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 975.61 48.85RITTMASTER RICHARD WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 48.85 3,026.23ROBERT HALF TECHNOLOGY FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,680.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,706.23 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 28 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 28Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 17.88ROEMEN BRIAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 17.88 445.00ROOT-O-MATIC REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 445.00 166.21ROSEN MOLLY REFORESTATION FUND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 166.21 1,738.00ROSEVILLE MIDWAY FORD GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 1,738.00 44.89SAVAIRE KEITH WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 44.89 5.00SCHULTE ANN GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT 5.00 170.00SETS DESIGN INC.POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 170.00 73.00SHALLENBERGER JOSEPH BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 73.00 6,897.00SHAPCO PRINTING INC COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 6,897.00 4,096.79SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON, INC.SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 4,096.79 19.21SHRED-IT FINANCE G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 559.00POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 19.01BLDG & ENERGY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 19.01ORGANIZED REC G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 616.23 7,123.00SIGNATURE MECHANICAL INC REC CENTER BUILDING MAINTENANCE 7,123.00 41.49SITEONE LANDSCAPE SUPPLY LLC PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 29 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 29Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 41.49 711.95SKALLET, DAVID BLDG & ENERGY G & A MEETING EXPENSE 711.95 171.18SLINGLUFF VICKI WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 171.18 1,789.32SLP FF ASSOC IAFF LOCAL #993 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND BAL SHT UNION DUES 1,789.32 488.20SMITH LAURA HUMAN RESOURCES TRAVEL/MEETINGS 488.20 90.32SMITH MAURICE JR POLICE G & A TRAVEL/MEETINGS 90.32 800.00SPARTAN, LLC.ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 800.00 358.54SPS COMPANIES INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 15.37WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 8.63PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 382.54 6,936.97SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC SIDEWALK & TRAILS G&A IMPROVEMENTS OTHER THAN BUILDI 6,936.97 65,000.00ST. LOUIS PARK EMERGENCY PROGRAM STEP RENTAL ASSISTANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 65,000.00 300.00ST. LOUIS PARK POLICE RESERVES GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET CLEARING ACCOUNT 300.00 6,500.00STALOCH ROBIN ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 6,500.00 80.00STANDARD HEATING & A/C BLDG & ENERGY G & A MECHANICAL 80.00 582.30STAR TRIBUNE POLICE G & A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 30 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 30Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 582.30 139.24STEWART MICHAEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 139.24 150.00STEYAERT CHUCK WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 150.00 5.43STILLINGS MICHAEL WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 5.43 175.00STRAND MFG CO STORM WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 175.00 1,207.92STREICHER'S POLICE G & A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 1,207.92 2,747.20STRYKER SALES CORP.FIRE OPERATIONS OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 2,747.20 783.33SUBURBAN RATE AUTHORITY WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 783.33SEWER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 783.34STORM WATER UTILITY G&A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 2,350.00 4,841.22SUMMIT ENVIROSOLUTIONS INC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 29,332.26REILLY G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 34,173.48 20,355.00SWAN COMPANIES PARK IMPROVE CAPITAL PROJECT BUILDINGS & STRUCTURES 20,355.00 236.07TELELANGUAGE INC ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 236.07 41.00TEXA-TONKA LANES FIRE OPERATIONS GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 41.00 2,580.60THE DAVEY TREE EXPERT COMPANY TREE DISEASE PUBLIC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 2,580.60 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 31 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 31Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 67.47THE JOAN DORMAN REVOCABLE TRUST WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 67.47 1,007.54THE MPX GROUP COMM & MARKETING G & A PRINTING & PUBLISHING 1,007.54 451.68THE SHERWIN WILLIAMS CO.PARK BUILDING MAINTENANCE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 451.68 238.59THE SHERWINN WILLIAMS CO WATER UTILITY G&A BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 238.59 51.00THE SIGN PRODUCERS INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 51.00 90.17THE STANDARD ADMINISTRATION G & A LIFE INSURANCE 93.47ADMINISTRATION G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 70.87HUMAN RESOURCES LIFE INSURANCE 71.06HUMAN RESOURCES LONG TERM DISABILITY 82.17COMM & MARKETING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 80.51COMM & MARKETING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 107.06IT G & A LIFE INSURANCE 118.83IT G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 113.41ASSESSING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 112.83ASSESSING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 119.63FINANCE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 122.48FINANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 303.66COMM DEV G & A LIFE INSURANCE 313.54COMM DEV G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 101.07FACILITIES MCTE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 103.64FACILITIES MCTE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 1,130.17POLICE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 1,120.09POLICE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 122.81COMMUNICATIONS/DISPATCH LIFE INSURANCE 120.26COMMUNICATIONS/DISPATCH LONG TERM DISABILITY 564.01FIRE OPERATIONS LIFE INSURANCE 560.01FIRE OPERATIONS LONG TERM DISABILITY 330.96BLDG & ENERGY G & A LIFE INSURANCE 340.59BLDG & ENERGY G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 35.69SUSTAINABILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 35.01SUSTAINABILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 32 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 32Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 87.12PUBLIC WORKS G & A LIFE INSURANCE 85.41PUBLIC WORKS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 232.17ENGINEERING G & A LIFE INSURANCE 240.01ENGINEERING G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 211.96PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LIFE INSURANCE 210.61PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 36.16CABLE TV G & A LIFE INSURANCE 40.82CABLE TV G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 21.84HOUSING REHAB G & A LIFE INSURANCE 21.48HOUSING REHAB G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 125.98WATER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 124.98WATER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 49.53SEWER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 48.49SEWER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 46.74SOLID WASTE G&A LIFE INSURANCE 45.90SOLID WASTE G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 94.11STORM WATER UTILITY G&A LIFE INSURANCE 92.14STORM WATER UTILITY G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 7,735.05EMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A LIFE INSURANCE 150.24ORGANIZED REC G & A LIFE INSURANCE 152.76ORGANIZED REC G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 180.59PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LIFE INSURANCE 177.05PARK MAINTENANCE G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 19.94NATURAL RESOURCES G & A LIFE INSURANCE 19.62NATURAL RESOURCES G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 79.88WESTWOOD G & A LIFE INSURANCE 78.37WESTWOOD G & A LONG TERM DISABILITY 106.30REC CENTER SALARIES LIFE INSURANCE 104.16REC CENTER SALARIES LONG TERM DISABILITY 93.98VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LIFE INSURANCE 91.87VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A LONG TERM DISABILITY 17,169.26 33.55THE UPS STORE WATER UTILITY G&A OPERATIONAL SUPPLIES 33.55 71.43THOMPSON JESSICA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 71.43 335.98THOMSON REUTERS WEST PAYMENT CENTER POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 335.98 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 33 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 33Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 50.00THORNE LAURA BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 703.75THRIVEPASSEMPLOYEE BENEFITS FUND G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 703.75 1,059.50TIMESAVER OFF SITE SECRETARIAL ADMINISTRATION G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 154.00COMM DEV PLANNING G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 190.50SUSTAINABILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,404.00 10.86TOLL GAS & WELDING SUPPLY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 10.86 .50TONY'S PLUMBING & HEATING BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 87.50BLDG & ENERGY G & A PLUMBING 88.00 4,634.50TOOLE DESIGN GROUP, LLC.ENGINEERING G & A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,634.50 29.71TOTTEN CRAWFORD PROPERTIES, LLC. WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 29.71 4,250.00TOUCHSTONE IQ, LLC SUSTAINABILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,250.00 2,440.00TRAFFIC IMPACT GROUP, LLC ESCROWS GENERAL 2,440.00 698.90TRANSPORT GRAPHICS INSURANCE FUND G&A UNINSURED LOSS 698.90 1,400.00TRANSPORTATION COLLABORATIVE & CONSULT. ESCROWS GENERAL 1,400.00 560.39TRI STATE BOBCAT GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 560.39 1,240.31TRITECH SOFTWARE SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT OFFICE EQUIPMENT City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 34 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 34Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 1,240.31 10.71TRUE EDGE LLC WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 10.71 3,383.01TWIN CITY OUTDOOR SERVICES INC SNOW PLOWING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,045.00SSD 1 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 453.00SSD 3 G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,881.01 2.03UDITSKY JOSHUA WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 2.03 738.00UHL CO INC FACILITIES MCTE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 738.00 1,406.49ULINEWATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,406.49 104.32US AUTOFORCE GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 104.32 697.67USA BLUE BOOK WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 697.67 7,747.97VALLEY-RICH CO INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 10,416.21SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 18,164.18 50.00VATSAAS KELSEY BASKETBALL REFUNDS & REIMBURSEMENTS 50.00 60.00VERIFIED CREDENTIALS LLC.HUMAN RESOURCES RECRUITMENT 60.00 40,437.94VERIZONIT G & A DATACOMMUNICATIONS 100.08SEWER UTILITY G&A TELEPHONE 71.84CELLPHONES, IPADS, ETC.TELEPHONE 40,609.86 85.00VERIZON WIRELESS POLICE G & A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 35 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 35Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 85.00 266.31VESSCO INC WATER UTILITY G&A EQUIPMENT PARTS 266.31 980.00VETERAN ELECTRIC REC CENTER BUILDING BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,487.00REC CENTER BUILDING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,467.00 427.11WAIT KAY WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 427.11 444.58WALKER SEAN WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 444.58 1.00WALTER ELECTRIC CONTRACTORS, INC. BLDG & ENERGY G & A DUE TO OTHER GOVTS 70.00BLDG & ENERGY G & A ELECTRICAL 71.00 992.00WARNING LITES OF MN INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 992.00 4,198.17WASHINGTON COUNTY E-911 PROGRAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,198.17 993.06WASTE MANAGEMENT OF MN, INC.SEWER UTILITY G&A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 993.06 37,246.87-WASTE MANAGEMENT OF WI-MN SOLID WASTE G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 209,570.68SOLID WASTE G&A GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 81,391.86SOLID WASTE G&A RECYCLING SERVICE 52,061.46SOLID WASTE G&A YARD WASTE SERVICE 79,207.68SOLID WASTE G&A ORGANICS 384,984.81 1,291.38WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE INC WATER UTILITY G&A OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,291.38 3,000.00WEISS SHMUEL ESCROWS PMC ESCROW 3,000.00 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 36 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 36Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 199.01WELSCH PETER WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 199.01 32.30WESTOVER JAMES WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 32.30 121.75WESTWOOD HILLS NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC.NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION GRANT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 121.75 6,428.16WESTWOOD SPORTS SOFTBALL GENERAL SUPPLIES 6,428.16 213.99WINSUPPLY OF EDEN PRAIRIE RELAMPING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 4,500.00INSTALLATIONOTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 4,713.99 176.58WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP INC FIRE OPERATIONS PROTECTIVE CLOTHING 176.58 2,500.00WSB ASSOC INC TECHNOLOGY REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,500.00 17,305.21XCEL ENERGY FACILITIES MCTE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 4,268.05PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 36,416.95WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,787.48REILLY G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 5,428.87SEWER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 1,622.39STORM WATER UTILITY G&A ELECTRIC SERVICE 7,305.49PARK MAINTENANCE G & A ELECTRIC SERVICE 25,428.62REC CENTER BUILDING ELECTRIC SERVICE 99,563.06 5,469.04YOUNG ENV. CONSULTING GROUP, LLC. STORM WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,469.04 30.58YOUNGDAHL KURT WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 30.58 1,400.00YOUNGSTEDTSPREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,400.00 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 37 3/29/2022CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK 11:27:33R55CKS2 LOGIS400V 37Page -Council Check SummaryNote: Payment amount may not reflect the actual amount due to data sequencing and/or data selection. 3/25/20222/26/2022 - AmountObjectVendorBU Description 8.85ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE PUBLIC WORKS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 114.90PUBLIC WORKS OPS G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 19.70WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 75.55PARK MAINTENANCE G & A GENERAL SUPPLIES 13.15VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A GENERAL SUPPLIES 232.15 236.25ZIEBART OF MINNESOTA INC VEHICLE MAINTENANCE G&A EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 236.25 10.54ZIEGLER INC GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHEET INVENTORY 10.54 474.58ZILLOW HOMES, INC.WATER UTILITY G&A GENERAL CUSTOMERS 474.58 Report Totals 3,139,205.23 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Approval of city disbursements Page 38 Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4b Executive summary Title: Accept donation to operations and recreation department for a bicycle repair station Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,091.75 donation from George Foulkes for the purchase and installation of a bicycle repair station at Westwood Hills Nature Center. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept this gift with restrictions on its use? Summary: State statute requires city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the use of each donation prior to it being expended. George Foulkes graciously donated $2,091.75 for the purchase and installation of a bicycle repair station at Westwood Hills Nature Center. Mr. Foulkes is a long-time member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission. The donation is in memory of Peter May, former Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission member who was an avid bicyclist. Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used for the purchase and installation of a bicycle repair station at Westwood Hills Nature Center. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, senior office assistant Reviewed by: Jason West, recreation superintendent Cynthia S. Walsh, deputy city manager / director of operations and recreation Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 Title: Accept donation to operations and recreation department for a bicycle repair station Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution approving acceptance of a donation in the amount of $2,091.75 to be used to purchase and install a bicycle repair station at Westwood Hills Nature Center Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance of any donations; and Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the donor; and Whereas, George Foulkes donated $2,091.75. Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to George Foulkes with the understanding that it be used for the purchase and installation of a bicycle repair station at Westwood Hills Nature Center. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4c Executive summary Title: Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2635-21 correcting omissions for recording Recommended action: Motion to approve s econd reading and adopt Ordinance 2635-21 correcting omissions f or recording and approve summary ordinance for publication. Policy consideration: None. The city council has gone through the process to first adopt and lat er amend ordinances to vacate right-of-way and already made the policy decision. Summary: The city council adopted Ordinance 2635-21, but the legal description of the right-of- way to be vacated was omitted. Due to this omission, Hennepin County would not accept it for recording. The city attorney prepared the corrected ordinance to resolve the issu es identifi ed by Hennepin County, so w e can record the document and impl em ent the city council’s d ecision to vacate the right-of -way. Next steps: The ordinance summary will be published in the official newspaper and recorded at Hennepin County. Financial or budget considerations: There is no financial implication of the proposed corrections. How ev er, the city council previously authorize d transferring the land to the economic development authority (EDA) and the EDA intends to sell the land to the adjacent property owners to he lp facilitate redevelopment of the property. The city recording the Ordinance with Hennepin County is expected before transferring and s elling the property. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Corrected Ordinance 2635-21 Summary ordinance for publication Prepared by: Sean Walther, planning manager Soren Mattick, city attorney Reviewed by: Karen Barton, community development director Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager ORDINANCE NO. 2635-21 ORDINANCE CORRECTING ORDINANCE NOS. 2532-18 AND 2635-21 REGARDING VACATING RIGHT-OF-WAY 9808 AND 9920 WAYZATA BOULEVARD THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: WHEREAS, the City Council previously approved Ordinance 2532-18 on March 19, 2018 and Ordinance 2635-21 on November 1, 2021 vacating a right-of-way as part of the land use applications for redevelopment of property located at 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Boulevard; and WHEREAS, land use applications, including a preliminary and final plat for Bereks Addition, for a revised redevelopment proposal of the properties above, have been submitted to the City by ESG Architects on behalf of SLP Park Ventures. Certain public utility mains that would have been relocated from the vacated right-of-way based on previous plans will now remain in place according to the revised plans; and WHEREAS, neither Ordinance 2532-18 or Ordinance 2635-21 have been recorded and, therefore, have not yet taken effect because conditions of approval have not yet been satisfied; and WHEREAS, one of the conditions of approval to relocate public utilities mains from the right-of-way to be vacated is no longer applicable; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park proposes to correct Ordinance 2532-18 and Ordinance 2635-21 to vacate the right-of-way and the application has been duly filed. The notice of the application was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on October 7, 2021 and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the right-of- way is not needed for public purposes, and that it is in the best interest of the public that said right- of-way be vacated; and WHEREAS, the right-of-way as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park to be vacated is legally described on the attached Exhibit “A”; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the following amendments shall be made to the City Code: Section 1. Section 4 of Ordinance 2532-18 is hereby amended by deleting strikethrough text and adding the following underlined text: This Ordinance shall take effect upon relocation of the public utilities and recording the final plat of Bereks Addition, and not sooner than fifteen days after its publication. Section 2. The City Clerk is instructed to record a certified copy of this Ordinance in the Office of the Hennepin County Recorder / Register of Titles as the case may be. Page 2 City council meetin g of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4c) Title: Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2635-21 correcting omissions for recording 2 220802v1 Section 3. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council _____________ By __________________________________ By __________________________________ Kim Keller, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to from and execution: ____________________________________ _____________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren M. Mattick, City Attorney First reading October 18, 2021 Second reading November 1, 2021 Date of publication November 11, 2021 Date ordinance takes effect November 26, 2021 Page 3 City council meetin g of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4c) Title: Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2635-21 correcting omissions for recording 3 220802v1 EXHIBIT “A” That part of Trunk Highway No. 12 as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 27-23 described as follows: Beginning at right of way Boundary corner B3; thence on an assumed azimuth of 1 degree 05 minutes 15 seconds along the boundary line of said plat a distance of 86.85 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B4; thence deflect to the right 83.74 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest and passing through Right of Way Boundary Corner B5, having a radius of 2083.24 feet, central angle of 2 degrees 18 minutes 11 seconds, chord azimuth of 48 degrees 18 minutes 24 seconds and chord distance of 83.73 feet; thence on an azimuth of 91 degrees 27 minutes 32 seconds a distance of 98.89 feet; thence southwesterly deflecting to the right on a non- tangential curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 788.53 feet, delta angle of 15 degrees 42 minutes 58 seconds, and a chord azimuth of 229 degrees 07 minutes 59 seconds and chord distance of 215.62 feet to the East line of parcel 44 as shown on said plat 27-23; thence north along said East line of Parcel 44 to the point of beginning. AND That part of Trunk Highway No. 12 as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 27-23 which lies southwesterly and southerly of Line 1, said Line 1 being described as follows: Line 1: Commencing at Right of Way Boundary Corner B212 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23; thence Northerly on an azimuth of 00 degrees 13 minutes 27 seconds along the West line of the boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of 484.26 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B211 and the point of beginning of the line being described; thence Easterly on an azimuth of 101 degrees 20 minutes 23 seconds along the boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of 214.28 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B1; thence continue on an azimuth of 101 degrees 20 minutes 23 seconds 93.00 feet; thence deflect to the left 350.87 feet on a non-tangential curve, concave to the North and passing through Right of Way Boundary Corner B2 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23, having a radius of 763.94 feet, a delta angle of 26 degrees 18 minutes 56 seconds, and a chord azimuth of 70 degrees 47 minutes 34 seconds to the Easterly line of said Parcel 44; thence on an azimuth of 01 degree 05 minutes 15 seconds 7.37 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B3 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23 and there terminating. And northerly of the following described line and its easterly extension: Commencing at the point of intersection of the West line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section 1 with the most southerly line of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK; thence on an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 39 minutes 11 seconds West along said West line a distance of 187.99 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence along a non- tangential curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 788.53 feet, central angle of 7 degrees 43 minutes 57 seconds, chord bearing of South 78 degrees 42 minutes 56 seconds East to its intersection with the most westerly extension of the southerly line of said Parcel 44; thence easterly along said extension of the most southerly line of said Parcel 44 to its intersection with Line 1 described above, and said line there ending. Page 4 City council meetin g of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4c) Title: Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2635-21 correcting omissions for recording City council meetin g of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4c) Page 5 Title: Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2635-21 correcting omissions for recording Summary for publication Ordinance No. 2635-21 Ordinance correcting Ordinance No. 2532-18 and 2635-21 regarding vacating right-of -way 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Boulevard This ordinance corrects omissions needed for recording ordinance and place into effect vacating excess right-of-way along the north side of Wayzata Boulevard adjacent to the parcels at 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Blvd. Adopted by the City Council April 4, 2022 /s/ Jake Spano Jake Spano, Mayor A co py of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: April 14, 2022 Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4d Executive summary Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 Recommended action: Motion to designate Ti-Zak Concrete, Inc., the lowest responsible bidder, and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $347,061.25 for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to continue the city’s practice of repairin g or replacing existing sidewalk, curb and gutter, and catch basins? Summary: Bids were received on March 11, 2022, for miscellaneous concrete repair, including sidewalk, curb and gutter, and storm sewer catch basins at various locations in the city. This annual construction contract addresses needed concrete repairs in the pavement management area scheduled for routine pavement maintenance the following year as well as sidewalk trip hazards throughout the city. Two (2) bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid results is as follows: CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT Ti-Zak Concrete, Inc.. $347,061.25 Concrete Idea, Inc. $395,823.50 Engineer’s Estimate $316,959.25 A re view of the bid indicates Ti-Zak Concrete, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid. Ti-Zak Concrete, Inc. has completed this type and size of work successfully in St. Louis Park. Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $347,061.25. Financial or budget considerations: This project was included in the city’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2022, with an estimated budget of $287,500.00. Funding will be provided by the following sources: the operations budget, stormwater utility, and pavement management funds. In addition, there are two new sidewalk segments being constructed as a part of this project that will be paid for by developers. Funding details are provided in the discussion section. 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 maps Ove rall 2022 financial summary Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, e ngineering services manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4d) Page 2 Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 Discussion Background: Bids were received on March 11, 2022, for miscellaneous concrete repair, including sidewalk, curb and gutter, and storm sewer catch basins at various locations in the city. This annual construction contract addresses needed concrete repairs in the pavement management area scheduled for routine pavement maintenance the following year as well as sidewalk trip hazards throughout the city. Staff annually surveys the condition of sidewalks to identify hazards for repair. Panels of sidewalk that are cracked or have been lifted by tree roots and create trip hazards, are repaired as a part of this contract. Curb and gutter with similar defects that create drainage or safety problems are also repaired. In addition to sidewalk repairs, there are two new sidewalk segments being constructed as a part of this project; the Texa-Tonka shopping center sidewalk, which will be funded by a special assessment, and the Dachis Addition, which will be paid for by cash escrow funds. Texa -Tonka shopping center sidewalk: Representatives for Pastor Properties, owner of the Texa-Tonka shopping center at 8000 Minnetonka Boulevard, have requested the city authorize the construction of concrete sidewalk and grass boulevard along Minnetonka Boulevard and assess the cost against the property in accordance with the Minnesota Statutes Chapter 429. The assessment agreement was approved at the March 21, 2022, council meeting. Dachis Addition sidewalk: This section of sidewalk was to be co nstructed by the applicant, Toni Dachis, as a requirement of a lot split/subdivision in 2020. The applicant was unable to secure a contractor for the work and has since sold the property. After the applicant provided the city with a cash escrow to cover the construction and administration cost of the project, the city agreed to complete the sidewalk construction as part of this year’s concrete replacement project. An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on Feb. 17 and Feb. 24 2022, and in Finance & Commerce from Feb. 17 through Feb. 23, 2022. In addition, plans and specifications are made available electronically on BidVAULT. Email notification was provided to four (4) minority associations. Ten contractors/vendors downloaded plan sets, two (2) of which were Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE). City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4d) Page 3 Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 Funding details: Based on the low bid received, cost and funding details for the city’s portion of the project are as follows: CIP estimate Low bid Construction cost $270,000.00 $277,451.88 Engineering $17,500.00 $17,500.00 Base bid total $287,500.00 $294,951.88 Funding sources Pavement management fund $82,500.00 $84,661.0 Operations budget $95,000.00 $97,459.12 Stormwater utility $110,000.00 $112,831.71 Base bid total $287,500.00 $294,951.88 The development sidewalks were not in the CIP; their cost breakdown is as follows: Development sidewalks Texa-Tonka shopping center sidewalk Dachis Addition sidewalk Construction cost $44,609.38 $25,000.00 Engineering $4,460.93 $2,500.00 Base bid total $49,070.31 $27,500.00 Due to the nature of our construction projects, unexpected costs do come up. To address this, past practice has been to show a contingency for the project. What follows is a table that shows this contingency and how this would affect the project costs. Low Bid Contingency Engineering Total Pavement management $79,628.69 $3,981.43 $5,075.00 $88,685.12 Stormwater utility $106,153.09 $5,307.65 $6,650.00 $118,110.74 PW Operations budget $91,670.10 $4,583.51 $5,775.00 $102,028.61 Texa-Tonka special assessment $44,609.38 $4,460.94 $4,460.93 $53,531.25 Dachis Escrow $25,000.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $30,000.00 Total $347,061.25 $20,833.53 $24,460.93 $392,355.72 Attached is the overall financial summary for the transportation and maintenance projects included in the 2022 CIP. As each project is brought to the council for final approval and for bid award, this summary will be updated to reflect the bids received. Final numbers will depend on bids received. Bid analysis : The low bid is slightly (2.7%) over the CIP amount. These cost increases are likely due to higher trucking and delivery costs as a result of fuel price increases the last month. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4d) Page 4 Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 Recommendation: There are three options open to the city when a bid is higher than what is included in the CIP. These are; reject the bid and rebid for this year, reject the bid and delay the project until a future year, and award the bid after a review of the overall financial management plan to understand if funding is available . To prepare our recommendation for award, staff explored these three options and is recommending that we award the bid. We developed this recommendation after reaching out to contractors to better understand the bidding climate and what other cities were seeing for bid pricing. Staff does not recommend going back out to bid for this project in 2022 since it is unlikely that the pricing will change. To ensure that we can make these concrete repairs to serve our community, we recommend that the city move ahead with this project in 2022. To accomplish this, e ngineering has reviewed the contract costs with the f inance director. The stormwater fund will be able to pay for the increased cost of the project, including contingency, as long as the projected rate increases presented to the council in Fall 2021 are made. The following utility rate increases will be brought to council this fall for approval: Sanitary Sewer 3.0%, Stormwater 6.0%, and Water 4.5%. These rates will take effect in 2023. In the coming months, staff will continue to look for additional funding sources to offset sanitary sewer, stormwater and water rates to try and reduce the rate increases necessary in future years due to capital improvement projects. There are adequate developer funds to pay for their portion of the project, including contingency. Construction timeline: All work required under this contract, except maintenance work, shall be completed by July 31, 2022. MINNETONK A B LV D 29TH ST W TEXAS AVE SMORNINGSIDE RD O LD C E D A R LAK E R D MO N T E R E Y D R 16TH ST W PARKCEN T ER B LV D 42ND ST WGENERAL MILLS BLVDVERNON AVE SKIPLING AVE S2 5TH ST W BELTLINEBLVDMINIKAHDA C T WO O D D A L E A V E FRANK LINAVEW C E D A R L A K E R D GRAN DWAYGAMBLE DR WAYZATA BLVD FRANCEAVES PARKNIC O LLET BLVD28TH ST W DOUGLAS AVE W O L FEPK WY CAMBRIDGE ST MONTEREY AVE S34TH ST W MEADOWBR OOKB LV DZARTHANAVES41ST ST WWEBSTER AVE SCOOLIDGE AVE SPA RK P L ACEBLVDBROOK AVE SMACKEY AVE SFORESTRD UTICA AVE SJOPPA AVE SLAKESTWINGLEWOOD AVE SMI NNEHAH A CIR S WALK ER STGEORGIA AVE STOLEDO AVE SPARKDALE DR 42 1/2 ST W 2 2ND STW 26TH ST W CLUB RD GOODRICH AVE 14TH ST W DAKOTA AVE SMI NNEHA H A CIRN LOUISIANA AVE S36TH ST W SHELARD PKWY GLENHURST AVE SC O U N T Y R O A D 2 5 VIRGINIA CIR N VICTO RI AC I RLOUISIANAC TOXFORD S T PARKLANDSRDRHODE ISLAND AVE SEXCELSIOR BLVDAQUILA AVE SYOSEMITE AVE SCOLORADOAVESRANDALL A V E GORHAMAV EFLAG AVE SCE D A RW O O D RD MEADOWBROOK RDWISCONSINA VESBRUNSWICK AVE SOTTAWAAVESLI B R A R Y L N BROOKSIDEAVESVICTORIA W A Y S E R V ICE D R HIGHW A Y 7UTAHDR INDEPENDENCEAVESRUNNYMEADE LN VIRGINIAAVES35 TH ST WBOONE AVE SWE S T WOODHILLSDR CAMERATA WAY K E N T UCKYL N 27TH ST W BROOKVIEW DRBURD PLS UN S ET BLVD 33RD ST W HILLLN S WYOMING AVE S31ST ST W TA F T AVE S VALLAC H E R A V E 32ND ST W 40TH ST WNATCHEZ AVE SBARRY ST 39TH ST W HAMILTON ST DIVISION ST 24TH ST W 32 1/2 ST W 25 1/2 ST W XENWOOD AVE S37 TH S T W 36 1/2 ST W 18TH ST W RE P U B L I C A V E BASS WO OD RD13THLNW EDGEB R O O K D R DREWAVESGLENHURS TRDLOUISIANA CIR F O R E S T L NHILL S B OROAVES44TH ST WELIOTVIEWRDALABAMAAVESPARKERRD MONTEREYCTUTAH AVE SVERMONT ST 34 1/2 ST WXYLON AVE SENSIGN AVE SCEDAR S TFAIRWAY LNWESTSIDE DR JORDANAVESSUMTER AVE SBROOK LNAQUILALNSFORDRD WOOD LN HUNTINGTON AVE SLYNN AVE SGETTYSBURGAVESMEADOWBROOKLNKENTUCKY AVE SBR O W N L O W A V EFRONTAGERD ALLEYFORD LN W ESTMORE L ANDLNO R EGONCT13 1/2 ST W GLENHURST PLQUEBECDR QUEBEC AVE SZINRAN AVE SOREGON AVE SNEVADA AVE SVIRGINIA CIR S EDGEWOOD AVE SJERSEY AVE SHAMPSHIRE AVE SBLACKSTONE AVE SFLORIDA AVE SPENNSYLVANIA AVE SIDAHO AVE SCAVELLLN MARYLAND AVE SSALEM AVE SPRINCETON AVE SRALEIGH AVE SQUENTIN AVE SWOODLAND DR PRIVATE RDHIGHWOOD RD DECATUR AVE S22ND LN W NORTH S T EXCELSIORWAYPHILLIPS PKWYOA K P A R K VIL L A G E D R MONTEREYPKWYMELROSEAVESM O NITO R S TLANCASTERAVECAVELLAVES DUKE DR40TH LN W PAR KWOODS R D S T A N LEN RDKILMERAVE P A R K G L E N RDWESTWOODHILLS C U R V POW ELL RD HIGHWAY 100 S23 R D S T WKNOLL WOO D MAL LACCES RD HOS P ITALSERVICEDRRIDGEDRJEWIS HC CTURNA R O U N DPRIVATER DWolfe ParkWolfe Park Aquila ParkAquila Park Bass LakeBass Lake PreservePreserve Westwood HillsWestwood Hills Nature CenterNature Center LouisianaLouisiana OaksOaks 0 1 20.5 Miles 2022 Concrete replacement project Legend Random repair area Page 5 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4d) Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 MINNETONKA BLVD 3 6 TH S T W PARKCEN T ER BLV DVERNONAVES BELTLINEBLVDO AKLEAF DR T AF TAVE S SERVI CE D R H I G H WA Y 7 WO O D D A L E A V E 33RD ST W YOSEMITE AVE S28TH ST W 29TH ST W ZARTHANAVES31ST ST W WEBSTER AVE SLAKE ST WWALKER STGEORGIA AVE STOLEDO AVE SHILLLN S DAKOTA AVE S2ND ST NWC E D A R L A KE R DLOUISI ANA CT26TH ST W COLORADO AVE SGORHAM AVE LI B R A R Y L NLOUISIANA AVE SCAMERATAWAY KENTUC K Y L N27TH ST W UTICA AVE S32ND ST W 1ST ST NWBARRY ST 22ND ST W HAMILTON ST 24TH ST W 34TH ST W 25 1/2 ST WRIDGEDR XENWOOD AVE SP RIVATERDREP U BLIC AV E ELIOT VIE W R D ALABAMA AVE SOXFORD S T 37TH ST W WESTSIDE DR BRUNSWICK AVE SKENTUCKY AVE SBR O W N L O W A V E ALLEYOREGONAVESNEVADA AVE SEDGEWOOD AVE SHAMPSHIRE AVE SJERSEY AVE SBLACKSTONE AVE SFLORIDA AVE SIDAHO AVE SMARYLAND AVE SSALEM AVE SPRINCETON AVE SRALEIGH AVE SQUENTIN AVE SO A K P A R K V I L L A G E D R M O NITO R S T P A R K G L E N R D 35TH ST W PAR KWOODSRD C O U N T Y RO AD 2 5HIGHWAY 100 S23R D S T W DakotaDakota ParkPark Wolfe ParkWolfe Park Nelson ParkNelson Park NorthsideNorthside ParkPark CedarCedar KnollKnoll ParkPark LouisianaLouisiana OaksOaks 100 7 5 0 2,000 4,0001,000 Feet 2022 Concrete replacement repairs Pavement management area 4 Pavement management area PM AREA 4 HAS CURB & GUTTER, SIDEWALK AND PEDESTRIAN RAMPS TO BE REPAIRED. AREAS WILL BE MARKED AND LIST AVAILABLE BEFORE PROJECT BEGINS. Page 6 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4d) Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 FRANCE AVE S2 5 T H S T W 0 50 10025 Feet Dachis Addition new sidewalk construction Random Concrete Area AREAS WILL BE MARKED AND LIST AVAILABLE BEFORE PROJECT BEGINS. Page 7 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4d) Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 MINNETONKA BLVD 0 50 10025 Feet Texa Tonka new sidewalk construction Random Concrete Area AREAS WILL BE MARKED AND LIST AVAILABLE BEFORE PROJECT BEGINS. Page 8 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4d) Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 Overall financial summary 2022 Budget Pavement management (Area 8) Fern Hill Concrete replacement Alley construction Sanitary sewer lining W 36th/ Wooddale street rehabiliation 4021-1000 4022-0003 4022-1500 4022-3000 4022-6000 Fund balance-Connect the Park 926,000 621,000 - - - 305,000 Fund balance-New sidewalk construction 510,600 510,600 - - - - Pavement management fund 3,955,150 3,404,000 82,500 468,650 - - Tax Increment 4,325,000 - - - - 4,325,000 Stormwater 1,128,725 580,750 110,000 252,350 - 185,625 Water 2,084,037 1,984,662 - - - 99,375 Sanitary sewer 2,574,000 290,375 - - 540,000 1,743,625 Operations budget 95,000 - 95,000 - - - Total funding 15,598,512 7,391,387 287,500 721,000 540,000 6,658,625 Table 1: 2022 Transportation and maintence projects funding -CIP 2022 Budget Pavement management (Area 8) Fern Hill Concrete replacement Alley construction Sanitary sewer lining W 36th/ Wooddale street rehabiliation 2022 project balance 4021-1000 4022-0003 4022-1500 4022-3000 4022-6000 Fund Balance-Connect the Park 926,000 315,267 - - - 305,000 305,733 Fund Balance-New sidewalk construction 510,600 623,494 - - - - (112,894) Pavement management fund 3,955,150 3,666,806 88,685 468,650 - - (268,991) Tax Increment 4,325,000 - - - - 4,325,000 - Stormwater 1,128,725 1,013,717 118,111 252,350 - 185,625 (441,078) Water 2,084,037 2,367,624 - - - 99,375 (382,962) Sanitary sewer 2,574,000 432,040 - - 442,000 1,743,625 (43,665) Operations budget 95,000 - 102,029 - - - (7,029) Total funding 15,598,512 8,418,948 308,824 721,000 442,000 6,658,625 (950,885) Bid award with contingency Bid award with contingency estimated Bid award with contingency estimated Table 2: 2022 Transportation and maintence projects funding - actual Page 9 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4d) Title: Bid tabulation: award bid for concrete replacement – Project No. 4022-0003 Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4e Executive summary Title: Final payment resolution – 2021 concrete replacement - Project No. 4021-0003 Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of $7,920.83 for the annual concrete replacement project with Standard Sidewalk, Inc. - Project No. 4021-0003, City Contract No. 28-21. Policy consideration: Not applicable Summary: On March 1, 2021, the city council awarded the bid for the concrete replacement proj ect. The project was advertised, bid and awarded to Standard Sidewalk, Inc. in the amount of $188,266.75. This project was for miscellaneous concrete repair, including sidewalk, curb and gutter, and storm sewer catch basins at various locations in the city. This annual construction contract is for concrete repairs in the pavement management area scheduled for mill and overlay the following year. It also addresses sidewalk trip hazards throughout the city. The contractor completed this work within the contract time allowed and the overall project is $29,850.25 (15.86%) less than the bid for a final construction cost of $158,416.50. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of the work performed by the contractor under Contract No. 28-21 has been calculated as follows: Original Contract Price $188,266.75 Cost savings -$29,850.25 Amount Due (based on actual work) $158,416.50 Previous Payments -$150,495.67 Balance Due $7,920.83 This project was included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2021. The work was paid for using public works operations budget, stormwater utility, and pavement management funds. 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 Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, e ngineering services manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4e) Page 2 Title: Final payment resolution – 2021 concrete replacement - Project No. 4021-0003 Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution authorizing final payment and accepting work for the 2021 concrete replacement project City Project No. 4021-0003 Contract No. 28-21 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 March 1, 2021, Standard Sidewalk Inc. has satisfactorily completed the 2021 concrete re placement project, as per Contract No. 28-21. 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 $158,416.50. 4.The City Manager is directed to make final payment in the amount of $7,920.83 on this contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4f Executive summary Title: Bid Tabulation: 2022 Pavement Management Project – Fern Hill (4021-1000) (Ward 1) Recommended action: Motion to designate Bituminous Roadways, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $6,833,385.89 for the 2022 Pavement Management Project No. 4021-1000. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to pursue the pavement rehabilitation, sidewalk construction , bikeway installation and impervious reductions recommended as part of this project? Summary: A total of f ive (5) bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid results is as follows: CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $6,833,385.89 S.M. Hentges & Son, Inc.$7,027,166.40 Meyer Contracting Inc.$8,022,645.60 GMH Asphalt Corporation $8,110,657.09 Northdale Construction Co., Inc.$9,287,097.33 Engineer’s e stimate $6,402,917.91 A review of the bids indicates Bituminous Roadways, Inc. submitted the lowest bid. Bituminous Roadways, Inc. is a reputable contractor. Staff recommends that a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $6,833,385.89. Financial or budget considerations: This project is included in the city 's Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2022. Funding will be provided by the following sources: Pavement management (franchise fees), utility funds, and general fund balance. The low bid is higher than the CIP; however, it is recommended to award the bid as submitted. Additional information on the breakdown of the funding can be found later in this report. 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 Overall 2022 financial summary Prepared by: Aaron Wiesen, project engineer Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4f) Page 2 Title: Bid Tabulation: 2022 Pavement Management Project – Fern Hill (4021-1000) Discussion Background: Bids were received on March 24, 2022, for the 2022 Pavement Management project. The 2022 construction season is the seventeenth year of implementing the city 's Pavement Management Program. This year's work, Project No. 4021-1000, will be performed in Area 8 of the city 's eight pavement management areas. It includes work in the Fern Hill neighborhood, Ward 1. Selection of street segments included in the project was based on street condition and field evaluations to determine the current conditions of the pavement, curb and gutter, and the city's underground utilities. An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on March 3, 2022, and March 10, 2022, and in Finance and Commerce from March 5 to March 9, 2022. Email notification was provided to four (4) minority associations, and final printed plans were available for viewing at City Hall. In addition, plans and specifications were made available electronically via the internet on the city 's OneOffice website. Thirty -nine (39) contractors/vendors downloaded plan sets, of which six (6) were Disadvantage Business Enterprise (DBE) companies. Funding Details: Staff has analyzed the bids and determined that Bituminous Roadways, Inc. is a qualified contractor that can complete this work during the 2022 construction season. The low bid does exceed the city 's 2022 CIP values for watermain, storm sewer and sanitary sewer utility. The low bid came in lower than the CIP values on the other funding sources. Based on the low bid received, cost and funding details are as follows: CIP Low Bid Construction cost $6,427,293.00 $6,833,385.89 Engineering and administration $964,094.00 $902,223.18 Base bid total $7,391,387.00 $7,735,609.07 Funding sources Pavement management $3,404,000.00 $3,373,461.41 Water utility $1,984,662.00 $2,170,322.43 Stormwater utility $580,750.00 $929,240.40 Sanitary sewer utility $290,375.00 $396,036.63 Connect the park- sidewalks and bikeways $621,000 $291,015.74 Side walks $510,600 $575,532.46 Base bid total $7,391,387.00 $7,735,609.07 Due to the nature of our construction projects, unexpected costs do come up. To address this, past practice has been to show a contingency for the project. What follows is a table that shows this contingency and how this would affect the project costs. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4f) Page 3 Title: Bid Tabulation: 2022 Pavement Management Project – Fern Hill (4021-1000) Low bid Contingency (10%) Engineering Total Pavement management $2,933,444.70 $293,344.47 $440,016.71 $3,666,805.88 Water utility $1,973,020.39 $197,302.04 $197,302.04 $2,367,624.47 Stormwater utility $844,764.00 $84,476.40 $84,476.40 $1,013,716.80 Sanitary sewer utility $360,033.30 $36,003.33 $36,003.33 $432,039.96 Connect the Park (Sidewalk and bikeway) $242,513.12 $24,251.31 $48,502.62 $315,267.05 Sidewalk $479,610.38 $47,961.04 $95,922.08 $623,493.50 Total $6,833,385.89 $683,338.59 $902,223.18 $8,418,947.66 Attached is the overall financial summary for the transportation and maintenance projects included in the 2022 CIP. As each project is brought to the council for final approval and for bid award, this summary will be updated to reflect the bids received. Final numbers will depend on bids received. Bid analysis : The low bid is 4.7% over the CIP amount. Below is an analysis on the costs for each funding category. Pavement Management: The low bid for pavement management is $30,538.59 under the pavement management CIP amount. Water utility: The low bid for the watermain utility is $185,660.43 (9.4%) over the watermain utility CIP amount. After reviewing the bid, the increase is due to the cost of the ductile iron pipe and fittings. In the week leading up to the bid opening, city staff heard from contractors that there is a material shortage for ductile iron pipe and ductile iron fittings. The supply shortage, along with the risk of not meeting the contract completion dates if material arrival is delayed, meant the cost for watermain pipe increased by 44.3% compared to prices in 2020. City staff is reaching out to the supplier of the watermain ductile iron pipe to gain a better understanding of the current supply availability and if there is any concern of getting the pipe necessary for this project. Stormwater utility: The low bid for the storm utility is $348,490.40 (60%) over the storm utility CIP amount. After reviewing the bid, the increase is due to the cost of storm catch basins and manhole structures. When compared to 2020 bid item prices, the cost for catch basin structures increased by 60% and the cost for storm manhole structures increased by 120%. City staff reached out to the contractor to gain a better understanding for the increase in storm structure costs. Due to the ever-changing market and increase in construction demand, the supply chain for materials is behind and the lead time to receive materials is longer than ever before. Contractors have been seeing a 50% to 100% increase in cost this year for concrete storm pipes and structures. The trucking and delivery costs have also increased due to the increase in fuel prices in the last month. Sanitary sewer utility: The low bid for the sanitary sewer utility is $105,661.63 (36.4%) over the sanitary sewer utility CIP amount. After reviewing the bid, the increase is due to the cost of sanitary sewer manhole structures. When compared to 2020 bid item prices, the cost for sanitary sewer manhole structures increased by 120%. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4f) Page 4 Title: Bid Tabulation: 2022 Pavement Management Project – Fern Hill (4021-1000) City staff reached out to the contractor to gain a better understanding for the increase in sanitary structure costs. Due to the ever-changing market and increase in construction demand, the supply chain for materials is behind and the lead time to receive materials is longer than ever before. Contractors have been seeing a 50% to 100% increase in cost this year for concrete sanitary structures. The trucking and delivery costs have also increase d due to the increase in fuel prices in the last month. Connect the park (sidewalks and bikeway): The low bid for the Connect the park (sidewalk and bikeway ) portion is $329,984.26 under the Connect the park (sidewalk and bikeway) CIP amount. Sidewalks: The low bid for the remaining sidewalk segments (not part of Connect the Park program) is $64,932.46 (12.7%) over the sidewalk CIP amount. After reviewing the bid, the low bid was under the engineer's estimate for these sidewalk segments. The reason the cost is over the CIP amount is the amount of additional sidewalks segments that were added to the project scope due to resident feedback collected during the public engagement. Recommendation: There are three options open to the city when a bid is higher than what is included in the CIP. These are; reject the bid and rebid for this year, reject the bid and delay the project until a future year, and award the bid after a review of the overall financial management plan to understand if funding is available . To prepare our recommendation for award, staff explored these three options and is recommending that we award the bid. We developed this recommendation after reaching out to contractors to better understand the bidding climate and what other cities were se eing for bid pricing. Staff does not recommend going back out to bid for this project in 2022, since it is unlikely th e pricing will change. In addition, this would make it harder to get the necessary utility materials, delay the project by 6 to 8 weeks and result in the project not being completed this year. To ensure that the condition of our streets remains good and that they continue to serve our community, we recommend that the city move ahead with this project in 2022. To accomplish this, e ngineering has reviewed the contract costs with the f inance director. The utility funds will be able to pay for the increased cost of the project, including contingency, as long as the projected rate increases presented to the council in Fall 2021 are made. The following utility rate increases will be brought to council this fall for approval: Sanitary Sewer 3.0%, Stormwater 6.0%, and Water 4.5%. These rates will take effect in 2023. In the coming months, staff will continue to look for additional funding sources to offset sanitary, stormwater and water rates to try and reduce the rate increases necessary in future years due to capital improvement projects. Next steps: Construction is anticipated to begin in May and should be completed by November 2022. Overall financial summary 2022 Budget Pavement management (Area 8) Fern Hill Concrete replacement Alley construction Sanitary sewer lining W 36th/ Wooddale street rehabiliation 4021-1000 4022-0003 4022-1500 4022-3000 4022-6000 Fund balance-Connect the Park 926,000 621,000 - - - 305,000 Fund balance-New sidewalk construction 510,600 510,600 - - - - Pavement management fund 3,955,150 3,404,000 82,500 468,650 - - Tax Increment 4,325,000 - - - - 4,325,000 Stormwater 1,128,725 580,750 110,000 252,350 - 185,625 Water 2,084,037 1,984,662 - - - 99,375 Sanitary sewer 2,574,000 290,375 - - 540,000 1,743,625 Operations budget 95,000 - 95,000 - - - Total funding 15,598,512 7,391,387 287,500 721,000 540,000 6,658,625 Table 1: 2022 Transportation and maintence projects funding -CIP 2022 Budget Pavement management (Area 8) Fern Hill Concrete replacement Alley construction Sanitary sewer lining W 36th/ Wooddale street rehabiliation 2022 project balance 4021-1000 4022-0003 4022-1500 4022-3000 4022-6000 Fund Balance-Connect the Park 926,000 315,267 - - - 305,000 305,733 Fund Balance-New sidewalk construction 510,600 623,494 - - - - (112,894) Pavement management fund 3,955,150 3,666,806 88,685 468,650 - - (268,991) Tax Increment 4,325,000 - - - - 4,325,000 - Stormwater 1,128,725 1,013,717 118,111 252,350 - 185,625 (441,078) Water 2,084,037 2,367,624 - - - 99,375 (382,962) Sanitary sewer 2,574,000 432,040 - - 442,000 1,743,625 (43,665) Operations budget 95,000 - 102,029 - - - (7,029) Total funding 15,598,512 8,418,948 308,824 721,000 442,000 6,658,625 (950,885) Bid award with contingency Bid award with contingency estimated Bid award with contingency estimated Table 2: 2022 Transportation and maintence projects funding - actual Page 5 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4f) Title: Bid Tabulation: 2022 Pavement Management Project – Fern Hill (4021-1000) Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4g Executive summary Title: Conveyance of city property to the EDA for the Beltline Station Development (Ward 1) Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing conveyance of city property located on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard to the Economic Development Authority (EDA ) in connection with the Beltline Station Development. Policy consideration: Doe s the city council support conveyance of city property to the EDA in connection with the Beltline Station Development? This action is consistent with long held plans and previous direction provided by the city council and EDA in connection with the redevelopment of the Beltline Station site. Summary: In anticipation of the redevelopment of the Beltline Station site, staff worked with EDA legal counsel Kennedy & Graven to obtain fe e title to multiple parcels beneath a portion of County State Aid Highway (CSAH) 25 and the Highway 7 Frontage Road (see attached aerial photographs). The city /EDA’s long held vision was to combine these parcels with the adjacent EDA -owned properties (4601 Highway 7 and 3130 Monterey Avenue ) to create an even larger site that could ultimately be sold for desired re development purposes. The subject parcels , along with adjacent city vacated right of way (area shaded in yellow), need to be conveyed to the EDA in order for the EDA to sell the entire redevelopment site property to Sherman Associates for its proposed Beltline Station Development. When the EDA sells the property to Sherman Associates, the EDA will quit claim the portions of property located wit hin the right of way back to the City of St. Louis Park (area shaded in red). Financial or budget considerations: The EDA will incur legal and title work costs to record the conveyance. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Aerial photo of subject property Resolution Pre pared by: Jennifer Monson, redevelopment administrator Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager Karen Barton, community development director/EDA executive director Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4g) Page 2 Title: Conveyance of city property to the EDA for the Beltline Station Development Aerial photo of property to be conveyed to the EDA 3130 Monterey Ave S 4601 Highway 7 4725 Highway 7 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4g) Page 3 Title: Conveyance of city property to the EDA for the Beltline Station Development Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution authorizing conveyance of property to the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority Whereas, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“Authority”) administers Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project"), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 through 469.1082, as amended, to promote economic redevelopment opportunities and to promote the development of land which is underutilized within the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”); and Whereas, pursuant to the Act, the Authority is authorized to acquire real property, or interests therein, and to undertake certain activities to facilitate the development or redevelopment of real property by private enterprise ; and Whereas, the City owns the property legally described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the “City Property”); and Whereas, the Authority is considering entering into a purchase agreement (the “Agreement”) with Sherman Associates, Inc., or an entity related thereto or affiliated therewith (collectively, the “Redeveloper”), pursuant to which the Authority will convey a portion of the City Property to the Redeveloper to facilitate a mixed -use development in the Project and a portion of the City Property including certain rights of ways back to the City after replatting; and Whereas, the City is authorized to convey real property pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 465.035, as amended, to any governmental subdivision for a nominal consideration, or pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 471.64, as amended, to any other political subdivision of the State of Minnesota (the “State”); and Whereas, the Authority is a political subdivision of the State pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.091, subdivision 2, as amended; and Whereas, the City finds and determines that conveyance of the City Property to the Authority is for a public purpose and is in the public interest because it will further the objectives of the Project; and Whereas, the City finds and determines that conveyance by the Authority of a portion of the Redevelopment Property to the Redeveloper and the conveyance of a portion of the City Property containing rights of way back to the City, are for a public purpose and are in the public interest because such actions will further the objectives of the Project; and Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis P ark, Minnesota as follows: City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4g) Page 4 Title: Conveyance of city property to the EDA for the Beltline Station Development 1. The City Council of the City approves the conveyance of the City Property to the Authority by quit claim deed for reconveyance to the Redeveloper and reconveyance of certain rights of ways back to the City after replatting, and authorizes and directs city staff and officials to execute the deed and related documents necessary to facilitate the transaction referenced herein and contemplated herein, with all such actions to be in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in this resolution. 2. City staff and officials are authorized and directed to take any and all additional steps and actions necessary or convenient in order to accomplish the intent of this resolution. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4g) Page 5 Title: Conveyance of city property to the EDA for the Beltline Station Development Exhibit A Legal description of City property The property located within the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota legally described as follows: Lot 17, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn. And Lot 1, 2, 3, 4, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn., except that part of said Lots described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Lot 4; thence Westerly along the South line of said Lot 4, a distance of 6.00 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence North 00 degrees 19 minutes 53 seconds East, assumed bearing, parallel with the East line of Lots 5 and 6, said Block 1, a distance of 114.27 feet; thence Northwesterly along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 15.00 feet and a central angle of 61 degrees 46 minutes 23 seconds, a distance of 16.17 feet; thence N orth 61 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 40.60 feet; thence Westerly along a tangential curve to the left, having a radius of 24.00 feet and a central angle of 76 degrees 35 minutes 00 seconds, a distance of 32.08 fe et; thence Southwesterly along a reverse curve to the right, having a radius of 361.58 feet and a central angle of 26 degrees 53 minutes 32 seconds, a distance 169.71 feet; thence South 43 degrees 00 minutes 19 seconds, West, not tangent to said curve, a distance of 71.07 feet to the intersection with a line distant 46.00 feet Easterly of as measured at a right angle to and parallel with hereinafter described "Line A"; thence Southerly along said parallel line, a distance of 26.00 feet to the South line of said Lot 13; thence Easterly along said South line and the easterly extension thereof, a distance of 128.10 feet to the centerline of alley; thence Northerly along the centerline of said Alley, a distance of 32.65 feet to the intersection with the westerly extension of the South line of said Lot 4; thence Easterly along said Westerly extension and along the South line of said Lot 4, a distance of 130.61 feet to the point of beginning. Said "Line A" is described as follows: Commencing at the most Southerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1 Belt Line Industrial Park 2nd Addition, thence South 59 degrees 15 minutes 24 seconds East of an assumed bearing along the Southeasterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 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; thence North 25 degrees 19 minutes 54 seconds West, tangent to last described curve 180.04 feet; thence Northerly 589.17 feet along a tangential curve concave to the East having a radius of 1268.10 feet a central angle of 26 degrees 37 minutes 12 seconds, said line there terminating. Torrens Property - Certificate Title No. 697371 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4g) Page 6 Title: Conveyance of city property to the EDA for the Beltline Station Development AND Lots 9 and 19, Block 2; Those parts of Lots 10, 11, 17, 18, Block 2, lying north of the southerly right -of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; That part of Natchez Avenue vacated, lying east of the West line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, north of the southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7, and southerly of a line hereinafter referred to as Line 1; That part of the vacated alley in Block 2 lying north of the southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7, and southerly of the aforementioned Line 1. All in "Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park," Hennepin County, Minnesota; Line 1 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point o f beginning; thence North 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds East 51.97 feet; thence northeasterly 174.11 feet along a non - tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5790.08 feet, a central angle of 01 degrees 43 minutes 22 seconds, and a chord bearing of North 67 degrees 56 minutes 18 seconds East, and said line there terminating. AND That part of West 32nd Street, vacated, lying southerly of the centerline thereof, westerly of the northerly extension of the east line of Lot 1, Block 1, said plat of Lewiston Park, and easterly of a line hereinafter referred to as Line 2; That part of Natchez Avenue, vacated, lying southerly of the centerline of West 32nd Street, northerly of the north line of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, Hennepin County, and west of the West line of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24; That part of the vacated alley adjoining Block 1, said plat of Lewiston Park, lying southerly of West 32nd Street and northerly of Lot 1, Block 1, Brooks McCracken Industrial Park, Hennepin County. Line 2 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non -tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West; thence South 67 degrees 02 minutes 58 seconds West, not tangent to said curve, 65.29 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4g) Page 7 Title: Conveyance of city property to the EDA for the Beltline Station Development South 00 degrees 20 minutes 22 seconds East 298.91 feet, and said line there terminating. AND Lots 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 2, Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND The east 37 feet of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND That part of West 32nd Street, vacated, lying northerly of the centerline thereof, westerly of the southerly extension of the east line of Lot 14, Block 2, said plat of Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park, and easterly of the aforementioned Line 2; That part of Natchez Avenue, vacated, lying northerly of the centerline of West 32nd Street, southerly of a line hereinafter referred to as Line 3, and west of the West line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24; That part of the alley adjoining Block 2, said plat of Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park lying northerly of West 32nd Street and southerly of the aforementioned Line 3; Line 3 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West, and said line there terminating. Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4h Executive summary Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution renewing a mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. Policy consideration: Does the city council want to continue with the implementation of a mobility sharing program for 2022? Summary: This past summer, Bird provided mobility sharing services in the city in the form of scooter sharing. Their operations went from late May to early November, 2021. About 1,500 trips were taken during this time, with an average of 8 trips per day by 660 unique users. There were few complaints raised to staff , as well as no reported injuries or crashes attributed to the scooters. Bird is requesting the city to renew the mobility sharing license issued in 2021 under the same operating terms. Staff has reviewed Bird’s request to continue operating in St. Louis Park in 2022 and is recommend extending their mobility sharing license for the 2022 season. It is expected that scooters will be operational in Minneapolis and St. Paul this spring as well as in Golden Valley. Edina did not renew its pilot program after having scooters in 2019. No other scooter, bike or vehicle sharing companies requested to operate in the city. However, there are two additional licenses available, and we are currently open to receiving proposals. Should additional vendors show interest in deploying in the city, staff will update the council. Financial or budget considerations: The vendor will pay a license fee for each device deployed to help cover staff time and infrastructure costs. Any other costs related to this policy are negligible and would come from the general operating budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably. Supporting documents: Discussion Resolution License agreement Study session report March 25, 2019 Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, engineering services manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Page 2 Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. Discussion Background: City Code sections 30-212 to 30-258 regulate mobility sharing operations within St. Louis Park. The ordinance defines mobility sharing, authorizes the city’s ability to impound devices, requires providers to have a city license, and establishes fees. The ordinance also establishes up to three permits available to operate mobility sharing (bikes, low power vehicles (scooters), or vehicle sharing). The ordinance took effect on May 10, 2019. On April 9, 2021, the city opened a new RFP for mobility sharing companies for the 2021 season and received one application from Bird Rides Inc. (Bird). This application was approved by resolution at the May 17, 2021, city council meeting. 2021 was the second year a shared mobility company has operated scooters in St. Louis Park and saw a significant decline in use compared to the inaugural 2019 season. That year, Spin was the only vendor offering scooters and was recording an average of 50 uses per day with a total of approximately 5,000 uses during the season. Last year’s daily usage dropped to an average of 8 daily trips with a total of 1500 trips for the y ear. No mobility sharing companies operated in the city in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic. During the 2021 riding season, Bird deployed 50 scooters within the city of St. Louis Park. They had hoped to employ as many as 125 scooters during the season, but the demand did not justify those numbers. A maximum of 250 devices, split among all licensees, will be authorized by the city. The city will evaluate the performance of the program during its length and can increase or decrease the maximum number of devices allowed based on performance metrics and ordinance compliance. The city has received no other responses to our RFP from scooter, bike or vehicle sharing companies. However, there are two additional licenses available, and the city continues to acce pt additional service requests. Should additional vendors show interest in deploying in the city, staff will update the council. Bird has operated in over 130 markets worldwide. Bird is expected to operate in Minneapolis, St. Paul and the City of Golden Valley in 2022. License agreement: If approved, Bird will operate under the same license agreement signed in 2021 (attached). The agreement lays out the structure of the program, which has not had any major changes since 2019. A full explanation of the city’s mobility sharing program structure is in the March 25, 2019, study session report . If approved, the mobility sharing license would be valid through March 30, 2023. W ebsite : Further information regarding the city’s mobility sharing program can be found on the city’s website at: https://www.stlouispark.org/how-do-i/learn -about/mobility -sharing. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Page 3 Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution approving a mobility sharing extension amendment for Bird Rides Inc. (Bird) Whereas, City Code sections 30-212 to 30-258 regulate mobility sharing operations within the City of St. Louis Park; and, Whereas, the goal of the shared mobility program is to decrease the use of personal vehicles, increase access to public transit, increase the use of active transportation, ensure safe and equitable access to emerging transportation technologies, and ensure alignment with the work of the city’s strategic priorities; and, Whereas, the city has reviewed the RFP submittal provided by Bird Rides Inc. and recommend their approval for a mobility sharing license; 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; and, Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that Bird Rides Inc. is hereby approved for a mobility sharing license valid through March 30, 2023. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk WHEREAS, Licensee’s Devices are bicycles or low power vehicles as defined by the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, Licensee’s operation requires use of City right of way to facilitate the stationing and parking of Licensee’s Fleet within the City of St. Louis Park, and it is considered a mobility sharing operation under the Ordinance (“Licensee’s Operation”); and WHEREAS, Licensee has submitted a written application to the City for a license to implement Licensee’s Operation under the provisions of the Ordinance; WHEREAS, Licensee’s license application is incorporated and attached hereto as Exhibit A (“Licensee’s Application”); and WHEREAS, the City controls certain public rights of way and recreational trails located within its municipal boundaries (“City Right of Way”); and WHEREAS, the City Right of Way contemplated by this Agreement does not cover areas that are not controlled by the City, including but not limited to, all streets, roads, trails, or parkways owned by Three Rivers Park District, the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, and/or private property owners; and WHEREAS, the City believes that allowing mobility sharing operations to exist in the City Right of Way is likely to promote the public’s health, safety, and welfare by decreasing the use of personal vehicles, increase access to public transit, and increase the use of active transportation, thereby reducing traffic volumes, noise, and air pollution; and WHEREAS, the City believes mobility sharing has the potential to help achieve the City’s strategic priorities of committing to be a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all, committing to continue to lead in environmental stewardship, committing to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-oriented development, committing to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably, and committing to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement; and WHEREAS, the City must balance the benefits of mobility sharing operations with its duty to keep streets and sidewalks safe, orderly, and free of unregulated obstructions and encumbrances; and LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR PILOT MOBILITY SHARING OPERATIONS THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the 21 day of May, 2021 by and between the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation (herein called “City”) and Bird Rides, Inc., a Delaware corporation (herein called “Licensee”) (collectively, “Parties”). WHEREAS, the City adopted an ordinance in St. Louis Park’s Code of Ordinances, Chapter 30, Article VII, to facilitate and regulate mobility sharing operations from the City’s right of way (“Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, Licensee owns a fleet of commercial, mobility sharing devices intended or equipped for shared use by paying consumers from right of way locations in the City of St. Louis Park (“Licensee’s Fleet” or “Licensee’s Devices”); and Page 4 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. WHEREAS, after observing mobility sharing in 2019, the City has authorized a pilot period in 2021 during which time the City will examine mobility sharing operations, and temporarily allow such use of the City Right of Way by approved licensees, coinciding with the anticipated term of this Agreement, (“Pilot Program”); and WHEREAS, the Pilot Program is intended to understand the impact of mobility sharing operations on City Right of Way, and to provide guidance for the development of future policy; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is intended to outline the terms and conditions under which Licensee will be allowed to utilize the City Right of Way during the Pilot Program. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the following terms and conditions, the parties hereto agree as follows: ARTICLE I. USE OF CITY RIGHT OF WAY 1. Authorization. In accordance with St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances 2557-19, the City hereby grants a revocable, non-exclusive license to Licensee to implement Licensee’s Operation within the City Right of Way during the term of this Agreement, subject to all of the terms and conditions set forth herein. This authorization is not a lease or an easement, and shall not be construed to transfer any real property interest in the public right of way or other City property. 2. Additional Uses. Licensee expressly understands and agrees that this Agreement does not grant Licensee or its contractors the ability to exclude, or prohibit others from using, the City Right of Way. Licensee further understands and agrees that the City holds its interest in the City Right of Way in trust for the public, and that the City’s uses, needs, and obligations shall at all times supersede Licensee’s privileges under this Agreement. ARTICLE II. TERM The term of this Agreement shall be through March 30, 2022, unless terminated earlier as provided herein. The License set forth in this Agreement may be revoked or terminated at any time, for any reason, in the sole discretion of the City upon twenty-four (24) hours written notice by the City to Licensee. In the event of early termination or revocation, Licensee will be granted a reasonable period of time in which to collect and remove Licensee’s Devices, and any other facilities owned by Licensee, and to restore the City Right of Way in accordance with Article V, Section 4. The provisions of Article V, Section 9 herein shall survive revocation or termination of this Agreement. ARTICLE III. TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR USE OF CITY RIGHT OF WAY Licensee agrees that it will implement Licensee’s Operation in accordance with the following terms and conditions: 1. Device fleet size and type a. A maximum total of 250 devices will be authorized by the City under the Ordinance among all licensees during the first two (2) months of the Pilot Program. If more than one license is Page 5 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. issued by the City during the Pilot Program period, then each permitted licensee shall be limited to an equal number of fleet devices to achieve the maximum total number allowed. b. During June 2021 and August 2021, the City will evaluate the Pilot Program, including the average number of rides per device, per day, together with the compliance with distribution requirements listed below. If the monthly average of rides per device, per day exceeds three (3) among all Licensees, and if warranted by public good considerations, then the maximum number of devices allowed under the Ordinance may be increased by the City by a total of 65 devices among and between all Licensees at each of the evaluation points. If multiple licensees are operating under the Ordinance at such time, then each licensee shall be limited to an equal number of fleet devices to achieve the maximum allowed. c. Notwithstanding Sections 1 (a), (b), and (c) herein, the City reserves the right to unilaterally limit or reduce the maximum number of devices in Licensee’s Fleet allowed under the Ordinance and this Agreement. If such reduction is related to noncompliance issues governed by this Agreement, then an equivalent reduction may not be applied to all Pilot Program Licensees. d. Licensee must obtain and receive written approval from the City at least two weeks prior to the introduction of any new model of device to be included in Licensee’s Fleet. e. The City will notify Licensee of any increases or decreases applicable to Licensee’s Fleet under this section by sending written or emailed notice under Article V, Section 17 herein. Such increases and/or decreases shall not require an amendment to this Agreement. 2. Licensee’s Fleet equipment, maintenance, and safety requirements a. Licensee’s Fleet shall be equipped with equipment meeting all specifications, including but not limited to brakes, reflectors, and lighting set forth in Minnesota State Statute 169.225, and/or 169.222. b. Licensee’s Fleet must be certified as safe to operate under any applicable standard by Underwriters Laboratories, or an equivalent safety rating. c. Licensee will schedule and attend an on-site meeting with City staff, prior to launching Licensee’s Fleet, to provide a demonstration of equipment and proper use of the Licensee’s Devices. The City may require this meeting to be held in coordination with other Pilot Program licensees. d. All devices in Licensee’s Fleet shall be equipped with both: a) a locking mechanism to prevent theft; and b) an operable, on-board mechanism to provide real-time location when a device is parked. e. Licensee will remain responsible for the maintenance of each device in Licensee’s Fleet, including but not limited to technology mechanisms and locking systems. f. Licensee’s Fleet shall have a unique identifier clearly displayed on each device in the form of numbers and/or letters for the purposes of conveying or documenting parking or safety complaints, and for auditing the quantity and type of devices in the Licensee’s Fleet. g. Each device in the Licensee’s Fleet must visibly display Licensee’s logo or business name on both sides of the device, together with a customer service phone number staffed from at least 7am-10pm on days Licensee’s Fleet is in service on City Right of Way. Licensee’s customer service line shall accept voicemail at all other times to report parking or operational complaints, and safety or maintenance concerns. Page 6 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. h. Each device in Licensee’s Fleet must visibly display the following instructions, or a substantively similar version thereof: i. “No Sidewalk Riding” (minimum 48-point font) located on the platform of every Fleet Device ii. “Wear A Helmet” iii. “Yield to Pedestrians” iv. “Don’t Ride with a Passenger” i. Licensee shall proactively remove any and all inoperable or unsafe devices from Licensee’s Fleet within twelve (12) hours of the initial onset of such condition. j. Licensee agrees that it will maintain a multilingual website and mobile application which shall be available to the general public twenty-four (24) hours per day, seven (7) days per week, including certain languages as specified by the City. k. Licensee warrants that it complies with Minnesota and federal disabilities laws and regulations, including, but not limited to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. 12101, et seq., as amended. Licensee also warrants that the products or services it will provide under this Agreement comply with the accessibility requirements of Section 508 of the United States Workforce Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794d), and its implementing regulations set forth at Title 36, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 1194. Licensee agrees to promptly respond to and resolve any complaint regarding accessibility of its products or services. Failure to comply with these requirements shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. l. Licensee agrees that it will proactively provide all customers of Licensee’s Fleet with a summary of instructions and laws regarding mobility sharing riding, parking, and operations including those set forth in City of St. Louis Park Ordinance 2557-19, Minnesota State Statute 169.225, Minnesota State Statute 169.222, and any other law or regulatory provision applicable to the operation and/or parking of mobility sharing devices. m. Licensee agrees that it will either recommend or require the use of helmets to all customers of Licensee’s Fleet. n. Licensee will keep and maintain a comprehensive and complete record of all Fleet Device collision reports received by Licensee or its contractor(s) during the term of this Agreement. The record shall include date/time, location, and nature of the collision. A copy of such record shall be provided to the City within two (2) business days of a written or emailed request. o. If the City determines, in its sole discretion, that any of Licensee’s consumers or customers have failed to comply with applicable laws governing the safe operation and/or parking of Licensee’s Devices, including but not limited to, breach of any current or future laws governing driver’s license requirements, the use of helmets, operation on sidewalks, and/or parking requirements, or have otherwise demonstrated a threat to public health, safety, or welfare, such determination shall be grounds for suspension or revocation of this Agreement. 3. Licensee’s Fleet distribution. Licensee shall comply with the following daily distribution requirements: a. Licensee shall distribute at least 35% of Licensee’s Fleet, at least once per day, to the areas shown on Appendix B (“Area of Priority”). b. The remaining 65% of Licensee’s Fleet may be distributed as proposed in Appendix A. c. Distribution requirements will be evaluated by the City monthly, and may be increased or decreased by the City based on any of the criteria set forth in this Agreement. Page 7 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. d. Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary in this Article III, Section 3, the City may require Licensee to rebalance the distribution of Licensee’s Fleet in the specified areas of the City if deemed by the City to be too dense or too sparse, or if doing so will help promote equitable access to and from traditionally underserved areas within the City. Licensee will comply with all such requests within twenty-four (24) hours of receiving written notice from the City. e. All of Licensee’s Devices must be disabled from public use daily, no later than 10 p.m.. Licensee shall be responsible for collecting and removing all of Licensee’s Devices from City Right of Way within two (2) hours of such disabling. Licensee’s Devices may be redistributed or enabled for public use on City Right of Way no earlier than 5 a.m. of the following day. 4. Fleet parking and riding. Licensee and Licensee’s customers shall comply with the following parking and riding rules and restrictions in the City Right of Way: a. No person may operate a Device upon a sidewalk, except when necessary to enter or leave adjacent property. b. No person may operate a Device that is carrying any person other than the operator. c. Devices must be parked and locked upright to a bicycle rack, sign post, or parked upright within a specifically designated shared mobility device zone when not in use. i. Devices may not be locked to: 1. Traffic signal poles 2. Pedestrian signal or push button poles 3. Streetlight poles 4. Trees or bushes d. Devices must not be parked and/or ridden in any location or manner that will impede normal and reasonable pedestrian traffic and/or access to: i. Pedestrian ramps ii. Building/property entrances iii. Driveways iv. Loading zones v. Disability parking and transfer zones vi. Transit stops vii. Crosswalks viii. Parklets ix. Street/sidewalk cafes x. Other street furnishings (benches, parking meters, etc.) xi. Underground utility, sewer, or water facilities xii. Sidewalk clear zones 1. The sidewalk clear zone is the accessible, primary pedestrian thoroughfare that runs parallel to the street. The clear zone ensures that pedestrians have a safe, obstruction-free thoroughfare. e. Licensee will be solely responsible for informing its customers as to parking and riding a Device properly and in compliance with state and local laws. f. Licensee will undertake proactive, reasonable measures to prevent and deter improper parking or dumping of Devices on private property or other public property not owned or controlled by the City. Page 8 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. 5. Device parking and riding complaints and enforcement a. Licensee must provide the City with an up-to-date, direct, local contact for Licensee’s Operation, as well as an emergency, after-hours contact. b. During the Pilot Program term, Device parking and riding complaints received by the City shall be referred to Licensee, and Licensee or Licensee’s authorized representative may be provided a limited opportunity to address/respond by re-parking or relocating its noncompliant Devices. i. This provision will be exercised only in instances where, in the City’s discretion, the public’s safety and welfare will not be unduly compromised due to additional passage of time. c. Licensee alone will be fully responsible for re-parking or relocating Devices where a complaint has been received by the City or Licensee, or where Devices are otherwise found to be in violation of parking rules stated herein. d. The City will not be responsible under this License Agreement for monitoring Device parking or dumping on private property, or other public property not owned or controlled by the City, but the City may impound illegally parked Devices in accordance with City ordinances. i. When doing so will not unduly burden the complaining third party, the City will refer such complaints to Licensee, and Licensee or Licensee’s authorized representative will be provided a limited opportunity to remedy the complaint without further City involvement. e. Licensee will be solely responsible to third parties for addressing unauthorized Devices dumped or left unattended on private property, or on other public property not owned or controlled by the City. f. Licensee will act swiftly and exercise due diligence in responding to complaints of unauthorized Devices leaning against, blocking, dumped, or left unattended on private property, or on other public property not owned or controlled by the City. g. The City reserves the right to mandate and apply geofencing specifications to Licensee’s Fleet to prohibit parking/locking Devices in specified areas, and/or to direct customers to specified designated parking areas. Licensee shall comply with any and all geofencing requirements within five (5) business days of a written or emailed request made by the City. The cost of installing and maintaining geofencing equipment or facilities shall be borne by the Licensee. h. If the City incurs any costs or damages arising out of Device parking and riding complaints, violations, or other related costs that are not otherwise recovered with the City’s collection of an impoundment release charge, Licensee shall reimburse the City for such costs within thirty (30) days of receiving written or emailed notice. i. The City may impound any Device parked in the same location without movement for more than three (3) consecutive days. j. A per occurrence impoundment fee will be applied to all Devices owned or controlled by Licensee as follows: i. Initial impoundment fee of $56 per device ii. If not paid and retrieved by Licensee within twenty-four (24) hours of impoundment, an $18 storage fee per device, per day shall be added to the initial impoundment fee. k. The City may limit the number of Devices allowed under this Agreement if it determines that the number of parking and riding violations, reported crashes, third party complaints, and/or Licensee’s response to such violations or complaints, are deemed by the City to Page 9 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. be unacceptable or detrimental to public safety, or otherwise creating or contributing to a nuisance condition. l. Licensee expressly understands that the City may impound any and all Devices found by the City to be in violation of applicable laws and/or the terms of this License Agreement. Seizure and impoundment of Devices may be exercised by the City with or without prior notice to Licensee. m. Any failure by the City to act on the provisions of this section shall not relieve Licensee of any other duty or penalty at equity or law. 6. Data privacy and protection a. Licensee’s Operation shall employ an electronic payment system that is compliant with the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards (PCI DSS). b. Licensee has submitted a privacy policy to the City with and as part of Licensee’s Application (“Licensee’s Privacy Policy”). Licensee’s Privacy Policy shall continue to expressly limit the collection, storage, or usage of all personally identifiable information. c. Licensee shall not institute retroactive changes to customer conditions, terms of use, or Privacy Policy. d. Licensee’s Privacy Policy must operate to safeguard Licensee’s customers’ personal, financial, and travel information and usage including, but not limited to, trip origination and destination data. Licensee agrees to make all policies, procedures, and practices regarding Licensee’s data security practices available to the City, upon request. e. The City reserves the right to hire or commission a third party to perform a security audit mid-way through the term of this Agreement, or at any other time the City determines that an audit is warranted. f. Licensee must provide its customers with an opportunity to expressly assent to Licensee’s Privacy Policy, terms of service, and/or user agreements when renting or transacting for use of any or all of Licensee’s Devices. Licensee agrees to provide its customers with the ability or option to decline the sharing of any data that is not otherwise required to complete the payment transaction. Customer rights with regard to these requirements and options shall be clearly stated and easily accessed by the customer during each transaction. Licensee will further indicate to its customers that it will share non-personally identifiable data with the City (or government) for legitimate interests as allowed by law. g. Licensee agrees that it will not collect or sort personal or individual data related to race, gender, religion, national origin, age, or sexual orientation, except for survey data collected on an opt-in basis, for the limited use of certain public purposes expressly set forth by the City. Licensee may not deny service to any customer on the basis of refusal to provide any such survey information. h. Licensee agrees that it will not attempt to access or collect any location-based data via customers’ mobile phone or any other electronic mobile device, without first obtaining each affected customer’s explicit permission. i. All current or future customer data sharing agreements between Licensee and any third party must be disclosed and provided to the City. Licensee must further notify the City in advance of any prospective partnership, acquisition, or other data sharing agreement. Licensee may not engage in or facilitate any inter-app operability or other form of private partnership that includes data acquisition or other data sharing model with any entity if the entity does not meet the standards set forth herein. j. Customers’ personally identifiable information collected by Licensee may not be transmitted to, processed, or stored at a destination outside of the United States. Page 10 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. 7. Data collection/Sharing a. The City and Licensee each understand and agree that the City is not requesting or requiring the collection or creation of any new data with this Agreement, unless expressly provided and stated herein. Any new data collected, created, or stored by Licensee shall be considered Licensee’s private data, and not government data, unless a provision of this Agreement expressly requires its collection or creation, and/or the City requests and receives such data from Licensee. b. Licensee understands and agrees that the City may rely upon a third-party researcher or consultant to evaluate various aspects of the Pilot Program. Upon receiving a request from the City, Licensee will share all data relevant to evaluating or enforcing the terms set forth in this Agreement with the City and any such third-party researcher. Such third- party researcher shall be a public research, academic, or non-profit entity. If the third- party researcher is not a public research, academic or a non-profit entity, the City must have written permission from Licensee to facilitate work with the third-party researcher. c. Licensee agrees to administer two customer surveys during the Pilot Program term, including survey questions submitted by the City. The surveys must address travel behavior and basic socioeconomic indicators to aid the City in evaluating whether and how Licensee’s Operation supports City goals for transportation. The surveys shall not include, and Licensee shall not collect, any personally identifiable data related to or in furtherance of this provision. d. Licensee shall provide an API that meets the requirements of the Mobility Data Specification (“MDS”), as published online at http://github.com/CityOfLosAngeles/mobility-data-specification, or similar data specification. Licensee may not change the API URL without notifying at least thirty (30) days in advance of change. Licensee and the City shall use the “provider” standard of MDS or similar data specification. The City shall not use the “agency” standard of MDS or similar data specification without the written permission of the Licensee. The Licensee shall not use the “agency” standard of MDS or similar data specification without the written permission of the City. e. Licensee shall provide a publicly accessible API that meets the requirements of the General Bikeshare Feed Specification (https://github.com/NABSA/gbfs). Licensee may not change the API URL without notifying at least thirty (30) days in advance of change. Licensee is required to make the API endpoint available for public consumption. f. Licensee shall keep a record of maintenance activities, including but not limited to device identification number and maintenance performed. Licensee will provide a complete copy of the same to the City upon request. g. Licensee shall deliver to the City, upon request, all specified real-time and archival information for each device in its fleet (The purpose of this requirement is to ensure the City can successfully manage the Pilot Program and execute related planning efforts in support of strategic goals and future programs). Information covered by this provision includes real-time location, event, and status information gathered by on-board GPS tools, data for each trip record, historic/archival data, and key system information. All requested data will be shared via the documented MDS, or similar data specification, and GBFS APIs. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, Licensee will not be asked to share any personally identifiable information with the City. At a minimum, Licensee will supply the City with the following upon request: i. Daily drop-off locations or aggregation sites/zones Page 11 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. ii. Real-time location, event, and status information iii. Trip-level details including start/end location/time, duration, and distance traveled iv. Trip-level breadcrumb trails listing all GPS readings for each device This provision is intended to an d applies to only such data collected by Licensee pursuant to Licensee’s own initiative. The City is not requiring Licensee to generate or collect any of the above-described data with this Agreement. To the extent that Licensee does generate and/or collect such data, the Parties each understand and agree that the City may seek, and Licensee must then provide, a copy of any such City-requested data. h. Licensee shall create daily, weekly, and monthly reports illustrating the following: number of devices distributed; total number of trips; trips per device per day; number of new users; total number of customers; average miles per trip; and average minutes per trip. The foregoing summaries shall be delivered to City upon request. i. Licensee shall deliver to the City, upon request, a reporting of total vehicle miles traveled resulting from all of Licensee’s employee or contractor operations in support of participation in the Pilot Program. j.Licensee is directly responsible for providing the API key, and all other required information and data covered by this Agreement to the City. Licensee shall not refer the City to another subsidiary or parent company representative for API access. The City will be permitted to publicly utilize Licensee’s API and display real-time data. k.If any data requested by the City and covered by this Agreement is falsified, or the City suspects dishonest reporting, the City reserves the right to either sanction or perform an audit of vehicle availability and/or trip data at any time during the Pilot term. If a third- party audit finds that falsified or dishonest reporting exists, the City reserves the right to suspend or revoke this Agreement, in addition to any other remedy at equity or law. l.Unless otherwise required by law, Licensee agrees that it will not retain any raw trip data related to this Agreement for a period longer than one (1) year after beginning of Pilot Program term. Article IV. Payment terms and conditions Licensee shall receive no compensation from the City under this Agreement. Licensee shall pay the City a per-term charge of $100.00 per deployed Device to offset the City’s costs related to impacted and newly required City infrastructure, as well as implementation and oversight of this License Agreement. All Devices added during the term of the License agreement shall be subject to the same annual charge; the charge shall not apply to replacement Devices. Article V. Representation and general conditions 1. Ownership and condition of Right of Way. This Agreement shall not be construed so as to transfer ownership or control of the City’s Right of Way to Licensee, or to any other party. The City makes no representations or warranties concerning the condition of the City Right of way, or its suitability for use by Licensee, its contractors or customers. 2. Delegation of police power. This Agreement does not delegate or otherwise transfer the City’s police power to regulate mobility sharing devices, Licensee’s Operation, and/or to enforce City ordinances or other laws, to Licensee, or to any other party. Licensee understands and agrees that Page 12 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. ultimate decisions related to City enforcement against third parties and/or public compliance issues, shall remain within the City’s sole discretion. 3. Compliance with laws. Licensee agrees to comply with all applicable Federal, State, and local laws as they may be adopted or amended from time to time. Licensee further acknowledges that its rights hereunder are subject to the lawful exercise of the police power of the City to adopt, amend, and enforce ordinances, resolutions, and policies designed to promote the safety and welfare of the public. 4. Removal upon order. Licensee shall remove at once any or all Devices or other property owned or controlled by Licensee upon being ordered to do so by the City. Licensee shall be responsible for restoring the City Right of Way to its original condition, and the city shall not be liable for any damages resulting to Licensee by reason of such an order. Such removal and restoration of the City Right of Way will be at the sole expense of Licensee. Upon failure of Licensee to remove Devices or other property as ordered within a reasonable time period, the City may perform the removal or work at Licensee’s cost and/or initiate a claim against Licensee. 5. Interest of members of City. Licensee agrees that it has complied with Mi nnesota Statutes, Section 471.87. No member of the governing body, officer, employee, or agent of the City shall have any interest, financial or otherwise, di rect or indirect, in the Agreement. 6. Equal opportunity statement. Licensee agrees to comply with the provisions of all applicable Federal, State, and City of St. Louis Park statutes, ordinances, and regulations pertaining to civil rights and nondiscrimination including, without limitation, Minnesota Statutes, Section 181.59 and Chapter 363A, incorporated herein by reference. 7. Non-discrimination. Licensee will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, ancestry, sex, national origin, affection preference, disability, age, marital status or status with regard to public assistance or as a disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam era. Such prohibition against discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation and selection for training, including apprenticeship. If required by applicable law, Licensee shall agree to post in conspicuous places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth this nondiscrimination clause. In addition, the Contractor shall, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the Contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, creed, religion, ancestry, sex, national origin, affectional preference, disability, age, marital status or status with regard to public assistance or status as disabled veteran or veteran of the Vietnam eras, 1991 Gulf and current Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and comply in all other aspects with the requirements of said applicable laws. 8. Insurance. Licensee shall secure and maintain insurance issued by insurance companies acceptable to the City, admitted in Minnesota, and meeting an A.M. Best’s minimum rating of A- and Financial Size Category IX. The insurance specified may be in a policy or policies of insurance, primary or excess. Such insurance shall be in force on the date of execution of the Agreement and shall remain continuously in force for the duration of the Contract. The Licensee and any sub-contractors carrying out work related to this Agreement shall secure and maintain the following insurance: Page 13 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. a. Workers Compensation insurance that meets the Minnesota statutory obligations with coverage B-Employers Liability limits of at least $100,000 each accident, $500,000 disease - policy limit and $100,000 disease each employee. b. Commercial General Liability insurance with limits of at least $2,000,000 per occurrence; $4,000,000 general annual aggregate; $2,000,000 annual aggregate - products - completed operations. The following coverages shall be included: Premises and Operations Bodily Injury and Property Damage; Personal and Advertising Injury; Blanket Contractual Liability; and Products and Completed Operations Liability. The insurance shall also provide minimum limits of $100,000 each occurrence fire damage, and $10,000 medical expense any one person. The policy shall be on an “occurrence” basis and the City and its officials and employees shall be named an additional insured for ongoing and products/completed operations. c. Commercial Automobile Liability insurance covering all owned, non-owned, and hired automobiles with full automobile coverage including damages, contents, and vandalism and limits with a combined single limit of at least $1,000,000 per accident. d. Computer Security and Privacy Liability for the duration of this agreement providing coverage for, but not limited to, Technology and Internet Errors & Omissions, Security and Privacy Liability, and Media Liability. Insurance will provide coverage against claims that arise from the disclosure of private information from files including but not limited to: 1) Intentional, fraudulent or criminal acts of the Contractor, its agents or employees. 2) Breach of the City’s private data, whether electronic or otherwise. The insurance policy should provide minimum coverage in the amount of $1,000,000 per occurrence and $2,000,000 annual aggregate. If written on a Claims-Made basis, the policy must remain in continuous effect for at least three (3) years after the service is provided or include a three (3) year extended reporting period. Acceptance of the insurance by the City shall not relieve, limit, or decrease the liability of the Licensee. Any policy deductibles or retention shall be the responsibility of the Licensee. Licensee waives its right to subrogation for the above listed coverages. Licensee shall control any special or unusual hazards and be responsible for any damages that result from those hazards. The City does not represent that the insurance requirements are sufficient to protect the Contractor’s interest or provide adequate coverage. Evidence of coverage is to be provided on a current ACORD Form certificate of insurance. A thirty (30) day written notice is required if the policy is canceled, not renewed, or materially changed. Licensee shall require any of its subcontractors, if sub-contracting is allowable under this Agreement, to comply with these provisions, or the Licensee will assume full liability of the subcontractors. 9. Hold harmless. Licensee agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers and employees, from any liabilities, claims, damages, costs, judgments, and expenses, including attorney’s fees, resulting directly or indirectly from any intentional or negligent act or omission of Licensee, its employees, its agents, or employees of subcontractors, in the performance of the operation, work, or services provided by or through this License Agreement, or by reason of the failure of the Licensee to fully perform, in any respect, any of its obligations under this License Agreement. Licensee shall be released from its indemnification obligations under this section if the loss or damage was caused by the City’s negligent construction or maintenance of public infrastructure. 10. Assignment or transfer of interest. Licensee shall not assign any obligation or interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any obligation or interest in the same either by assignment or novation without the prior written approval of the City, provided, however, that claims for money due to income in Bankruptcy without such approval. Notice of any such assignment or transfer shall be furnished to the Page 14 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. city. Except as provided herein, Licensee shall not subcontract any services under this Agreement without prior written approval of the City department contract manager designated herein. 12. Independent contractor. Nothing contained in this Agreement is intended to, or shall be construed in any manner, as creating or establishing the relationship of employer/employee between the parties. Licensee shall at all times remain an independent contractor with respect to the work and/or services to be performed under this Agreement. Any and all employees of Licensee or other persons engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Contractor under this Agreement shall be considered employees or sub-contractors of the Contractor only and not of the City; and any and all claims that might arise, including Worker’s Compensation claims under the Worker’s Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota or any other state, on behalf of said employees or other persons while so engaged in any of the work or services to be rendered or provided herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of Contractor. 13. Retention of records. Licensee shall retain all records pertinent to this License Agreement for a period of six (6) years. This provision expressly excludes any and all identifiable customer usage or location data. 14. Data practices. Licensee agrees to comply with the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act and all other applicable State and Federal laws relating to data privacy or confidentiality. Licensee must immediately report to the City any requests from third parties for information relating to this License Agreement. The City agrees to promptly respond to inquiries from Licensee concerning data requests. Licensee agrees to hold the City, its officers, and employees harmless from any claims resulting from Licensee’s unlawful disclosure or use of data protected under state and federal laws. 15. Inspection of records. All Licensee records with respect with Licensee’s obligations under this License Agreement shall be made available to the City or its designees, at any time during normal business hours, as often as the City deems necessary, to audit, examine, and make excerpts or transcripts of all relevant data. 16. Ownership of materials/Intellectual property. All finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, maps, models, photographs, reports, or other materials furnished by the City in connection with this Agreement shall be the property of the City. The City may use, extend, or enlarge any document produced by the City under this Agreement without the consent, permission of, or further compensation to the Licensee. Each party acknowledges and agrees that each party is the sole and exclusive owner of all right, title, and interest in and to its services, products, software, source and object code, specifications, designs, techniques, concepts, improvements, discoveries, and inventions including all intellectual property rights thereto, including without limitations any modifications, improvements, or derivative works thereof, created prior to, or independently, during the term of this Contract. This Agreement does not affect the ownership of each party’s preexisting, intellectual property. Each party further acknowledges that it acquires no rights under this Agreement to the other party’s preexisting intellectual property, other than any limited right explicitly granted in this Agreement. 17. Contacts. The following are designated as official representatives for each of the Parties, and as points of contact for purposes of delivering or receiving notice, contract management, official requests, and all other communication contemplated under this License Agreement Page 15 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. For the City: Contract Manager: Ben Manibog, Transportation Engineer bmanibog@stlouispark.org 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55416 952.924.2669 Or Deb Heiser, Engineering Director 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard St. Louis Park, MN 55416 IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the said parties have signed and executed this instrument the day and year first above written. For Licensee: 18. Entire Agreement. This License Agreement and attachments and other documents named, is the entire agreement between the parties. No modification of this Agreement shall be valid or effective unless made in writing and signed by the parties hereto. 19. Interpretation of Agreement. In interpretation of this Agreement, the language of the Agreement shall prevail, followed by the language of the Licensee’ s Application. AustiBird Rides, IncATTN: Austin Marshburn 406 Broadway #369 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Page 16 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. For the Licensee: By: Person responsible for monitoring contract Its: . For the City of St. Louis Park: CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Approved: By: . Department head responsible for monitoring contract By: . Contract manager Approved as to form: . City Attorney          Page 17 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4h) Title: Approve mobility sharing license for Bird Rides Inc. Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4i Executive summary Title: Accept donation from National Association of Government Web Professionals Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a monetary donation from the National Association of Government Web Professionals (NAGW) in an amount not to exceed $1,500 for all related expenses for Jason Huber, information technology manager, to attend the 2022 NAGW National Board Retreat in Little Rock, Ark . Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on its use? Summary: State statute requires the city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is necessary to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the use of each donation prior to it being expended. The City of St. Louis Park’s information technology manager, Jason Huber, represents the NAGW as their president. As a result of Mr. Huber’s board member status, NAGW will compensate all related expenses to attend its board retreat April 21 - 23, 2022, in Little Rock, Ark ., in an amount not to exceed $1,500. The city attorney has reviewed this matter. His opinion is that state law permits the payment of such expenses by this organization, regardless of whether the funds come from primary or secondary sources. It is treated as a gift to the city and there needs to be a resolution adopted by the city council determining that attendance at this event serves a public purpose and accepting the gift. The resolution needs to be adopted before attendance at the retreat. Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used toward the expenses incurred by Jason Huber’s attendance at the NAGW National Board Retreat in Little Rock, Ark. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Jason Huber, information technology manager Reviewed by: Jacque Smith, interim information resources director Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4i) Page 2 Title: Accept donation from National Association of Government Web Professionals Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution accepting donation from National Association of Government Web Professionals for expenses for Jason Huber to attend the 2022 National Association of Government Web Professionals Board Member Retreat Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance of any donations; and Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the donor; and Whereas, the National Association of Government Web Professionals (NAGW) will compensate all related costs, in an amount not to exceed $1,500, for the city’s information technology manager, Jason Huber, to attend the NAGW Board Member Retreat April 21 – 23, 2022, in Little Rock , Ark .; Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to NAGW with the understanding that it must be used for expenses incurred by Jason Huber to attend the 2022 NAGW National Board Member Retreat held in Little Rock, Ark. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4j Executive summary Title: Accept donation to the building and energy department Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving acceptance of 15 portable solar battery charger pack donation to the building and energy department valued at $166.20 total. Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept this gift with restrictions on its use? Summary: State statute requires city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the use of each donation prior to it being expended. Partners in Energy, an Xcel Energy Community Collaboration, has donated 15 portable solar battery charger packs valued at $166.20 total ($11.08 per pack) to the City of St. Louis Park building and energy department. The donation is given with the restriction that they be used to drive participation in the St. Louis Park Renewable Energy Challenge during April 2022, or for future renewable energy or energy efficiency programming. Financial or budget considerations: These portable solar battery charger packs from Partners in Energy will be used as prizes in the St. Louis Park Renewable Energy Challenge in April 2022, as well as to drive participation in future renewable energy and energy efficiency programs. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. Supporting documents: Resolution Prepared by: Annie Pottorff, sustainability specialist Reviewed by: Emily Ziring, sustainability manager Brian Hoffman, director of building and energy Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4j) Page 2 Title: Accept donation to the building and energy department Resolution No. 22 - ____ Resolution approving acceptance of donations in the amount of 15 portable solar battery charger packs valued at $166.20 to be used for St. Louis Park Renewable Energy Challenge and future renewable energy or energy efficiency programming Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance of any donations; and Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the donor; and Whereas, Partners in Energy donated 15 portable solar battery charger valued at $166.20 total; and Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that these gifts are hereby accepted with thanks to Partners in Energy and that they will be used for the St. Louis Park Renewable Energy Challenge and future renewable energy or energy efficiency programming. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4k Executive summary Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen R d (Site A1P 0022A ) (Ward 2) Recommended action: Motion to approve Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17, between the city and T-Mobile Central, LLC for communication antennas, and related equipment, on the city’s water tower at 5100 Pak Glen Road . Policy consideration: None at this time. Summary: On June 3, 1996 the city council approved a lease agreement with T-Mobile allowing for antennas and related equipment on the Park Glen water tower. In June of 2021 the city council approved a second amendment allowing T-Mobile to replace existing equipment with newer technology. T-Mobile now desires to amend the agreement to add an emergency power generator. Per the city’s request, T-Mobile has opted for a diesel generator for a lesser environmental impact and less noise. The amendment has been reviewed and found to be acceptable by the City Attorney. Financial or budget considerations: The annual lease rate for 2022 is increasing by $3,791.76 to $46,644 to account for the additional leased space for the generator upgrade project. The rent structure is based on a lease rate of $2 per square foot for the generator space . The financial terms of this agreement require annual lease payments with a 5% annual rate increase. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 Prepared by: Mike Okey, public works services manager Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, public works superintendent Cynthia S. Walsh, director of operations and recreation/deputy city manager Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 1 THIRD AMENDMENT TO AMENDMED AND RESTATED WATER TOWER ANTENNA LEASE AGREEMENT THIS THIRD AMENDMENT TO AMENDMED AND RESTATED WATER TOWER ANTENNA LEASE AGREEMENT (“Third Amendment”) is made and entered into on the date of the last party to execute this Amendment (“Effective Date”), by and between The City of St. Louis Park, whose address is 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN 55416-2290 ("City"), and T-Mobile Central LLC, a Delaware limited liability company whose address is 12920 SE 38 th Street, Bellevue, WA 98006 ("Lessee"). Recitals The Parties hereto recite, declare and agree as follows: A. City and Lessee entered into an AMENDMED AND RESTATED WATER TOWER ANTENNA LEASE AGREEMENT , dated January 6, 2017 (the “Lease”) that amended and restated the prior lease dated June 3, 1996, including any and all “Amendments” as amended, with respect to the Premises located at 5100 Park Glen Road, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55426 known as the “Park Glen Water Tower” B.City and Lessee desire to enter into this Third Amendment in order to modify and amend certain provisions of the Lease. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements herein contained and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, City and Lessee covenant and agree as follows: 1.City Consent. City hereby grants Lessee the right and consents to Lessee’s upgrade in the Lessee’s Communication Facility and the installation of equipment and 158 square feet of additional lease area as described and depicted in on Exhibit “C-2” which are attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, which equipment shall be considered part of the Lessee’s Communication Facility under the Lease. 2.Rent. As consideration for additional leased space to accommodate equipment depicted on Exhibit C-2 herein, the annual Rent shall increase by an amount equal to three thousand seven hundred and ninety two dollars and XX/100 ($3,792.00) commencing on the earlier to occur of: (i) the date which Lessee begins construction activities to install equipment depicted on C-2, or ninety (90) days from the Effective Date of this agreement. 3. Exhibit D-1 shall be Replaced with Exhibit D-2 herein. 4. Approvals. City represents and warrants to Lessee that the consent or approval of no third party, including, without limitation, a lender, is required with respect to the execution of this Second Amendment, or if any such third party consent or approval is required, City has obtained any and all such consents or approvals. 5.Authorization. The persons who have executed this Second Amendment represent and warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this Second Amendment in their individual or representative capacity as indicated. A1P0022A_NLG-52120_AMD_Hardening National_HC 2019_3069155_17574 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 2 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 2 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Second Amendment on the day and year first written above. City: The City of St. Louis Park Lessee: T-Mobile Central LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: By: Name: Name: Title: Title: Date: Date: A1P0022A_NLG-52120_AMD_Hardening National_HC 2019_3069155_17574 TMO Signatory Level: L06 Digitally signed by John J. Velasquez DN: cn=John J. Velasquez, o=T- Mobile USA, Inc., ou=Legal Affairs, email=John.Velasquez@t- mobile.com, c=US Date: 2022.02.25 14:55:54 -05'00' 2/28/2022 Hossein Sepehr Sr. Director, Engineering and Operations City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 3 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 3 EXHIBIT C-2 attached hereto. (Generator Site plans) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 4 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 4 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 5 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 5 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 6 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 6 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 7 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 7 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 8 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 8 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 9 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 9 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 10 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 10 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 11 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 11 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 12 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 12 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 13 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Site Number: A1P0022A Region: Central Market: MINNEAPOLIS MN 13 Exhibit “D-2” T-Mobile Lease Rent Schedule at EWT2 located at 5201 Park Glen Road T-Mobile Site No. A1P0222A / No. ____-17 2022 Annual Rent 2022 Annual Rent (adjusted) 2023 Annual Rent 2024 Annual Rent 2025 Annual Rent 2026 Annual Rent 2027 Annual Rent 2028 Annual Rent $42,852.24 $46,644.00 $48,976.20 $51,425.01 $53,996.26 $56,696.07 $59,530.88 $62,507.42 1.Rent shall increase by 5% for each year of the agreement. 2.Annual Rent is due prior to January 1 of each year (i.e. 2022 Rent is due by 12/31/2021). 3.The lease provided for an initial 5-year term (ending 12/31/2021) and 2 additional 5-year terms (ending 12/31/2031). City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4k) Page 14 Title: Lease Amendment No. 3 to City Agreement No. 20-17 w/ T-Mobile for 5100 Park Glen Rd (Site A1P0022A) Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4l Executive summary Title: Temporary on-sale intoxicating liquor license – Church of the Holy Family (Ward 1) Recommended action: Motion to approve a temporary on-sale into xicating liquor license for the Church of the Holy Family at 5925 West Lake Street for an ev ent on April 23, 2022. Policy consideration: Does the applicant meet the requirements for issuance of a temporary on-sale into xicating liquor licens e? Summary: The Church of the Holy Family has applie d for a temporary on-sale into xicating liquor license for their annual spring fundraising event. "Wild West Round Up”, will take place on Saturday, April 23, 2022, in the gymnasium of the Holy Family Acad emy, locat ed at 5925 West Lake Street. Liquor will be served from 6 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. The Church of the Holy Family has the required liability insurance through Catholic Mutual Group. The police department completed a background investigation on the principals and found no reason to deny the temporary license. The applicant meets all requirements for the issuance of the license, and staff recommends approval. Financial or budget considerations: The fee for a temporary liquor license is $100 per day of the event. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Chase Peterson-Etem, office assistant Reviewed by: M elissa K ennedy, city clerk Approve d by: Kim K eller, city manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Consent agenda item: 4m Official minutes Planning commission February 15, 2022 – 6:00 p.m. Members present: Jim Beneke, Matt Eckholm, Michael Salzer (arrived 6:05pm ), Tom Weber, Joffrey Wilson Members absent: Jessica Kraft Staff present: Jennifer Monson, Laura Chamberlain, Sean Walther G uests: Will Anderson, George Johnson, Dillon O’Brien 1.Call to order – roll call 2.Approval of minutes – February 2, 2022 Commissioner Weber made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eckholm to approve the February 2, 2022, minutes as presented. The motion passed 4-0 (Commissioners Salzer and Commissioner Kraft absent). 3.Hearings 3a. Beltline Station Development Applicant: Sherman Associates, Inc. Case No: 22-01-CP Ms. Monson presented the report to the commission. Commissioner Wilson asked about two of the proposed buildings, one of which is market rate and one of which is largely affordable. He asked about the pros and cons or reasons for having the two types proposed. Ms. Monson stated the city’s inclusionary housing policy does require the mixing of incomes in each building adding this site is very complex . In order to finance the development, the affordable housing had to be in their own separate building from the market rate units. Mr. Anderson added this is driven primarily by the financing, adding they will be also pursuing bonds and also have low-income housing tax credits included, as well. He noted the majority of the affordable units have two to three bedrooms, which is a priority of affordable housing. He added Sherman is a developer that does both affordable and market rate properties and has been in business for over 40 years, having expertise in both areas. He noted there are balconies on every unit, two bathrooms in every unit and also underground parking. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4m) Page 2 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of February 16, 2022 Commissioner Weber stated this has been before the commission in the past year and asked if today this approval is only involving the roads and final approval will be later this year. Ms. Monson stated that is correct and noted last summer an environmental analysis was conducted. She added tonight the amendment to the comprehensive plan will be approved and at a later meeting, the final plan will be presented to the commission with building to begin later this summer. Commissioner Salzer asked if this will change from the 2018 transit-oriented development to this new form of development. Ms. Monson stated the majority was re - guided except for those guided right of way, so this amendment will bring all the developable land re -guided to transit -oriented development. Commissioner Wilson stated this development is needed and meets many of the city’s goals . He cautioned about setting a precedent for having affordable in one place and market rate in another. Ms. Monson stated staff and city council agree with this, adding it did take a very long time to figure out the financing. She stated the only way it was able to move forward was to have the housing separated out by affordable and market rate. She noted the Wooddale Station site will be mixed income with the affordable mixed with market rate units. Chair Beneke asked about the parking ramp and since is includes park and ride, who is responsible for the maintenance of the ramp. He also asked about the 268 stalls , stating it seems like a lot and what is the projected usage. Ms. Monson stated this will go to the city council and EDA will ultimately own the ramp and lease it to the Met Council and the residential spaces will be leased back to Sherman. A vertical separation of usage will be brought forward to the planning commission to approve at a later meeting . She added projected usage will probably not be 268 stalls and the city has pushed to reduce this, but under the SWLRT project and financing, the city is required to build those 268 stalls. She added they are looking into using stall for extra commercial use or tenant visitor parking would likely be allowed . Mr. Walther added originally SWLRT wanted over 500 stalls but the city was able to bring that down. He added this will be used for many park and ride vehicles from the south metro, so it most definitely will be used . Chair Beneke opened the public hearing. There were no callers. Chair Beneke closed the public hearing. Commissioner Weber made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Wilson to approve the amendment as proposed by city staff. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4m) Page 3 Title: Planning commission meeting minutes of February 16, 2022 The motion passed 5-0 (Commissioner Kraft absent). 4. Other Business- none 5. Communications Mr. Walther stated the next meeting will be March 16 and the March 9 meeting is cancelled . He noted there will be two applications related to the Wooddale Station and a request for resolution for the project on Wayzata Blvd. for TIF for that site . Mr. Walther noted also the council approved the Park West final plat and the West Side Wine and Spirits application . He added applications for boards and commissions are now open and folks can apply on the city website . 6. Adjournment – 6:27 p.m. Sean Walther Jim Beneke ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Sean Walther, liaison Jim Beneke, chair Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Public hearing: 6a Executive summary Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take testimony, and then close the hearing. Motion to approve prop osed use and policy on unmanned aerial system operations. Policy consideration: Does council wish to approve the proposed use and policy for the Fotokite UAS system? Summary: Study session report from March 28, 2022 was presented to council. The tethered Fotokite UAS was budgeted to replace an antiquated pole camera on the emergency command vehicle during its recent remodel. The main feature of this device that distinguishes it from other small, unmanned aircraft is its cable, or tether, which is secure d onto the device and conn ects it to a home base. To date, the police department has not deployed a drone. The St. Louis Park Police Department be gan preparing for a UAS program in 2021 and has de velope d a compreh ensive and legally compliant policy . The tethered drones may be used for various city operations, including: •Emergency response: provide video images of scenes to assist in public safety operations, using the thermal imaging camera to locate missing people or fugitives outdoors, documenting severe weather damage, and various public displays and community events. •Regular city operations: assist with employee training, conduct structure inspections and engineering site surveys, assist with GIS mapping, and provide videography for communications and marketing. City Attorney Soren Mattick was consulted regarding current federal and state regulations and their applicability to the Fotokite. Financial or budget considerations: The cost of the Fotokite system(s) were included in the 2021 budget. Total cost of two units was $50,000 which was in the fire department’s CIP budget for a drone and the police department’s CIP budget for the emergency command vehicle upgrade. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: St. Louis Park police department policy on unmanned aerial system operations MN Statute §626.19 Prepared by: Greg Weigel, police lieutenant Approved by: Mike Harcey , police chief Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Policy706 St. Louis Park Police Department Policy Manual U nm anned Ae rial Sys te m (UA S )O peratio ns 706.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this policy is to establish guidelines for the use of an unmanned aerial system (UAS)and for the storage,retrieval,and dissemination of images and data captured by the UAS (Minn.Stat.§626.19).Minnesota Statutes refer to these systems as "Unmanned Aerial Vehicles"(UAVs),and for purposes of this policy,and any related policies,these terms are understood to be interchangeable. 706.1.1 DEFINITIONS Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)-An unmanned aircraft of any type that is capable of sustaining directed flight,possibly tethered to a control unit supplying power and controls,whether preprogrammed or remotely controlled without the possibility of direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft (commonly referred to as an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)),and all of the supporting or attached systems designed for gathering information through imaging,recording,or any other means (Minn.Stat. §626.19). 706.2 POLICY Unmanned aerial systems may be utilized to enhance the department's mission of protecting lives and property when other means and resources are not available or are less effective.Any use of a UAS will be in strict accordance with constitutional and privacy rights and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)regulations. 706.3 PRIVACY The use of the UAS potentially involves privacy considerations.Absent a warrant or exigent circumstances,operators and observers shall adhere to FAA altitude regulations and shall not intentionally record or transmit images of any location where a person would have a reasonable expectation of privacy (e.g.,residence,yard,enclosure).Operators and observers shall take reasonable precautions to avoid inadvertently recording or transmitting images of areas where there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.Reasonable precautions can include,for example, deactivating or turning imaging devices away from such areas or persons during UAS operations. 706.4 PROGRA M COORDINATOR The Chief of Police will appoint a program coordinator who will be responsible for the management of the UAS program,if one is in operation.The program coordinator will ensure that policies and procedures conform to current laws,regulations,and best practices and will have the following additional responsibilities: •Coordinating the FAA Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA)application process and ensuring that the COA is current. •Ensuring that all authorized operators and required observers have completed all required FAA and department-approved training in the operation,applicable laws, policies,and procedures regarding use of the UAS. Copyright Lexipol,LLC 2022/01/24,All Rights Reserved. Published with permission by St.Louis Park Police Department Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)Operations - 1 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Page 2 j St.Louis Park Police Department Policy Manual Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)Operations •Developing uniform protocol for submission and evaluation of requests to deploy a UAS,including urgent requests made during ongoing or emerging incidents. Deployment of a UAS shall require authorization of the Chief of Police or the authorized designee,depending on the type of mission. •Developing protocol for conducting criminal investigations involving a UAS,including documentation of time spent monitoring a subject. •Implementing a system for public notification of UAS deployment. •Developing an operational protocol governing the deployment and operation of a UAS, including but not limited to safety oversight,use of visual observers,establishment of lost link procedures,and secure communication with air traffic control facilities. •Developing a protocol for fully documenting all missions. •Developing a UAS inspection,maintenance,and record-keeping protocol to ensure continuing airworthiness of a UAS,up to and including its overhaul or life limits. •Developing protocols to ensure that all data intended to be used as evidence are accessed,maintained,stored,and retrieved in a manner that ensures its integrity as evidence,including strict adherence to chain of custody requirements.Electronic trails, including encryption,authenticity certificates,and date and time stamping,shall be used as appropriate to preserve individual rights and to ensure the authenticity and maintenance of a secure evidentiary chain of custody. •Developing protocols that ensure retention and purge periods are maintained in accordance with established records retention schedules. •Facilitating law enforcement access to images and data captured by the UAS. •Recommending program enhancements,particularly regarding safety and information security. •Ensuring that established protocols are followed by monitoring and providing annual reports on the program to the Chief of Police. •Developing protocols for reviewing and approving requests for use of the department UAS by government entities (Minn.Stat.§626.19). •Preparing and submitting the required annual report to the Commissioner of Public Safety (Minn.Stat.§626.19). •Posting the department policies and procedures regarding the use of UAV on the department website,as applicable (Minn.Stat. §626.19). •Reviewing the program and UAS use for compliance with Minn.Stat.§626.19. 706.5 USE OF UAS Only authorized operators who have completed the required training shall be permitted to operate the UAS. Use of vision enhancement technology (e.g.,thermal and other imaging equipment not generally available to the public)is permissible in viewing areas only where there is no protected privacy Copyright Lexipol,LLC 2022/01/24,AII Rights Reserved. Published with permission by St.Louis Park Police Department Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)Operations - 2 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Page 3 St. Louis Park Police Department Policy Manual Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)Operations interest or when in compliance with a search warrant or court order.In all other instances,legal counsel should be consulted and/or a search warrant obtained. UAS operations should only be conducted when lighting and weather conditions do not affect safety,and a UAS should not be flown over populated areas without FAA approval,if required for the type of UAS equipment deployed. Members shall not use a UAS without a search warrant,except (Minn.Stat.§626.19): (a)During or in the aftermath of an emergency situation or disaster that involves the risk of death or bodily harm to a person. (b)Over a public event where there is a heightened risk to the safety of participants or bystanders. (c)To counter the risk of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization if the agency determines that credible intelligence indicates a risk. (d)To prevent the loss of life or property in natural or man-made disasters and to facilitate operation planning,rescue,and recovery operations. (e)To conduct a threat assessment in anticipation of a specific event. (f)To collect information from a public area if there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. (g)To collect information for crash reconstruction purposes after a serious or deadly collision occurring on a public road. (h)Over a public area for officer training or public relations purposes. (i)For purposes unrelated to law enforcement at the request of a government entity, provided the request is in writing and specifies the reason for the request and a proposed period of use._ 706.5.1 DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED Each use of a UAS should be properly documented by providing the following (Minn.Stat. § 626.19): (a) (b) (c)The applicable exception,unless a warrant was obtained 706.6 PROHIB ITED USE The UAS video surveillance equipment shall not be used: •To conduct random surveillance activities. •To target a person based solely on actual or perceived characteristics such as race,ethnicity,national origin,religion,sex,sexual orientation,gender identity or expression,economic status,age,cultural group,or disability. •To harass,intimidate,or discriminate against any individual or group. A unique case number (or documentation in a form attached to a unique case number) A factual basis for the use of a UAS Copyright Lexipol,LLC 2022/0 1/24,AII Rights Reserved. Published with permission by St.Louis Park Police Department Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)Operations - 3 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Page 4 St.Louis Park Police Department Policy Manual Unmanned Aerial System (VAS)Operations •To conduct personal business of any type. The UAS shall not be weaponized (Minn.Stat.§626.19). 706.6.1 ADDITIONAL PROHIBITIONS Unless authorized by a warrant,a UAS shall not be deployed with facial recognition or biometric matching technology (Minn.Stat.§626.19). Unless authorized by a warrant or for purposes of a permitted use outlined in this policy,a UAS shall not be used to collect data on public protests or demonstrations (Minn.Stat.§626.19). 706.7 RETENTION OF UAS DATA The Records Section supervisor shall ensure that data collected by the UAS is disclosed or deleted as required by Minn.Stat.§626.19,including the deletion of collected data as soon as possible, and in no event later than seven days after collection,unless the data is part of an active criminal investigation (Minn.Stat.§626.19). Copyright Lexipol,LLC 2022/01/24,All R ig hts Rese rv ed. Published w ith permis sion by St. Louis Park Police Department Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)Operations - 4 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Page 5 626.19 USE OF UNMANNED AERIAL VEHICLES.​ Subdivision 1.Application; definitions.(a) This section applies to unmanned aerial vehicle data​ collected, created, or maintained by a law enforcement agency and to law enforcement agencies that maintain,​ use, or plan to use an unmanned aerial vehicle in investigations, training, or in response to emergencies,​ incidents, and requests for service. Unmanned aerial vehicle data collected, created, or maintained by a​ government entity is classified under chapter 13.​ (b) For purposes of this section, the following terms have the meanings given:​ (1) "government entity" has the meaning given in section 13.02, subdivision 7a, except that it does not​ include a law enforcement agency;​ (2) "law enforcement agency" has the meaning given in section 626.84, subdivision 1;​ (3) "unmanned aerial vehicle" or "UAV" means an aircraft that is operated without the possibility of​ direct human intervention from within or on the aircraft; and​ (4) "terrorist attack" means a crime that furthers terrorism as defined in section 609.714, subdivision 1.​ Subd. 2.Use of unmanned aerial vehicles limited.Except as provided in subdivision 3, a law​ enforcement agency must not use a UAV without a search warrant issued under this chapter.​ Subd. 3.Authorized use.A law enforcement agency may use a UAV:​ (1) during or in the aftermath of an emergency situation that involves the risk of death or bodily harm​ to a person;​ (2) over a public event where there is a heightened risk to the safety of participants or bystanders;​ (3)to counter the risk of a terrorist attack by a specific individual or organization if the agency determines​ that credible intelligence indicates a risk;​ (4) to prevent the loss of life and property in natural or man-made disasters and to facilitate operational​ planning, rescue, and recovery operations in the aftermath of these disasters;​ (5) to conduct a threat assessment in anticipation of a specific event;​ (6) to collect information from a public area if there is reasonable suspicion of criminal activity;​ (7) to collect information for crash reconstruction purposes after a serious or deadly collision occurring​ on a public road;​ (8) over a public area for officer training or public relations purposes; and​ (9) for purposes unrelated to law enforcement at the request of a government entity provided that the​ government entity makes the request in writing to the law enforcement agency and specifies the reason for​ the request and proposed period of use.​ Subd. 4.Limitations on use.(a) A law enforcement agency using a UAV must comply with all Federal​ Aviation Administration requirements and guidelines.​ (b)A law enforcement agency must not deploy a UAV with facial recognition or other biometric-matching​ technology unless expressly authorized by a warrant.​ Official Publication of the State of Minnesota​ Revisor of Statutes​ 626.19​MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020​1​ City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Page 6 (c) A law enforcement agency must not equip a UAV with weapons.​ (d) A law enforcement agency must not use a UAV to collect data on public protests or demonstrations​ unless expressly authorized by a warrant or an exception applies under subdivision 3.​ Subd. 5.Documentation required.A law enforcement agency must document each use of a UAV,​ connect each deployment to a unique case number, provide a factual basis for the use of a UAV, and identify​ the applicable exception under subdivision 3 unless a warrant was obtained.​ Subd. 6.Data classification; retention.(a) Data collected by a UAV are private data on individuals or​ nonpublic data, subject to the following:​ (1) if the individual requests a copy of the recording, data on other individuals who do not consent to​ its release must be redacted from the copy;​ (2) UAV data may be disclosed as necessary in an emergency situation under subdivision 3, clause (1);​ (3)UAV data may be disclosed to the government entity making a request for UAV use under subdivision​ 3, clause (9);​ (4) UAV data that are criminal investigative data are governed by section 13.82, subdivision 7; and​ (5) UAV data that are not public data under other provisions of chapter 13 retain that classification.​ (b) Section 13.04, subdivision 2, does not apply to data collected by a UAV.​ (c) Notwithstanding section 138.17, a law enforcement agency must delete data collected by a UAV as​ soon as possible, and in no event later than seven days after collection unless the data is part of an active​ criminal investigation.​ Subd. 7.Evidence.Information obtained or collected by a law enforcement agency in violation of this​ section is not admissible as evidence in a criminal, administrative, or civil proceeding against the data subject.​ Subd. 8.Remedies.In addition to any other remedies provided by law, including remedies available​ under chapter 13, an aggrieved party may bring a civil action against a law enforcement agency to prevent​ or remedy a violation of this section.​ Subd. 9.Public comment.A law enforcement agency must provide an opportunity for public comment​ before it purchases or uses a UAV. At a minimum, the agency must accept public comments submitted​ electronically or by mail. The governing body with jurisdiction over the budget of a local law enforcement​ agency must provide an opportunity for public comment at a regularly scheduled meeting.​ Subd. 10.Written policies and procedures required.Prior to the operation of a UAV, the chief officer​ of every state and local law enforcement agency that uses or proposes to use a UAV must establish and​ enforce a written policy governing its use, including requests for use from government entities. In developing​ and adopting the policy, the law enforcement agency must provide for public comment and input as described​ in subdivision 9. The written policy must be posted on the agency's website, if the agency has a website.​ Subd. 11.Notice; disclosure of warrant.(a) Within a reasonable time but not later than 90 days after​ the court unseals a warrant under this subdivision, the issuing or denying judge shall cause to be served on​ the persons named in the warrant and the application an inventory that shall include notice of:​ (1) the issuance of the warrant or application;​ Official Publication of the State of Minnesota​ Revisor of Statutes​ 2​MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020​626.19​ City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Page 7 (2)the date of issuance and the period of authorized, approved, or disapproved collection of information,​ or the denial of the application; and​ (3) whether information was or was not collected during the period.​ (b) A warrant authorizing collection of information with a UAV must direct that:​ (1) the warrant be sealed for a period of 90 days or until the objective of the warrant has been​ accomplished, whichever is shorter; and​ (2) the warrant be filed with the court administrator within ten days of the expiration of the warrant.​ (c)The prosecutor may request that the warrant, supporting affidavits, and any order granting the request​ not be filed. An order must be issued granting the request in whole or in part if, from affidavits, sworn​ testimony, or other evidence, the court finds reasonable grounds exist to believe that filing the warrant may​ cause the search or a related search to be unsuccessful, create a substantial risk of injury to an innocent​ person, or severely hamper an ongoing investigation.​ (d)The warrant must direct that, following the commencement of any criminal proceeding using evidence​ obtained in or as a result of the search, the supporting application or affidavit must be filed either immediately​ or at any other time as the court directs. Until the filing, the documents and materials ordered withheld from​ filing must be retained by the judge or the judge's designee.​ Subd. 12.Reporting.(a) By January 15 of each year, each law enforcement agency that maintains or​ uses a UAV shall report to the commissioner of public safety the following information for the preceding​ calendar year:​ (1) the number of times a UAV was deployed without a search warrant issued under this chapter,​ identifying the date of deployment and the authorized use of the UAV under subdivision 3; and​ (2) the total cost of the agency's UAV program.​ (b) By June 15 of each year, the commissioner of public safety shall compile the reports submitted to​ the commissioner under paragraph (a), organize the reports by law enforcement agency, submit the compiled​ report to the chairs and ranking minority members of the senate and house of representatives committees​ having jurisdiction over data practices and public safety, and make the compiled report public on the​ department's website.​ (c)By January 15 of each year, a judge who has issued or denied approval of a warrant under this section​ that expired during the preceding year shall report to the state court administrator:​ (1) that a warrant or extension was applied for;​ (2) the type of warrant or extension applied for;​ (3) whether the warrant or extension was granted as applied for, modified, or denied;​ (4) the period of UAV use authorized by the warrant and the number and duration of any extensions of​ the warrant;​ (5) the offense specified in the warrant or application or extension of a warrant; and​ (6) the identity of the law enforcement agency making the application and the person authorizing the​ application.​ Official Publication of the State of Minnesota​ Revisor of Statutes​ 626.19​MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020​3​ City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Page 8 (d) By June 15 of each year, the state court administrator shall submit to the chairs and ranking minority​ members of the senate and house of representatives committees or divisions having jurisdiction over data​ practices and public safety and post on the supreme court's website a full and complete report concerning​ the number of applications for warrants authorizing or approving use of UAVs or disclosure of information​ from the use of UAVs under this section and the number of warrants and extensions granted or denied under​ this section during the preceding calendar year. The report must include a summary and analysis of the data​ required to be filed with the state court administrator under paragraph (c).​ History: 2020 c 82 s 5​ NOTE: This section, as added by Laws 2020, chapter 82, section 5, is effective August 1, 2020, provided​ that the chief law enforcement officers adopt the written policy required under subdivision 10 no later than​ February 15, 2021. Laws 2020, chapter 82, section 5, the effective date.​ Official Publication of the State of Minnesota​ Revisor of Statutes​ 4​MINNESOTA STATUTES 2020​626.19​ City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 4a) Title: Unmanned aerial systems (UAS) for public safety use Page 9 Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Public hearing: 6b Executive summary Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development (Ward 1) Recommended action: Open the public hearing, take testimony and close the public hearing. •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating various highway easements on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard and set the Second Reading of an Ordinance for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes); •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating various street easements on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard and set the Second Reading of an Ordinance for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes); •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating various alley easements on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard and set the Second Reading of an Ordinance for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes); •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating various easements on the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard and set the Second Reading of an Ordinance for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes) Policy consideration: Are the highway, street, alley, utility , and access easements needed for a public purpose? Summary: There are numerous highway, street, alley, utility , and access easements that need to be vacated to make the Beltline Station Development feasible. These vacations include portions of the existing CSAH 25 frontage road right-of-way, unused and unimproved street right -of-way for 32nd Street and Natchez Avenue, various sewer and utility easements, a slope easement, and an access easement. Sherman Associates requests approval of a preliminary and final plat which would establish new property lines, dedicate additional right-of-way, and drainage and utility easements along all property lines consistent with the city’s subdivision requirements, including a new 30-foot- wide easement running north-south through the site to accommodate a 55-inch storm sewer pipe that will be relocated as part of the development. Based on the proposed plan for the site , there is no longer a public purpose for the existing easements. 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: Easement vacation exhibits; Highway vacation ordinance ; Street vacation ordinance; Alley vacation ordinance ; Easement vacation ordinance Pre pared by: Jennifer Monson, redevelopment administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager Karen Barton, community development director Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 2 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Proposed highway, street, and alley vacations Proposed alley, utility and access easements vacations City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 3 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Ordinance No. ____-22 An ordinance vacating highway easements Southeast corner County State Aid Highway 25 and Beltline Boulevard The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. The petition to vacate various highway easement was initiated by the City of St. Louis Park. Notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on March 24, 2022, and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said application and has determined that the highway easements are not needed for public purposes, and that is it in the best interest of the public that said highway easements be vacated. Section 2. The following described highway easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit A, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal description of the vacation of a portion of the highway easement Parcels 138, 139, 140 and 141 created in Doc. No. 2021414 and partially assigned to the City of St. Louis Park per Doc. No. 5034825 Those parts of Lot 12 through 15 inclusive, Block 2, Mazey and Langan’s Addition to St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying southerly of a line hereinafter described as Line 1, EXCEPT those parts of said Lots 12 and 13 lying northerly of a line hereinafter described as Line 3: Line 1 is described as beginning at the point of intersection of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet southeasterly of Line 2 described below with the south line of said Lot 15; thence run northeasterly parallel with said Line 2 to a point distant 100 feet southeasterly (measured at right angles) of a point on said Line 2, distant 866.3 feet northeasterly of its point of beginning; thence run northeasterly to a point distant 40 feet southeasterly (measured at right angles) of a point on said Line 2, distant 1016.3 feet northeasterly of its point of beginning; thence run northeasterly parallel with said Line 2 for 50 feet and there terminating; Line 2 is described as beginning at a point on the east line of Lot 2, Block 4, Lewiston Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, said county, distant 1.7 feet southerly of the northeast corner thereof; thence run northeasterly at an angle of 78 degrees 33 minutes 00 seconds from said east line (measured from north to east) for 94 feet; thence deflect to the left on a 01 degree 00 minute 00 second curve, having a radius of 5729.65 feet and a length of 1310 feet; for 972.3 feet and there terminating; City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 4 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Line 3 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West, and said line there terminating. Section 3. The following described highway easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit B, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal description of the vacation of a portion of the highway easement Parcel 146 created in Doc. No. 2021414 and partially assigned to the City of St. Louis Park per Doc. No. 5034825 Those parts of Lot 9 through 11 inclusive, and Lots 17 through 19 inclusive, Block 2, Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota lying northwesterly of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet southeasterly of a line hereinafter described as Line 1 and southerly and westerly of a line hereinafter described as Line 2: Line 1 is described as beginning at a point on the east line of Lot 2, Block 4, Lewiston Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, said county, distant 1.7 feet southerly of the northeast corner thereof; thence run northeasterly at an angle of 78 degrees 33 minutes 00 seconds from said east line (measured from north to east) for 94 feet; thence deflect to the left on a 01 degree 00 minute 00 second curve, having a radius of 5729.65 feet and a length of 1310 feet, and there terminating; Line 2 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds East 51.97 feet; thence northeasterly 174.11 fee t along a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5790.08 feet, a central angle of 01 degrees 43 minutes 22 seconds, and a chord bearing of North 67 degrees 56 minutes 18 seconds East; thence North 68 degrees 03 minutes 55 seconds East 88.04 feet; thence southeasterly 31.87 feet along a non -tangential curve concave to the southwest, having a radius of 40.00 feet, a central angle of 45 degrees 38 minutes 48 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 22 degrees 41 minutes 23 seconds East, and said line there terminating; City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 5 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Together with that part of said Lot 9 adjoining and southeasterly of the above described land. Section 4. The following described highway easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit C, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal description of the vacation of the highway easement Parcel 131B per Doc. No. 5034825 Lots 1 through 4 inclusive and Lots 13 through 17 inclusive, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn. according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Registrar of Titles in and for Hennepin County, Minnesota, the title thereto being registered as evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 697371. Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect May 13, 2022 Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 18, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading April 4, 2022 Second reading April 18, 2022 Date of publication April 28, 2022 Date ordinance takes effect May 13, 2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 6 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit A City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 7 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 8 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit B City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 9 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 10 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit C City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 11 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Ordinance No. ____-22 An ordinance vacating street easements Southeast corner County State Aid Highway 25 and Beltline Boulevard The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. The petition to vacate various street easement was initiated by the City of St. Louis Park. Notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on March 24, 2022, and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said application and has determined that the street easements are not needed for public purposes, and that is it in the best interest of the public that said street easements be vacated. Section 2. The following described street easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit A, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Description for the Vacation of a portion of Natchez Avenue as Dedicated on the Plat of Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co., Minn. Vacating that part of Natchez Avenue, as dedicated on the plat of Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co., Minn., lying southerly of the centerline of West 32nd Street and northerly of the north line of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, said county. Section 3. The following described street easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit B, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Description for the Vacation of a portion of Natchez Avenue as Dedicated on the Plat of Mazey & Langan’s Addition to St. Louis Park Vacating that part of Natchez Avenue, as dedicated on the plat of Mazey & Langan’s Addition to St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the centerline of West 32nd Street and southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the north-south quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north-south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet alon g a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West, and said line there terminating. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 12 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Section 4. The following described street easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit C, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Description for the Vacation of a portion of Natchez Avenue as Dedicated on the Plat of Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park Vacating that part of Natchez Avenue, as dedicated on the plat of Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the westerly extension of the north line of Lot 15, Block 2, said plat, and southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north-south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds East 51.97 feet, and said line there terminating. Section 5. The following described street easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit D, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Description for the Vacation of a portion of West 32nd Street as Dedicated on the Plat of Mazey & Langan’s Addition to St. Louis Park Vacating that part of West 32nd Street, as dedicated on the plat of Mazey & Langan’s Addition to St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying westerly of the southerly extension of the east line of Lot 14, Block 2, said plat, and easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non -tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West; thence South 67 degrees 02 minutes 58 seconds West, not tangent to said curve, 65.29 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 00 degrees 20 minutes 22 seconds East 298.91 feet, and said line there te rminating Section 6. The following described street easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit E, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 13 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Description for the Vacation of a portion of West 32nd Street as Dedicated on the Plat of Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn. Vacating that part of West 32nd Street, as dedicated on the plat of Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn., lying westerly the northerly extension of the east line of Lot 1, Block 1, said plat, and easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non -tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West; thence South 67 degrees 02 minutes 58 seconds West, not tangent to said curve, 65.29 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 00 de grees 20 minutes 22 seconds East 298.91 feet, and said line there terminating. Section 7. This ordinance shall take effect May 13, 2022 Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 18, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading April 4, 2022 Second reading April 18, 2022 Date of publication April 28, 2022 Date ordinance takes effect May 13, 2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 14 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit A City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 15 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit B City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 16 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit C City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 17 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit D City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 18 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit E City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 19 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Ordinance No. ____-22 An ordinance vacating alley easements Southeast corner County State Aid Highway 25 and Beltline Boulevard The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. The petition to vacate various alley easements was initiated by the City of St. Louis Park. Notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on March 24, 2022, and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said application and has determined that the alley easements are not needed for public purposes, and that is it in the best interest of the public that said alley easements be vacated. Section 2. The following described alley easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit A, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Description for the Vacation of a portion of the Alley in Block 1 as Dedicated on the Plat of Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn Vacating that part of Alley in Block 1, as dedicated on the plat of Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn., lying southerly of the southerly right-of-way line of West 32nd Street and northerly of Lot 1, Block 1, Brooks McCracken Industrial Park, said county. Section 3. The following described alley easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit B, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Description for the Vacation of a portion of the Alley in Block 2 as Dedicated on the Plat of Mazey & Langan’s Addition to St. Louis Park Vacating that part of the alley in Block 2, as dedicated on the plat of Mazey & Langan’s Addition to St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the northerly right-of-way line of West 32nd Street and southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 fee t; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non -tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West, and said line there terminating. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 20 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Section 4. The following described alley easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit C, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Description for the Vacation of a portion of the Alley in Block 2 as Dedicated on the Plat of Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park Vacating that part of the alley in Block 2, as dedicated on the plat of Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northerly of the southerly right -of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7 and southerly of the following described line: Commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds East 51.97 feet; thence northeasterly 174.11 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5790.08 feet, a central angle of 01 degrees 43 minutes 22 seconds, and a chord bearing of North 67 degrees 56 minutes 18 seconds East, and said line there terminating. Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect May 13, 2022 Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 18, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading April 4, 2022 Second reading April 18, 2022 Date of publication April 28, 2022 Date ordinance takes effect May 13, 2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 21 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit A City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 22 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit B City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 23 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit C City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 24 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Ordinance No. ____-22 An ordinance vacating various easements Southeast corner County State Aid Highway 25 and Beltline Boulevard The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. The petition to vacate various easements was initiated by the City of St. Louis Park. Notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on March 24, 2022, and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said application and has determined that the easements are not needed for public purposes, and that is it in the best interest of the public that said easements be vacated. Section 2. The following described sewer easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit A, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal description of the vacation of the sewer easement per Doc. No. 2334994 Vacating the easement for sanitary and storm sewer purposes described in Doc. No. 2334994, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as an easement in and across the North Ten (10) feet of Lots Twelve (12) to Seventeen (17), both inclusive, Block Two, (2), Oakenwald, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the office of the Register of Deeds in and for said Hennepin County, Minnesota. Section 3. The following described utility easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit B, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal description of the vacation of the utility easement per Doc. No. 1393807 Vacating the easement for storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, and public utility purposes described in Doc. No. 1393807, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as an easement in, over, and across vacated Oakenwald Avenue now known as Monterey Avenue as plated [sic] adjacent to Block 2 “Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park”, lying southerly of State Highway No. 7, and the 15 foot strip of land east of and adjacent to said Oakenwald Avenue as plated [sic] in the plat of “Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park.” Section 4. The following described access easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit C, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal description of the vacation of the access easement per Doc. No. T5141480 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 25 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Vacating the easement for access purposes described in Doc. No. T05141480, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as that part of vacated Oakenwald Avenue as platted adjacent to Block 2 OAKENWALD ADDITION ST. LOUIS PARK, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying southerly of State Highway 7 together with a 15 foot wide strip of land east of and adjacent to said vacated Oakenwald Avenue lying southerly of State Highway 7 also together with that part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24 said Hennepin County lying easterly and northeasterly of a line described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the west line of said vacated Oakenwald Avenue and the north line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence southerly on an extension of said west line of said vacated Oakenwald Avenue a distance of 4.00 fe et; thence southeasterly to a point on the southerly extension of the east line of the above described 15 foot wide strip of land distant 20.00 feet south from the north line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter and said line there terminating. The sidelines of said easement are to be prolonged or shortened to terminate at the southerly line of State Highway 7. Section 5. The following described slope easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit D, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal description of the vacation of the slope easement per Doc. No. 1484672 Vacating the easement for slope purposes described in Doc. No. 1484672, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as an easement over the West five (5) feet of the following: except the North thirty (30) feet and except the South ninety (90) feet thereof: That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, described as beginning at the Northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South along the West line thereof 288.7 feet; thence East to a point on the Northerly right-of- way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, distant 46 feet from the intersection of said right-of -way line with the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter as measured along said right-of- way line; thence Northeasterly along said Northerly right-of-way line to its intersection with the extension South of the East line of Monterey Avenue; thence North along the extension of the East line of Montere y Avenue to the North line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence West along said North line to the point of beginning. Section 6. The following described drainage and utility easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit E, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 26 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Legal description of the vacation of the drainage and utility easement per plat of BROOKS MCCRACKEN INDUSTRIAL PARK Vacating the drainage and utility easement embraced within Lot 1, Block 1, BROOKS MCCRACKEN INDUSTRIAL PARK, as dedicated on the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, recorded as Document Nos. 5362677(Abstract) and 1898117(Torrens). Section 7. The following described utility easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit F, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal description of the vacation of the utility easements per Doc. No. 1817347 Vacating the easements for underground utility purposes described in Doc. No. 1817347, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as a 20-foot easement for underground utility purposes across Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, LEWISTON PARK Hennepin Co., Minnesota. The center line of said easement is described as follows: Commencing at a point on the West line of said Lot 2, 9 feet South from the Northwest corner thence Easterly to a point in the East line of said Lot 2, 4 feet South of the Northeast corner and there terminating. AND An easement for underground utility purposes across the East 30 feet of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 1, LEWISTON PARK, Hennepin Co., Minnesota. Section 8. The following described storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, and public utility purposes easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit G, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal Description for the Vacation of the Storm Sewer, Sanitary Sewer, Water Main, and Public Utility Purposes per Doc. Nos. 1855929 Vacating the easement for storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, and public utility purposes described in Doc. No. 1855929, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as an easement in, over, and, across the vacated alley embraced within the following described property: That part of Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and of the alley located therein described as follows: Commencing at the southeast corner of said Lot 4; thence Westerly along the south line of said Lot 4, a distance of 6.00 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence North 00 degrees 19 minutes 53 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 27 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development seconds East, assumed bearing, parallel with the East line of Lots 5 and 6, said Block 1, a distance of 114.27 feet; thence Northwesterly along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 15.00 feet and a central angle of 61 degrees 26 minutes 23 seconds, a distance of 16.17 feet; thence North 61 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 40.60 feet; thence Westerly along a tangential curve to the left, having a radius of 24.00 feet and a central angle of 76 degrees 35 minutes 00 seconds, a distance of 32.08 feet; thence Southwesterly along a reverse curve to the right, havin g a radius of 361.58 feet and a central angle of 26 degrees 53 minutes 32 seconds, a distance 169.71 feet; thence South 43 degrees 00 minutes 19 seconds, West, not tangent to said curve a distance of 71.07 feet to the intersection with a line distant 46.00 feet Easterly of as measured at a right angle to and parallel with hereinafter described "Line A"; thence Southerly along said parallel line, a distance of 26.00 feet to the south line of said Lot 13; thence Easterly along said south line and the easterly extension thereof, a distance of 128.10 feet to the centerline of said alley; thence Northerly along the centerline of said alley, a distance of 32.63 feet to the intersection with the westerly extension of the south line of said Lot 4; thence Easterly along said westerly extension and along the south line of said Lot 4, a distance of 130.51 feet to the point of beginning. Said "Line A" is described as follows: Commencing at the most southerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1 Belt Line Industrial Park 2nd Addition, thence South 59 degrees 15 minutes 24 seconds East on an assumed bearing along the Southeasterly extension of the southwesterly line of said Lot 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; thence North 25 degrees 19 minutes 54 seconds West, tangent to last described curve [180.04 feet; thence Northerly 589.17 feet along a tangential curve] concave to the East having a radius of 1268.10 feet a central angle of 26 degrees 37 minutes 12 seconds, said line there terminating. Section 9. The following describ ed drainage and storm sewer easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit H, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal Description for the Vacation of the Drainage and Storm Sewer Easement per Doc. No. 3997894 Vacating the drainage and storm sewer easement described in Doc. No. 3997894, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as an easement in and over the northerly 15 feet of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, lying easterly of the southerly extension of the westerly line of Lot 11, Block 1, “Lewiston Park, City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 28 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Hennepin County, Minnesota.” Also 7.5 feet on each side of the following described line: Commencing at a point on the southerly line of said Lot 4, 45 feet westerly of the southeasterly corner of said Lot 4; thence deflecting at an angle 90 degrees 0’ to the north along a line to its intersection with the northerly line of said Lot 4 and there terminating. Section 10. The following described drainage and storm sewer easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit I, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal Description for the Vacation of the Drainage and Storm Sewer Easement per Doc. No. 1060757 Vacating the easement for drainage and storm sewer purposes described in Doc. No. 1060757, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as an easement for drainage and storm sewer in and over the west 15 feet of the east 30 feet of said Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, “Lewiston Park.” Section 11. The followin g described walkway, slope, and utility easement, as depicted and described in Exhibit J, as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: Legal Description for the Vacation of the Walkway, Slope, and Utility Easement per Doc. No. 1799119 Vacating the easement for walkway, slope, and utility purposes described in Doc. No. 1799119, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as that part of Lots and 12, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn. which lies Westerly of a line drawn parallel to and 66 feet Easterly of the following described line: Commencing at the most Southerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1, BELT LINE INDUSTRIAL PARK 2ND ADDITION, thence South 59 degrees 15 minutes 24 seconds East on an assumed bearing along the Southeasterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 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; thence North 25 degrees 19 minutes 54 seconds West, tangent to last described curve, 180.04 feet; thence Northerly 589.17 feet along a tangential curve concave to the East having a radius of 1268.10 feet a central angle of 26 degrees 37 minutes 12 seconds, and said line there terminating. Legal Description for the Vacation of the Walkway, Slope, and Utility Easement per Doc. No. 5223253 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 29 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Vacating the easement for walkway, slope and utility purposes described in Doc. No. 5223253, Hennepin County, Minnesota, as the Westerly 20 feet and the Southeasterly 20 feet of the following described property: That part of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, which lies Easterly of a line drawn parallel to and 46 feet Easterly of the following described line, excepting therefrom the east 37 feet of said Lot 4 as measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of said Lot 4: Commencing at the most Southerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1, BELT LINE INDUSTRIAL PARK 2ND ADDITION, thence South 59 degrees 15 minutes 24 seconds East on an assumed bearing along the Southeasterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 1 a distance of 40.00 feet to the point of beginning of said line; thence North 30 degrees 44 minute s 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; thence North 25 degrees 19 minutes 54 seconds West, tangent to last described curve, 180.04 feet; thence Northerly 589.17 feet along a tangential curve concave to the East having a radius of 1268.10 feet a central angle of 26 degrees 37 minutes 12 seconds, and said line there terminating, according to the recorded plat thereof, and situate in Hennepin County, Minnesota. Section 12. This ordinance shall take effect May 13, 2022 Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 18, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading April 4, 2022 Second reading April 18, 2022 Date of publication April 28, 2022 Date ordinance takes effect May 13, 2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 30 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit A City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 31 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit B City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 32 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit C City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 33 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit D City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 34 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit E City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 35 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit F City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 36 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit G City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 37 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 38 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit H City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 39 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit I City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 40 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Exhibit J City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 6b) Page 41 Title: Highway, street, alley, utility, and access easement vacations for Beltline Station Development Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Public hearing: 6c Executive summary Title: Off-sale intoxicating liquor license – TMS Alpha, LLC dba Westside Wine & Spirits (Ward 3) Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close public hearing. Motion to approve application from TMS Alpha, LLC dba Westside Wine & Spirits for an off -sale into xicating liquor licens e locat ed at 8016 Minnetonka Blvd. Policy consideration: Does the applicant meet the requirements for issuance of an off-sale intoxicating liquor licens e? Summary: TSM Alpha, LLC dba Westside Wine & Spirits has applied for an off -sale in to xicating liquor license for the premises located at 8016 Minnetonka Blvd. Westside Wine & Spirits will be occupying space in the Texa-Tonka shopping center totaling appro ximat ely 3,400 square f eet. The liq uor store its elf w ill s ell malt beverages, wine, and spirits. However, the overall concept includes a separate food market off ering olive oil, chocolates, ch ees es, and the lik e. The two spaces will be adjacent to one -another and will have separate access to the outside . A conditional use permit for this liquor store was approved by council on February 7, 2022. Thomas Schoenberger is the sole owner and operating manager of Westside Wine & Spirits. Tom has bee n highly involved in the management of liquor and most recently worked as the Director of Food and Beverage at the Golden Valley Country Club. Preceding that, Tom was the general manager of several successful restaurants throughout Minnesota and the United States. The police department conducted a full background investigation, and nothing was discovered that would warrant denial of the license. The application and police report are on f ile in the city clerk’s office. The required notice of the public hearing was published on March 24, 2022. If the license is approved, nothing will be issued until all requirements have been met with the city Building and Energy department, Hennepin County, and the State Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division. Financial or budget considerations: Fees include $500 for the background investigation. The annual fee for an off-sale license is $380 and w ill be p ro -rated f or the remainder of the license term pursuant to city provisions. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicabl e. Supporting documents: None Prepared by: Chase Peterson-Etem, office assistant Reviewed by: M elissa K enn edy, city clerk Approve d by: Kim K eller, city manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Public hearing: 6d Executive summary Title: Roadway easement vacation for Wooddale Avenue Apartments (Ward 2) Recommended action: Open the public hearing, take testimony and close the public hearing. Policy consideration: Is the roadway easement needed for a public purpose? Summary: There is a portion of a roadway easement that was turned back to the City of St. Louis Park by MnDOT after the construction of Highway 100 that is on the site of the proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartments. In order for the development to proceed as proposed, the easement needs to be vacated. The city stopped using the paved roadway in this area in 2018. The road way is only used privately by the church for internal circulation and the road no longer connects to Wooddale Avenue. Real Estate Equities requests approval of a preliminary and final plat which would establish new property lines, dedicate additional right-of-way, and drainage and utility easements along all property lines consistent with the city’s subdivision requirements. Based on the proposed plan for the site , there is no longer a public purpose for the existing easement. The ordinance associated with the vacation has been included as an action item with the other Wooddale Avenue Apartments approvals. 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: See agenda item 8a for roadway vacation ordinance and exhibit Prepared by: Laura Chamberlain, senior planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager Karen Barton, community development director Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Action agenda item: 8a Executive summary Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments (Ward 2) Recommended action: •Motion to adopt Resolution approving the amendments to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Plan Map, as well as related figures and tables (requires 5 affirmative votes); and •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance vacating a roadway easement located between Highway 100 and Wooddale Avenue and set the second reading for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes); and •Motion to adopt Resolution approving the preliminary and final plat for Wooddale Avenue Apartments (requires 4 affirmative votes); and •Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance adding section 36-268-PUD 23 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from R3 – Two -Family Residential to PUD 23 and set the second reading for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes). Policy consideration: Does city council support the proposed development? Summary: Real Estate Equities, LLC (“developer”) proposes to construct a four-story, 114-unit multi-family building at 3801 Wooddale Avenue South on the southeast corner of the Wooddale Avenue cul-de -sac and the Highway 100 on-ramp, site of t he current Aldersgate Methodist Church. The apartment building includes amenity spaces, underground parking, and surface parking on site. The proposal includes a mix of all-affordable one-, two-, and three-bedroom units, including five units available at 30 percent area median income (AMI), five units available at 50 percent AMI, and 104 units available at 60 percent AMI for 26 years, exceeding the city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy requirements. The developer applied for a comprehensive plan amendment, preliminary and final plat , and preliminary and final planned unit development. The planning commission held a public hearing on March 23, 2022 and voted 4 to 0 to recommend approval of the applications with the condition of the site’s south access be removed. Financial or budget considerations: There are extraordinary costs associated with the proposed redevelopment site that prevent the proposed project from being financially feasible. Consequently, the developer applied for $940,000 in tax increment financing (TIF) to close the financial gap. They also are requesting $850,000 from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF ) to provide deeper levels of affordability in 10 of the units. Details of these requests can be found in the EDA staff report from March 28, 2022. 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 exhibit; Zoning map amendment exhibit; Comprehensive plan amendment resolution; V acation ordinance; Plat resolution ; PUD ordinance; Draft planning commission minutes from March 23, 2022; Site renderings; Traffic study; Traffic audit; MnDOT comments and city engineering responses Prepared by: Laura Chamberlain, senior planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager; Karen Barton, community development director Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 2 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Discussion Site information: The proposed redevelopment site is a triangle -shaped site located between Wooddale Avenue South on the west, Trunk Highway 100 on the east, and Wooddale Ave nue South and Highway 100 on-ramp/off -ramp to the north. The site consists of the Aldersgate Methodist Church property located at 3801 Wooddale Avenue South, as well as right-of-way turnback areas owned by the city adjacent to the highway. Site area (acres): 3.27 acres Current use: Religious institution Surrounding land uses: North: On-ramp/off -ramp for Highway 100; Retail East: Fire station, single family residential South: Single family residential West: Highway 100 Current 2040 land use guidance Current zoning CIV - civic R-3 two -family residence ROW - right of way Proposed 2040 land use guidance Proposed zoning RH - high density residential PUD planned unit development City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 3 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Background: The existing building at 3801 Wooddale Avenue was constructed in 1950 and used as a place of worship and a daycare. Aldersgate Methodist Church is downsizing and sharing space with another local church. Aldersgate desire s to leave behind a legacy of affordable housing for the St. Louis Park community. The church has a purchase contract with Real Estate Equities to redevelop the site as an all-affordable workforce housing development. The existing building is currently occupied by Aldersgate Methodist Church and another small congregation which has a short-term lease for the space. Both users intend to vacate the space in the coming months. Real Estate Equities completed a phase I and phase II environmental assessment of the subject site, revealing significant environmental remediation is necessary to remove asbestos in the existing structure. The developer is submitting a grant application to Hennepin County to help off- set these clean-up costs. On January 11, 2022, Real Estate Equities was awarded Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) revenue bonds from Minnesota Management and Budget in the amount of $17,490,550. These bond allocations require the developer to close on the property and ready to start construction within 180 days. Real Estate Equity’s deadline for the Wooddale Avenue Apartment development is July 8, 2022. Prese nt considerations: The applicant requests the city: 1.Approve a comprehensive plan amendment, changing the future land use of the property from CIV – civic to RH – high density residential 2.Approve a preliminary and final plat to create one lot. 3.Amend the zoning map and zoning ordinance to rezone the subject properties from R-3 – two family residential to PUD – planned unit development. Architectural site planPage 4 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 5 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Comprehensive plan amendment analysis: The applicant requests a change to the future land use designation of the development site from CIV – civic and ROW – right of way , to RH – high density residential. Below is an excerpt from the comprehensive plan future land use map. A request for amending the city’s land use plan 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. The request is for residential development at a density of 35 units per acre, which is considered high density (RH) in the comprehensive plan. The amendment may be evaluated independently of the development proposal against the goals of the comprehensive plan for the subject properties. If approved, the amendment would allow a high-density multiple family residence to be constructed at this site. Therefore, the amendment is required for the development as proposed to move forward. General consistency with the comprehensive plan . The city’s land use plan should reflect the broad goals, policies and implementation strategies incorporated in th e comprehensive plan. These elements are the basis for evaluating the requested change. Reside ntial 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. A.Ensure that new and redeveloped medium and high-density residential land uses are located within walking distance of transit and commercial services. B.Engage the community to explore how to increase the mix of housing types near transit corridors, parks, and commercial nodes/corridors. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 6 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Economic development goal #1: Promote economic development and redevelopment activities that enhance the livability and vitality of the community. C.Encourage efficient, compact redevelopment that results in the highest and be st land uses so as to minimize energy and infrastructure costs. E.Promote the development of new market rate and affordable housing which will provide residents with additional housing options, assist in retaining and attracting talent for area employers, and further support local commercial businesses. Housing goal #1: The City of St. Louis Park will promote and facilitate a balanced and enduring housing stock that offers a continuum of diverse lifecycle housing choices suitable for households of all income levels including, but not limited to affordable, senior, multi-generational, supportive , and mixed income housing, disbursed throughout the city. A.Create a broad range of housing types to provide more diverse and creative housing choices to meet the needs of current and future residents. E.Use infill and redevelopment opportunities to assist in meeting housing goals. Housing goal #3 multi-family: The city is committed to promoting quality multi-family developments, both rental and owner occupied, in appropriate locations, including near transit centers, retail and employment centers and in commercial mixed-use districts. B.Promote high-quality architectural design in the construction of new multi-family developments. C.Be proactive in analyzing and guiding redevelopment opportunities for multi-family developments. Housing goal #4 residential rental housing: The city is committed to creating, preserving, and improving the city’s rental housing stock. B.Promote the inclusion of family -sized units (2- and 3-bedroom) in newly constructed multi- family developments. C.Minimize the involuntary displacement of people of color, indigenous people, and vulnerable populations, such as low-income households, the elderly, and people with disabilities from their communities as neighborhoods grow and change. Housing goal #5 affordable housing: The city is committed to promoting affordable housing options for low- and moderate-income households. C.Promote the inclusion of affordable housing in new developments, including those located near the Southwest Light Rail Transit Corridor and other transit nodes, retail and employment centers and commercial mixed-use districts. D.Pursue policies, tools , and programs to ensure long-term housing affordability for households at or below 30, 50, 60 and 80% of AMI. Staff find the proposed comprehensive plan amendment to reguide the site to high density residential would bring the site into alignment with land use guidance around the Wooddale LRT station. The proposal creates a pedestrian-scaled development within a ten-minute walk of the Wooddale LRT Station area. Staff also find the project meets these Livable Communities principles in the 2040 plan: structured parking, affordable housing, high quality outdoor recreation and amenity areas. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 7 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments 2003 Elmwood land use, transit & transportation study. The study developed a thirty-year vision for the neighborhood and acts as a tool for guiding decisions on future redevelopment, infill development, and infrastructure changes in the Elmwood area. The study area is generally bounded by Highway 7, Highway 100, Wooddale Avenue, and Brunswick Avenue in southeast St. Louis Park. Significant public input helped to give the overall neighborhood preferences when it came to land use, development, and transportation. The study process identified strong community preference for new single -family homes, and the study identified several market barriers to this type of development in the area. Recommendations in the 2003 study were based in part on the 2000-2020 Comprehensive Plan. The subject site was assumed to eventually be needed for circulation/right-of-way to support redevelopment in the area. While the proposed project does not follow land use guidance, staff find it does follow other principles in the 2003 plan. The architectural design includes building materials and colors that respect and complement the nearby single -family homes including stone and brick in natural colors. Staff find the proposed site plan provides sufficient buffer between the proposed apartment building and the existing single-family homes. The impact of the height of the building has also been minimized by pushing the building further to the east on the property, away from the existing residences. The desire for move-up housing is in part a desire for more family housing. Two- and three-bedroom units make up 76% of the units in the proposed development. Availab ility of infrastructure •Water and sewer: City engineering and operations staff reviewed the proposed development and find the public water and sewer infrastructure in the area to be adequate to serve the proposed development. •Traffic: Development Traffic Study: Transportation Collaborative & Consultants (TC2) completed a traffic study for the proposed multi-family residential development proposal at 3801 Wooddale Avenue. The updated site plan, reflecting the recommendation of the planning commission, shows all ve hicle access to the site from the cul-de -sac, which was studied in the traffic study as “Scenario A.” The study concluded that no infrastructure changes are needed from an intersection capacity perspective, although the study does recommend the addition of a westbound left-turn lane at the Wooddale Avenue / Wooddale Avenue cul- de -sac with Scenario A to reduce potential conflicts, assuming MnDOT’s concurrence. Neighborhood Traffic Audit: Based on neighborhood concerns, the city also had TC2 conduct a traffic audit for the entire Elmwood neighborhood. The audit took into consideration changes in the neighborhood over the last twenty years, proposed/approved developments in the area, as well as growth projections for the year 2040 for the neighborhood based on the city’s Comprehensive Plan. The Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit concluded: “Regional and local transportation improvements, along with multimodal focused travel behavior changes, have offset the traffic growth associated with redevelopment in the Elmwood Neighborhood. Even with the forecasted growth assumptions, the existing and planned transportation City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 8 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments system is expected to have reserve capacity and operate within acceptable levels of service. Thus, the Elmwood Neighborhood transportation network can support future planned redevelopment.” MnDOT Comments: In their review for the comprehensive plan amendment and the development review, MnDOT wrote a response letter raising some concerns regarding the cul-de-sac intersection with Wooddale Avenue. The letter highlighted questions about the traffic study conducted for the site. City engineering staff and the traffic study consultant met with MnDOT to discuss the specific comments and found the best data available supports the traffic study and its recommendations. The MnDOT letter and city’s response are included at attachments to this staff report •Stormwater: City engineering staff find that the development complies with stormwater requirements. In reviewing the site, city engineering staff found that increasing the size of the stormwater facility at this site would be beneficial to management of stormwater in the Elmwood neighborhood and to the city’s stormwater system. In th e 2005 study, Elmwood Redevelopment Area, the Aldersgate church parking lot was identified as a potential location for a regional stormwater pond due to its location in the watershed and size. Since that study, site investigations have found that the soils in this location are conducive to infiltration, increasing its value as a stormwater treatment site. Buildin g a larger stormwater retention area would provide much needed stormwater flood capacity and water treatment for the neighborhood, which was developed without stormwater management features. The developer is working with city engineering to potentially expand their stormwater facilities to accommodate regional stormwater collection on the site. The applicant will be required to obtain both city and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District permits prior to construction. Impacts to surrounding properties and the physical character of the neighborhood. Redevelopment of the lot from a religious institution to an apartment building will change the character of the area. The area around the project contains a single -family residential neighborhood to the west and south, with Highway 100 to the east, and the on-ramp/off -ramp for the highway to the north. The 2040 comprehensive plan identifies the overall Elmwood neighborhood area as already containing a mix of residential land uses, including low density residential, medium density residential, and high density residential. Through a series of meeting with the neighborhood, the developer understood the desire of neighboring properties to minimize the impact of the proposed apartment building. The developer addressed these concerns of building height and setbacks by orienting the building on the eastern side of the site, setting the building far back from the neighbors to the west. The western surface parking lot is also buffered from the properties to the west through landscaping. Regio nal policy . Metropolitan Council’s review of this comprehensive plan amendment is required. The Metropolitan Council must authorize the city to put the amendment into effect. Staff expect that a change to allow high density residential would be viewed favorably by the Metropolitan City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 9 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Council. Staff finds the goals and policies of the 2040 comprehensive plan support guid ing this property for RH – high density residential land uses. Vacation: The applicant is requesting the City of St. Louis Park to vacate the roadway easement located on the eastern edge of the property. The city council will hold a public hearing for this vacation at the same meeting, prior to this action item. Preliminary and final plat analysis: Real Estate Equities seeks preliminary and final plat approval to ready the property for development. Block and Lot: The subdivision proposal will one lot, as well as dedicate right -of-way for Wooddale Avenue S, Highway 100, and Cambridge Street. Lot 1, Block 1, Wooddale Avenue Apartments, Hennepin County, Minnesota will have an area of 142,799 square feet or 3.27 acre s. This lot will be the location of the 114 unit, 4-story apartment building. The density for this site is 34.9 units per acre. Easemen ts: Drainage and utility easements are provided along all external property lines. Right of way: The city is processing an application to vacate excess right-of-way along the eastern border of the site, which was designated as a “turnback area” by MnDOT to the city. With the vacation approval, the plat will clean up the remaining right-of-way through dedication. Park and trail dedication: The parks and recreation advisory commission (PRAC) reviewed the park and trail dedication for the proposed development on February 16, 2022. PRAC recommended collecting park and trail dedication fees in lieu of lan d. Park and trail dedication fees will need to be collected for all new dwelling units. The 2022 fee schedule sets the residential park dedication fee at $1,500 per dwelling unit and the residential trail dedication fee at $225 per dwelling units. 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 R-3 two -family residential. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 10 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Building and site design analysis: Wooddale Avenue Apartments development 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. In addition, the following criteria shall be satisfied: (1)The design shall consider the project as a whole and shall create a unified environment within project boundaries by ensuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and design and efficient use of utilities. Staff finds the plan meets this requirement. (2)The design of a PUD shall achieve compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses, both existing and proposed, and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse effects of the surrounding land uses on the PUD. The developer responded to neighborhood concerns about building height and bulk by orienting the building to the east, away from the neighborhood, and buffering the surface parking lots. Staff finds these criteria will be met. (3)A PUD shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 11 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments This criterion will be met. The development intends to use Enterprise Green Communities/Energy Star Program with the Minnesota Overlay as its design rating system to meet the requirements of the policy. (4)The use of green roofs or white roofs and on-site renewable energy is encouraged. The building includes rooftop solar energy installation. This criterion will be met. (5)A PUD shall comply with the city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy. The development will include 100 percent of the units available at affordable rents. The development includes 114 affordable units with 5 units affordable at 30 percent area median income (AMI), 5 units affordable at 50 percent AMI, and 104 units affordable at 60 percent AMI exceeding the city’s policy. This criterion will be met. Zoning analysis: The following table provides the development metrics. The proposed performance and development standards, as indicated in the development plans, establish the development requirements for this property if approved. Further details on some of the zoning items are provided below. Zoning compliance table Factor Required Proposed Met? Use Set by PUD ordinance Residential Yes Lot Area 2.0 acres 3.27 acres Yes Height Set by PUD ordinance 4 stories, 48.1 feet Yes Building Materials Minimum 60% Class I materials on all facades. North Face: 57.7% Class I East Face: 55.8% Class I South Face: 60.9% Class I West Face: 63.8% Class I Overall: 60% Class I Class I materials: cultured stone veneer, glass No. Staff recommend increasing Class I materials on North and East side to meet 60% minimum Dwelling Units 20% of total units at 50% AMI 114 total units; 5 units (4.4%) affordable at 30% AMI 5 units (4.4%) affordable at 50% AMI 104 units (91.2%) affordable at 60% AMI Yes Density (units per acre) High Density Residential Max allowed: 75 per acre 35 units per acre Yes Floor Area Ratio None with PUD 1.00 Yes City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 12 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Factor Required Proposed Met? Off-Street Parking 1 per studio 1 per 1-bedroom 1.25 per 2-bedroom 2 per 3-bedroom +5% Guest Total required: 184 Total provided: 207 Yes EV charging Stations 10% level 2 EVSE (19 stalls, at least one handicapped accessible) Conduit for 50% future level 2 EVSE 21 stalls provided, all in underground garage, 1 stall is handicapped accessible Conduit for 50% future level 2 EVSE Yes Bicycle Parking 1 per dwelling unit plus 1 per 10 automobile spaces . Total required: 135 Total Provided: 185 Yes Open Area/ DORA No specific percentage with PUD 12.2% N/A Landscaping Replacement diameter: 180 caliper inches New req uired: Trees: 114 overstory Shrubs: 1,101 Replacement provided: 308 caliper inches Provided: Trees: 108 overstory + 13 ornamental (equals 114.5 overstory) Shrubs: 239 – alternative landscaping methods proposed Yes Setbacks Set by PUD ordinance North: 17.8 feet East : 17.85 feet West : 24.7 feet Yes Mechanical Equipment Full screening required Yes Sidewalks Required along Wooddale Avenue (west property line) Yes Refuse handling Full screening required Yes Stormwater Management Meet state and city requirements Yes Use: The project is a single -phase residential development with one multi-family building. It includes a combination of one -, two-, and three-bedroom units. Interior amenities include community and fitness rooms, and a community room on the top floor of the building. Unit Type Number of Units Number of Bedrooms One bedroom 27 97 Two bedroom 53 106 Three bedroom 34 102 Total 114 305 Inclusionary housing policy: In 2019, city council amended the inclusionary housing policy to require any residential development that requires a comprehensive plan amendment or a planned unit development rezoning, adhere to the city’s inclusionary housing policy. The required City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 13 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments breakdown is 20 percent of units at 60 percent area median income (AMI), 10 percent of units at 50 percent AMI, or 5 percent of units at 30 percent AMI. The applicant can choose what percentage of affordability they would like to provide. The applicant has also applied for city financial assistance through the utilization of a housing Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district. A housing TIF district requires at least 20 percent of the units be available at 50 percent AMI per Minnesota state statute . The proposed apartment building would be an all-affordable development with rents ranging from 30 percent area median income to 60 percent area median income. The development exceeds the city’s inclusionary housing policy requirements as amended in October 2021, which requires at least 20 percent of the units be affordable at 60 percent area median income. The 114-unit building includes a combination of one -, two-, and three-bedroom units with five units at 30 percent area median income (AMI), five units at 50 percent AMI, and 104 units at 60 percent AMI. Unit Type 30% AMI 50% AMI 60% AMI Total units 1-bedroom 2 2 23 27 2-bedroom 2 2 49 53 3-bedroom 1 1 32 34 Total 5 5 104 114 A deve lopment of this size is required to provide at least four three-bedroom units. The Developer plans to include 33 three -bedroom units in the building’s unit mix, exceeding the requirements by 29 units, to further the city’s goals for family -sized housing. Climate action plan: The development will adhere to the city’s green building policy as amended in July 2020 and intends to follow Enterprise Green Communities/Energy Star Program with the Minnesota Overlay as its design rating system. The development will also include the following sustainable features: •A 40-53 kw rooftop solar array •LED lighting •Low VOC paint and adhesives •Energy Start appliances and windows •High efficiency magic paks •Recycled content in construction material •Recycled construction waste •Low flow water fixtures •Soil and asbestos remediation. Architectural design: The building design is a modern aesthetic with a warm and natural-toned color palette. Proposed class 1 building materials include cultured stone veneer and glazing. Vehicular parking: The zoning ordinance requires one off-street parking space for every one - bedroom, 1.25 parking spaces for every two-bedroom, and two parking spaces for every three- City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 14 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments bedroom unit, plus added 5 percent for guest parking. The applicant proposes 27 one -bedroom units, 53 two -bedroom units, and 34 three-bedroom units, so 184 parking spaces are required. Parking is provided in two surface lots, with 27 spaces on the north side of the property and 63 spaces on the west side of the property. The underground parking garage provides 117 parking spaces, for a total of 207 parking spaces on site. Staff find the project meets vehicular parking requirements. Electric vehicle parking: The zoning ordinance requires multi-family uses with 50 or more parking spaces to provide level 2 electric vehicle (EV) charging for 10% of the required parking spaces, with EV serving at least one handicapped parking space; and conduit for an 50% of required parking spaces for future level 2 EV charging stations. The proposed plans provide 21 level 2 charging stations for residents in the underground parking garage, one of which is handicapped accessible , and conduit serving an additional 71 parking spaces. Staff find the project meets EV parking requirements. Bicycle parking: The zoning ordinance requires one bicycle parking space per unit plus one bicycle parking space for every 10 vehicular parking spaces, so the project must have a minimum of 135 bicycle parking spaces. The proposed plans provide 185 bicycle parking spaces in wall-mounted racks in the underground parking level, three dedicated bike storage rooms in the underground parking level, and exterior bike racks near the main pedestrian entrance to the building. Staff find the project meets bicycle parking requirements. Landscaping: A total of 181 caliper inches of significant trees are being removed from the site. The city’s tree replacement calculation requires 170 caliper inches be replaced. The plan shows replanting 308 caliper inches as part of the development, meeting the city’s tree replacement requirements. For planting requirements, the zoning ordinance requires 114 overstory trees and 1,101 shrubs on the site. The plans propose 108 overstory trees and 13 o rnamental trees, which count as 6.5 overstory trees, providing 114.5 total tree equivalent, and 239 shrubs. Code allows for alternative landscaping measures to meet the intent of the landscape ordinance including but not limited to outdoor amenity areas, playgrounds, and outdoor space located on the roof. Staff find the project’s proposed landscaping and alternative landscaping meets the city’s planting requirement, and will continue to work with the developer as they further refine these elements in the plans. Designed outdoor recreation area (DORA): There is no minimum DORA requirement for planned unit developments. The proposed plans have 12.2% of the site area designated as DORA and includes a rooftop deck, ground floor amenity deck, dog run, tot lot, and private landscaped walkway with seating areas. Signs: A sign plan was not submitted for review. The site will be required to adhere to the sign requirements for the R-C high density multiple family residence zoning district . Utilities : All utility services to the building will be placed underground. Utility service structures, such as a generator or transformer, will be screened completely from off-site w ith materials consistent with the main building facade. Per the development agreement, buildings will provide the necessary infrastructure to take advantage of fiber-optic service lines in the vicinity of the development. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 15 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Green building policy: The development will adhere to the city’s green building policy and Real Estate Equities intends to exceed the city’s requirements. Neighborhood meeting: The developer held two meetings with the neighborhood. The developer held an initial meeting with the neighborhood on September 28, 2021. The meeting was well- attended, with at least 25 in-person attendees. Comments and concerns raised by attendees focused on increased traffic in the neighborhood, vehicle access to the southern portion of the site, increased density in the neighborhood, having affordable housing in the neighborhood, lack of green space on the site, and not enough parking on the site. The developer addressed these concerns and made changes to the site’s design. Based in part on the input at that meeting, the city commissioned a traffic study and Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit prior to the developer submitting formal applications A virtual neighborhood meeting was held on February 3, 2022. The developers presented their development proposal for the site. There were approximately 20 attendees at the meeting, as well as city staff, members of the development team, and city councilmembers representing the area. Attendees asked questions about the number of residents expected through the development and how that would impact the residential area to the west, impacts of traffic due to the south driveway access being added back to the site, overall impact on the neighborhood with so many different developments being approved, and inquiries about on-site amenities and ways to promote walking and bicycling connections for the apartment. The developer answered questions related to the site’s design, and city staff answered questions about traffic and overall planning for the neighborhood. The recording of this meeting has been posted on the city’s development projects webpage. Planning Commission: The planning commission held a public hearing and considered the applications at a special meeting on March 23, 2022. Nine members of the public made comments on the proposal. There were also seven written comments provided to the planning commission for their consideration. The comments reflected those expressed at previous neighborhood meetings. Commenters were particularly opposed to the south access of the property, raising concerns about safety related to an increase in traffic going through the neighborhood. There were comments supporting the need for a left turn lane on Wooddale Avenue. Other comments reflected that the density was inappropriate for the site, a medium density development would be preferred. The co mmission commented on the need for more affordable units in the city, but felt that the south access to the site was not necessary for the site to succeed. The commission noted that the future residents of the apartment will be part of the neighborhood and they will also want quiet streets without significant traffic. Questions were asked about the left turn lane from Wooddale, and if the south access was removed, the commission thought the turn lane would be even more important to pursue with MnDOT. The commission voted 4-0 to recommend approval of the applications, with the condition that the south access be removed. Next steps: City council is scheduled to hold a second reading of the PUD ordinance on April 18, 2022. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 16 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments The EDA will be receiving a report on the business terms regarding applications for tax increment financing (TIF ) on April 25, 2022, and the establishment of a TIF district is tentatively scheduled for June 6, 2022. Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Wooddale Avenue Apartments development comprehensive plan amendment. The amendment includes changes to the land use designation for the subject site from CIV – civic to RH – high density residential as described in the report and depicted in the attached exhibit. Staf f recommends approval of the vacation of the roadway easement described in Quit Claim Deed Doc. No. 4934584 by the City of St. Louis Park. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary and final plat Wooddale Avenue Apartments Addition subject to the conditions in the draft resolution: Staff recommends approval of the preliminary and f inal planned unit development for 3801 Wooddale Avenue South subject to the following conditions: 1.The site shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved official e xhibits, 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 plan ning 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 p ublic 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 cre dit 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. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 17 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments b.Final construction plans for all public improvements and private stormwater system shall be signed by a registered engineer and submitted to the city e ngineer 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. 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 e ngineer (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 manage ment system shall be installed in accordance with the official e xhibits. 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. Supporting documents: comprehensive plan amendment exhibit, zoning map amendment exhibit; draft PUD ordinance; official exhibits; site renderings; traffic study; traffic audit; MnDOT comments and city engineering responses; unofficial planning commission meeting minutes, comments submitted by public for public hearing Comprehensive plan amendment exhibit Page 18 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Zoning map amendment exhibit Page 19 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 20 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution supporting the approval of an amendment to the 2040 Comprehensive Plan for the City of St. Louis Park under Minnesota Statues 462.351 for the property located at 3801 Wooddale Avenue South . 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 March 23, 2022; and Whereas, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission; and Whereas, the contents of Planning Case File 22-02-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 3801 Wooddale Avenue South from CIV – civic and ROW – right of way to RH – high density residential. 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 April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 21 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments 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 April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk 5-126: Figure 5-5. 2040 Future Land Use MapPage 22 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 23 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments 5—129: Table 5.2 2040 Future land use Plan Future Land Use Gross Acres Net Acres % Net RL - Low Density Residential 2520.67 2484.21 35.96% RM - Medium Density Residential 397.44 381.18 5.52% RH – High Density Residential 224.81 228.10 216.17 219.46 3.13% 3.18% MX - Mixed Use 52.81 52.81 0.76% TOD - Transit Oriented Development 82.62 82.62 1.20% COM - Commercial 254.77 254.44 3.68% OFC - Office 229.31 212.16 3.07% BP - Business Park 103.81 103.65 1.50% IND - Industrial 237.82 199.64 2.89% CIV - Civic 212.66 209.97 207.07 204.38 3.00% 2.96% PRK - Park and Open Space 916.67 557.54 8.07% ROW - Right of Way 1515.38 1514.78 1507.01 1506.41 21.81% 21.80% RRR - Railroad 159.97 150.80 2.18% Water/Wetlands 0.00 499.44 7.23% Total 6908.74 6908.74 100.00% City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 24 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Ordinance No. ____-22 An ordinance vacating a roadway easement Portions of Turnback Area Per Quit Claim Deed Doc. No. 4934584 located between Highway 100 and Wooddale Avenue right-of-way The City of St. Louis Park does ordain: Section 1. The petition to vacate the turnback area right-of -way was initiated by the City of St. Louis Park. The notice of said petition has been published in the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor on March 24, 2022, and the City Council has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the right-of-way is not needed for public purposes, and that is it for the best interest of the public that said right-of-way be vacated. Section 2. The following described right-of-way as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, and depicted on the attached Exhibit “A”, is vacated: (Per Quit Claim Deed Doc. No. 4934584) That part of Tract A described below: Tract A: That part of Government Lot 1 of Section 21, Township 117 North, Range 21 West, Hennepin County, Minnesota, lying northeasterly of the northeasterly boundary line of Wooddale Avenue (formerly Pleasant Avenue); which lies easterly of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet westerly of Line 1 described below and westerly of Line 2 described below: Line 1: Beginning at a point on the southeasterly line of Lot 2, Block 1, Meadowbrook Addition, according to the plat thereof on file and of record in the Office of the County Recorder in and for Hennepin County, distant 41.0 feet southwesterly of the southeast corner thereof; thence run northerly to a point on the northwesterly boundary of said Block 1, distant 77.4 feet southwesterly of the northeast corner of said Block 1; thence continue northerly along the last described course for a distance of 693.7 feet; thence deflect to the right on a 1 degree 45 minute 00 second curve having a radius of 3274.17 feet and a length of 1575.2 feet, for 750.0 feet and there terminating. Line 2: Beginning at the point of intersection of a line run parallel with and distant 100 feet westerly of Line 1 described above, with the north line of said Section 21; thence run southeasterly to a point distant 70 feet westerly (measured at right angles) of a point on said Line 1, distant 139.7 feet southerly of its point of termination; thence run southerly to a point distant City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 25 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments 65 feet westerly (measured at right angles) of a point on said Line 1, distant 339.7 feet southerly of its point of termination; thence run southerly to a point distant 60 feet westerly (measured at right angles) of a point on said Line 1, distant 439.7 feet southerly of its point of termination; thence run southerly parallel with said Line 1 for 250 feet (measured along said Line 1); thence run southerly to a point on the southwesterly boundary line of said Wooddale Avenue, distant 350 feet southeasterly of its intersection with the northerly boundary line of Cambridge Street (formerly Oak Street) and there terminating. Toge ther with that part of Tract A hereinbefore described, adjoining and westerly of the above described strip, which lies southeasterly of the following described line: Beginning at the point of intersection of the northerly boundary of said Cambridge Street with the southwesterly boundary line of said Wooddale Avenue; thence run northeasterly at right angles to the southwesterly boundary line of said Wooddale Avenue for 150 feet and there terminating. Section 3. The City Clerk is instructed to record a certified copy of this ordinance in the Office of the Hennepin County Recorder or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Section 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon City Council approval of the Wooddale Avenue Apartments Addition final plat by Resolution ___ and no sooner than 15 days after publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 18, 2022 Kim Keller, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney First reading April 4, 2022 Second reading April 18, 2022 Date of publication April 28, 2022 Date ordinance takes effect Upon city council authorization of the associated Wooddale Avenue Apartments final plat and no sooner than May 13, 2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 26 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Exhibit “A” City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 27 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution approving preliminary and final plat of Wooddale Avenue Apartments, 3801 Wooddale Avenue South Whereas, Real Estate Equities, LLC 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 Wooddale Avenue Apartments is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordin ances, 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 adoption of Ordinance No. ___ vacating a roadway easement on the property by the City of St. Louis Park. 2.The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved official exhibits, and city code. 3.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. 4.Prior to the city signing and releasing the final plat to the developer for filing with Hennepin County: a.City council approval of the right-of-way vacation. 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: ii.The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to, sidewalks, boulevards, and the execution of necessary easements related to such improvements. iii.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 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 28 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments corners, and the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. iv.The applicant shall reimburse city attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final plat approval. v.The mayor and city manager are authorized to execute the planning development contract. 5.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 $171,000 and trail dedication fee of $25,650 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. 6.The on-site underground storm water management systems shall be designed with city engineers to accommodate regional storm water collection. The regional storm water collection system shall require an easement and a shared access agreement with the city. 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 re quired 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 exe cution 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 April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 29 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Exhibit "A" Parcel 1 All of the following described Tract: The South 81.61 feet of Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10; Lot 3, Block 9, That part of Lot 2, Block 9, lying South of the Westerly extension of the North line of the South 81.61 feet of said Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10; That part of the vacated alley adjoining said Block 10 on the South lying between the extensions across it of the West line of Lot 1 and the East line of Lot 10 of said Block, and including that part of vacated alley adjoining said Block 9 on the South lying between the extensions across it of the Southwesterly and East lines of Lot 3 of said Block; and including that part of vacated Xenwood Avenue lying between the Westerly extensions across it of the North line of the South 81.61 feet of said Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10 and the South line of vacated alley adjoining said Block 10 on the South, Except that part thereof designated and delineated as Parcel 5 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of WayPlat No. 27-11, All in "Collins' Second Addition To St. Louis Park". Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 765441. Parcel 2 That part of Government Lot One (1) of Section Twenty-one (21), Township One Hundred Seventeen (117), North, Range Twenty-one (21), West of the 5th Principal Meridian lying Northeasterly, of the center line of Wooddale Avenue and Northerly and Westerly of State Highway No. 100, Hennepin County, Minnesota. (Abstract Property) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 30 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Ordinance No. ____-22 Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park City Code relating to zoning by creating Section 36-268-PUD 23 as a Planned Unit Development Zoning District for the property located at 3801 Wooddale Avenue South. 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. 22-04-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance Section 36-268-PUD 23. Sect ion 2. The city council voted on April 4, 2022, to approve Resolution No____ amending the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the future land use designation for the subject property located at 3801 Wooddale Avenue South from Civic to High Density Residential. Said comprehensive plan amendment is associated with this ordinance and requires Metropolitan Council review and authorization to put it into effect. Secti o n 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from R3-Two Family Residence to PUD 23: Lot 1, Block 1, Wooddale Avenue Apartments, Hennepin County, Minnesota Secti on 4. 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 23 (a)Development Plan. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD signed Official Exhibits: 1.C Preliminary Plat 2.C Final Plat 3.C ALTA -NSPS Land Title Survey 4.C Easement Vacation Exhibit 5.C EX-1 DORA Exhibit 6.C Storm Report 7.C1-1 Demolition Plan 8.C2.1 Site Plan 9.C3-1 Grading Plan 10.C3-2 SWPPP 11.C3-3 SWPPP Notes 12.C4.1 Sanitary Sewer & Water Main Plan 13. C4.2 Storm Sewer Plan 14.C8-1 City Details 15.C8-2 Civil Notes 16.A1.0 Project Data 17.A2.0 Site Plan 18.A3.0 Floor Plans – Level -1 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 31 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments 19.A3.1 Floor Plans – Level 1 20.A3.2 Floor Plans – Levels 2 & 3 21.A3.3 Floor Plans – Level 4 22.A3.4 Roof Plan 23.A4.2 Elevations 24.A6.0 Exterior Material Sch edule 25.L1-1 Landscape Plan 26.L1-2 Landscape Details 27.LI Site Photometrics Plan 28.LII Garage Photometrics Plan The site shall also conform to the following requirements: (1)The property shall be developed with 114 residential units. (2) 207 off-street parking spaces shall be provided. (3)The maximum building height shall not exceed 48.1 feet and four stories. (4)The development site shall include a minimum of 12.2 percent designed outdoor recreation area based on private developable land area. (b)Uses. A.Permitted uses: The following uses are permitted in PUD 23: 1.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. B.Accessory uses: Accessory uses are as follows: 1.Home occupations as regulated by this chapter. 2.Gardens. 3.Parking lots. 4.Public transit stops/shelters. 5.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 d on, or anchored in, the ground and 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. 6.Outdoor uses and outdoor storage are prohibited. 7.Communication towers are prohibited. (c)Special Performance Standards City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 32 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments A.All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, transparency, architectural design, landscaping, parking, and screening requirements. B.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. C.Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the R-C High Density Multiple -Family Residence Zoning District and shall comply with the following: 1.Pylon signs shall be prohibited. D.Awnings. 1.Awnings shall be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. 2.Backlit awnings shall be prohibited. Sect ion 5. The contents of Planning Case File 22-02-CP, 22-03-S, 22-04-PUD, and 22-09-VAC are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sect ion 6. This ordinance shall take effect upon Metropolitan Council authorization of the associated comprehensive plan amendment approved by Resolution ___ and no sooner than 15 days after publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 18, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading April 4, 2022 Second reading April 18, 2022 Date of publication April 28, 2022 Date ordinance takes effect Upon Metropolitan council authorization of the associated comprehensive plan amendment and no sooner than May 13, 2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 33 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments DRAFT MINUTES Planning commission Members present: Jim Beneke, Matt Eckholm, Jessica Kraft, Michael Salzer Members absent: Tom Weber, Joffrey Wilson Staff present: Laura Chamberlain, Sean Walther 1. Call to order – roll call 2. Approval of minutes - none 3. Hearings 3a. Wooddale Avenue Apartments Applicant: Real Estate Equities Case No: 22-02-CP, 22-03-S, 22-04-PUD Ms. Chamberlain presented the report. Chair Beneke asked if there is no way to cut through this land without going through the parking garage. Ms. Chamberlain stated that is correct and presented this information on the slide, noting that only those using the garage will have the southern access. Chair Beneke asked if there is any other potential development in that area in the future. Ms. Chamberlain stated there is possibility of developments near the light rail station. Mr. Walther added there are still parcels to be developed but no plans beyond the Wooddale Station development at this time. He added someday the Micro Center and Burlington sites may be developed. Other areas are on 36th Street and Alabama Avenue, the former Jonny Pops site, owned by Nordic Ware. He also noted there has been interest in the Jessen Press building as well but nothing has formally been submitted. Commissioner Salzer asked if primary access for the garage is from the north. Ms. Chamberlain stated yes and added there is a secondary access to the south, as well. Commissioner Salzer asked about fee -based parking in the garage. Ms. Chamberlain stated the developer could answer that. She noted the garage parking is not included in the monthly rent, however, they will comply with the city’s inclusionary housing policy. Commissioner Salzer asked if there are any sound barriers being added in the area as it is so close to Highway 100. Ms. Chamberlain stated not to her knowledge and no indication from MNDOT on this either. Chair Beneke opened the public hearing. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 34 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Alex Bisanz, partner at Real Estate Equities, introduced himself and his team who are available to answer questions. Andy Wenzel, 5607 Cambridge Street, asked what the reason is for the new Cambridge access. He also noted the traffic and 70% of access will come through Highway 100 or 7 and noted those are folks that have a garage. He asked if there will be restrictions for on-street parking in front of the development if it passes. Dale Tatarek, 5826 Cambridge Street, stated he was not sure how the traffic study was done and noted streets have already been narrowed. He noted there are traffic jams occurring and could affect this area. He also noted Jonny Pops is moving out and he worries about parking in the area. He also noted the SWLRT adding there will be issues there and it would cost more to cancel the project vs. building the light rail project. He noted there is parking at the Louisiana Station and not at the Wooddale Station; maybe if it were eliminated it would save costs, as well. Ali Keyes, 3816 Wooddale Avenue, asked about minimum parking requirements and now we hear the garages will cost more. She asked about noise and light pollution with putting in 450 additional residents across from her home. She added the Micro Center and Burlington projects are staying but we do not know for how long. She noted the landscaping does not meet the minimum requirement and asked where will it be planted and placed. Luke Hodgdon, 5924 Cambridge Street, stated he is not aware of the traffic audit and where the numbers are coming from. He stated this will impact Cambridge Street and using the light rail as leverage for this whole development. With Jonny Pops leaving, the traffic coming through this area of Wooddale and Alabama will impact the neighborhood. He added there are many children in the neighborhood and all this added traffic and construction will be highly impactful. He fears for children’s safety and overall lifestyle of those living in the area. Daryl Eastburg, 3944 Xenwood Avenue South, asked in the winter, to keep the lots clean, where will all the snow go. He stated if there is less parking because of snow, they will park in the streets. Brian Fuchs, 5818 Goodrich Avenue South, noted traffic is addressed, but the MNDOT recommendation is to add a left turn lane. The packet stated the traffic will not be impactful in the area. He stated this site will create significantly more traffic and that intersection should be reviewed and redeveloped as well. He stated the recommendation from MNDOT and the traffic study should be required. Blake Chaffee, 5713 Cambridge Street, stated he opposes the project and the change in zoning. He stated the density is not reasonable and the traffic into the Elmwood neighborhood is not reasonable. He added there used to be some access behind the church allowing cut through traffic and people drove very fast there. He stated this will create more traffic problems than they had before and that is a safety issue; it is too much. He stated there is a place for this sort of development but not in a residential area. He has serious concerns and hopes this will not move forward. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 35 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Ben Petersen, 3940 Xenwood Avenue South, noted the traffic study said 400 trips at the church per day, not 200 which seems more reasonable, but the delta of 85 seems unrealistic. He added if street parking becomes an issue, restrictive parking would be added and he would support that if needed. Joel Coleman, 5900 Cambridge Street, stated he also is worried about the traffic impact and the size of development in the neighborhood. He stated Jonny Pops make sense but this single development will add 30% of new residents to the neighborhood, which is 500 people. He stated this might not be the best place to add this high density to this quiet neighborhood. He stated high density would be better in the Burlington parking lot area instead. Ali Keyes, 3816 Wooddale Avenue, asked if anyone has consulted with the Fire Department and impacts to them. Andy Wenzel, 5607 Cambridge Street, stated he would like to know how many housing units have been added in St. Louis Park in the last 20 years and how many new parks have been added in the last 20 years. He noted this site would be a perfect place for a park, to handle all the new housing destined for the area. Chair Beneke closed the public hearing. Mr. Walther answered questions raised during the public hearing. He stated the Cambridge south access was removed initially in the concept plans and then after the traffic study results, it was at staff’s request that they include the south access again. This was because of the relatively low number of resulting trips to and from the south access. He noted staff presented that information at the February neighborhood meeting. He stated the neighborhood felt the south access was undesirable. There were concerns from neighbors about the intersection at the Wooddale cul du sac intersection, as well. He noted the traffic study concluded that any of the access scenarios would work at the site with little or no impact to the level of service. He stated this site is adjacent to the existing public street at Wooddale and prohibiting any access to it from this site did not seem reasonable to city staff. Mr. Walther added the Fire Department was consulted on the project and there were no concerns with traffic at this site. He noted there was some benefit with the south access for the Fire Department as well for emergency response to the building. Mr. Walther stated the parking here meets city requirements and they used the standard counts under the city ordinance. He noted the garage parking was always proposed to be at a fee and discussed at the first neighborhood meeting. He noted right now parking in allowed on Wooddale south of the cul-de -sac and it is wide enough to accommodate parking on both sides. Staff did not see a reason people would need to park there but added people would be able to park there. He stated any limitations on parking can be looked at later but staff does not expect it to be a problem at this time. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 36 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Mr. Walther stated the Jonny Pops business is relocating to a different city. The property owner has said they will continue use the building as a warehouse and have no current interest in redevelopment at this site. Mr. Walther stated 2027 is now the projected opening of SWLRT and noted they did not discount the traffic generated by the development in the traffic study or required parking based on the future SWLRT. He noted noise and light pollution usually does not generate complaints and the lighting ordinance is rather strict to avoid nuisances. He noted the lighting will face downward and not spill over into the adjacent properties. He noted the landscaping plan has fewer shrubs than required; this is not unusual for this type of development. The code includes a provision for alternative landscaping that are not plantings and include amenities such as the tot lot paly equipment and dog run. He added the ordinance does not allow for snow to be stored on required parking spaces and must be pushed onto the green space or hauled away. Mr. Walther stated the left turn lane was recommended to be explored in the traffic study and MNDOT suggested it should be installed. However, he added this does not guarantee MNDOT will approve the turn lane. He noted staff is exploring this left turn lane further. He added it is not included as a condition of approval because the city and developer do fully control the decision; MNDOT will have the final say on this. Mr. Walther stated the number of new households added in the last 20 years can be found in the comprehensive plan on the city’s website. Commissioner Salzer asked about the minimum parking requirement and if they are based on the old or new requirement. Mr. Walther stated they are based on the new requirement. The applicant, Link Wilson, Kass Wilson Architects, stated they are sensitive to the comments made this evening. He stated both parking lots are entered from the north and do not go to the south, and that is 90 stalls. He added at peak times he would only see 59 coming and going during peak hours. He stated there are 235 total units with 27 one - bedrooms, 53 two -bedrooms, and 34 three-bedrooms. Mr. Wilson noted some would not have drivers in those units and with light rail, will be a year out from that. He stated they do not have any objection to signs but added they do meet the city ordinance. He stated all they do is multi-family housing and this is a very good multi-family site which creates a sound barrier from Highway 100. He noted the Towerlight project which his firm did, was very controversial, but now has become a neighborhood amenity. He added the interior finishes they use are high quality and create a condo-like feel to the units. Mr. Wilson added they pulled the building back as far as they could from the neighborhood and is buffered by as much landscaping as possible. Commissioner Salzer asked about the buffer and if there is a sidewalk included. Mr. Wilson stated there will be a sidewalk that connects all the way north to south. Mr. Walther added the sidewalk is currently at the back of the curb of the road and will be rebuilt with a six City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 37 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments foot wide boulevard, a six foot wide sidewalk, and berming and landscaping between the sidewalk and parking lot. Commissioner Salzer asked if there will be onsite management. Mr. Wilson stated yes and noted there will be 24-hour staff onsite. Commissioner Kraft stated after listening to the comments and reviewing the traffic study, she still has some concerns about the traffic overall and the left turn will be a concern, as well. She added at peak times that is a concern that should be addressed and will be critical since much of that traffic will be turning there. She also had concerns about the south entrance and that traffic and potential for speeding through the neighborhood. She stated perhaps the south entrance should be reconsidered. Stated overall in terms of use of this site for multi-family, she thinks that is a good use for it. She added she likes how the architecture steps down, how the is site is closer to the highway, and provides a buffer to the neighborhood. Commissioner Eckholm stated he is supportive of the project but does believe the south entrance is extraneous and they should strongly consider taking it out. He stated he is supportive of the high-density development land use and affordable housing, but if the point is moot and the traffic differences are minimal no matter which access scenario is used then why have the south driveway. He added if it was an entrance only, then he may agree, but he prefers to not have it at all and keep the traffic out of the neighborhood. He added that the things that the current residents love about this neighborhood are the same things we want future residents of this site and this neighborhood to enjoy, including the safety and walkability of the neighborhood. Putting a driveway there could ruin it for everybody. He stated generally he is supportive of this project. Commissioner Salzer stated human nature will kick in and he has walked this area extensively during covid. He stated he cannot imagine many would be exiting the parking garage from the south through the neighborhood. He added he likes that it will be a natural sound barrier. He did have some concerns about the development being so close to Highway 100 and asked if more barriers could be added. He stated parking on the street should be examined and perhaps parking stickers be used. He added he is generally in support of the project. Chair Beneke added he is also generally supportive of the project, especially with the affordable units in it. He has concerns with the south exit and agrees with others to eliminate the south exit. Ali Keyes, 3816 Wooddale Avenue, stated the maximum occupancy of the building experienced in past was 60% so why cannot a smaller building be built there. Patrick Alstrom, Real Estate Equities, clarified the maximum capacity under their le ase is two residents per bedroom. He noted their experience is that actual occupancy of people living in the building is 60% of that maximum. To clarify the occupancy of units rented is usually 90-95% within the whole building. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Page 38 Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Commissioner Eckholm made a motion, and Commissioner Kraft seconded, to approve the comprehensive plan amendment, preliminary and final plat, and the preliminary and final planned unit development (PUD) subject to the conditions recommended by staff, with added condition of exploring the removal of the southern driveway access to the garage from the plan. The motion passed 4-0 (Commissioners Weber and Wilson absent). Mr. Walther stated this will go to city council on April 4, 2022, for further consideration. KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That St. Louis Park AH I, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership owner of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit: All of the following described Tract: The South 81.61 feet of Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10; Lot 3, Block 9, That part of Lot 2, Block 9, lying South of the Westerly extension of the North line of the South 81.61 feet of said Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10; That part of the vacated alley adjoining said Block 10 on the South lying between the extensions across it of the West line of Lot 1 and the East line of Lot 10 of said Block, and including that part of vacated alley adjoining said Block 9 on the South lying between the extensions across it of the Southwesterly and East lines of Lot 3 of said Block; and including that part of vacated Xenwood Avenue lying between the Westerly extensions across it of the North line of the South 81.61 feet of said Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10 and the South line of vacated alley adjoining said Block 10 on the South, Except that part thereof designated and delineated as Parcel 5 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-11. All in "Collins' Second Addition To St. Louis Park". Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 765441. AND That part of Government Lot One (1) of Section Twenty-one (21), Township One Hundred Seventeen (117), North, Range Twenty-one (21), West of the 5th Principal Meridian lying Northeasterly, of the center line of Wooddale Avenue and Northerly and Westerly of State Highway No. 100, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Has caused the same to be surveyed and platted as WOODDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS, and does hereby dedicate to the public for public use the public ways, and does also dedicate the drainage and utility easements as created by this plat. In witness whereof said St. Louis Park AH I, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership, has caused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this _______ day of _________________________, 20______. Signed: St. Louis Park AH I, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership, By: St. Louis Park AH I, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, its General Partner BY:______________________________________ Patrick R. Ostrom, Vice President STATE OF ______________________ COUNTY OF ____________________ This instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of _________________________, 20______, by Patrick R. Ostrom, the Vice President of St. Louis Park AH I, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, the General Partner of St. Louis Park AH I, LLLP, a Minnesota limited liability limited partnership, on behalf of the limited liability limited partnership. _________________________________________________________________________________ Signature Printed Name, Notary Notary Public, _______________________ County, ______________________ My Commission Expires _________________________ SURVEYORS CERTIFICATION I Steven F. Hough do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey; that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plat have been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this Plat; and all public ways are shown and labeled on this plat. Dated this ________ day of _________________________, 20______. ______________________________________________ Steven F. Hough, Licensed Land Surveyor Minnesota License No. 54850 STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN This instrument was acknowledged before me this ________ day of _________________________, 20______, by Steven F. Hough. _________________________________________________________________________________ Signature Printed Name, Notary Notary Public, ______________________County, Minnesota My Commission Expires January 31, 2025 CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SAINT LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA This plat of WOODDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS was approved and accepted by the City Council of the City of Saint Louis Park, Minnesota, at a regular meeting thereof held this ________ day of _________________________, 20______, and said plat is in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subdivision 2. City Council, City of Saint Louis Park, Minnesota By: ________________________________________, Mayor By: _________________________________________, Clerk RESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE DEPARTMENT, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that taxes payable in 20______ and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat, dated this ________ day of _________________________, 20______. Mark V. Chapin, County Auditor By: ________________________________________, Deputy SURVEY DIVISION, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 383B.565 (1969), this plat has been approved this ________ day of _________________________, 20______. Chris F. Mavis, County Surveyor By: ________________________________________ REGISTRAR OF TITLES, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that the within plat of WOODDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS was filed in this office this ________ day of _________________________, 20______, at ______ o'clock _____.M. ______________________________, Registrar of Titles By: ________________________________________, Deputy COUNTY RECORDER, Hennepin County, Minnesota I hereby certify that the within plat of WOODDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS was recorded in this office this ________ day of _________________________, 20______, at ______ o'clock _____.M. Amber Bougie, County Recorder By: ________________________________________, Deputy C.R. DOC. NO. _____________________ R.T. DOC. NO. _____________________ SHEET 1 OF 2 SHEETS LOUCKS City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 39 NNDENOTES 1/2 INCH X 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT SET, MARKED "LS 54850" C.R. DOC. NO. _____________________ R.T. DOC. NO. _____________________ SHEET 2 OF 2 SHEETS LOUCKS BEARINGS ARE BASED ON THE NORTH LINE OF THE NE 1/4 OF SEC. 21, T. 117, R. 21 HAVING A BEARING OF S89°06'36"E. DENOTES FOUND 1/2 INCH IRON MONUMENT, MARKED "LS 54850", UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED DENOTES FOUND HENNEPIN COUNTY CAST IRON MONUMENT SCALE IN FEET 0 40N LOT CORNERS THAT FALL IN THE MIDDLE OF TRAVELED RIGHT-OF-WAYS WILL NOT BE SET; UNSAFE DUE TO TRAFFIC DENOTES FOUND REBAR SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 117, RANGE 21 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA SITE VICINITY MAP N NOT TO SCALE TRUNK HIGHWAY NO. 100WOODDALEAVEON-RAMP City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 40 11 10911 23 31 1 1 N N CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com Plotted: 03 /28 / 2022 5:38 PM W:\2021\21363\CADD DATA\SURVEY\S21363-PPLAT OUCKSL CADD QUALIFICATION QUALITY CONTROL PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS ALDERSGATE METHODIST CHURCH 3801 WOODDALE AVENUE ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 REAL ESTATE EQUITIES 579 SELBY AVENUE ST. PAUL, MN 55102 SCALE IN FEET 0 40 80 N License No. Date I hereby certify that this survey, plan or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Land Surveyor under the laws of the State of VICINITY MAP Field Crew Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. Minnesota. Steven F. Hough - PLS 54850 21363 SFH NJL SFH MJA 01/17/22 SITE PRELIMINARY PLAT 1 OF 1 All of the following described Tract: The South 81.61 feet of Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10; Lot 3, Block 9, That part of Lot 2, Block 9, lying South of the Westerly extension of the North line of the South 81.61 feet of said Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10; That part of the vacated alley adjoining said Block 10 on the South lying between the extensions across it of the West line of Lot 1 and the East line of Lot 10 of said Block, and including that part of vacated alley adjoining said Block 9 on the South lying between the extensions across it of the Southwesterly and East lines of Lot 3 of said Block; and including that part of vacated Xenwood Avenue lying between the Westerly extensions across it of the North line of the South 81.61 feet of said Lots 1 to 10 inclusive, Block 10 and the South line of vacated alley adjoining said Block 10 on the South, Except that part thereof designated and delineated as Parcel 5 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No. 27-11. All in "Collins' Second Addition To St. Louis Park". Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 765441. AND That part of Government Lot One (1) of Section Twenty-one (21), Township One Hundred Seventeen (117), North, Range Twenty-one (21), West of the 5th Principal Meridian lying Northeasterly, of the center line of Wooddale Avenue and Northerly and Westerly of State Highway No. 100, Hennepin County, Minnesota. SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE CATCH BASIN CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER UNDERGROUND CABLE TV UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE ELECTRIC TRANSFORMER ELECTRIC MANHOLE TELEPHONE MANHOLE UTILITY MANHOLE GAS METER HAND HOLE UNDERGROUND GAS GUY WIRE TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAILBOX ELM BASSWOOD BOXELDER LOCUST OAK PINE SPRUCE COTTONWOOD MAPLE CONIFEROUS TREE DECIDUOUS TREE OVERHEAD UTILITY MISC FRUIT ELEV @ THRESHOLD HANDRAIL ROOF DRAINTRENCH DRAIN PARKING STALL COUNT DISABLED PARKING STALL TOP OF CURB SET 1/2 INCH X 14 INCH IRON MONUMENT, MARKED "LS 54850" FOUND OPEN IRON MONUMENT FOUND CAST IRON MONUMENT FOUND REBAR AREA DRAIN CHAIN LINK FENCE ASH 2 EXISTING BUILDING RETAINING WALL STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE UNLESS SHOWN OTHERWISE NO PARKING FIRE CONNECTION SANITARY MANHOLE STORM MANHOLE CATCH BASIN STRUCTURE RIM & INVERT MAPPED STORM SEWER MAPPED SANITARY SEWER MAPPED WATERMAIN MAPPED UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC MAPPED UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC MAPPED UNDERGROUND GAS INFORMATION AS SHOWN ON PLANS NOT FIELD VERIFIED LEGEND UTILITY VALVE AIR CONDITIONING UNIT TOP NUT HYDRANT INFORMATION PER CITY ENGINEER LEGAL DESCRIPTION GENERAL NOTES SURVEYOR: Loucks 7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55330 763-424-5505 1. Prepared January 17, 2022. 2. The address, as disclosed in documents provided to the surveyor, obtained by the surveyor, or observed while conducting the fieldwork is 3801 Wooddale Avenue, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416. 3. The bearings for this survey are based on the Hennepin County Coordinate System NAD 83 (1986 Adjust). 4. Benchmark: MnDOT Monument "2734 H" Located in St. Louis Park, 4.95 miles north along Trunk Highway 100 from the junction of Trunk Highway 100 and Interstate Highway 494 in Edina, at Trunk Highway 100 milepoint 4.95, 32.6 feet southeast of light pole number h3j 5, 30.2 feet east of the northbound Trunk Highway 100 fog line, 22.1 feet west of the ramp from northbound Trunk Highway 100 to Excelsior Boulevard (County Road 3), 1.5 feet south of a witness post. Elevation = 905.15 feet (NGVD29) Site Benchmark: Top nut hydrant located at the southwest quadrant of Wooddale Avenue and Goodrich Avenue. Elevation = 921.65 feet (NGVD29). 5. This property is contained in Zone X (areas determined to be outside the 0.2% annual chance floodplain) per Flood Insurance Rate Map No. 27053C0362F, Community Panel No. 2701840362F, effective date of 11/04/16. 6. The field work was completed on 06/17/21. OWNER/DEVELOPER: Real Estate Equities 579 Selby Avenue St. Paul, MN 55102 651-389-3800 Current Zoning: Zone Two-Family Residence (R-3) Any current zoning classification, setback requirements, height and floor space area restrictions, and parking requirements, shown hereon, are per a report or letter by the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota dated 08/27/21, for the subject property are as follows: Setback requirements were not provided by the zoning letter. Proposed Zoning: P.U.D. ZONING INFORMATION Areas: Right of Way Dedication Area = 51,265 +/- square feet or 1.18 +/- acres Net Property Area = 142,799 +/- square feet or 3.27 +/- acres Total Property Area = 194,064 +/- square feet or 4.45 +/- acres SITE DATA 01/17/22 SURVEY ISSUED 02/25/22 REVISED R/W 03/17/22 CITY COMMENTS 03/28/22 CITY COMMENTS City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 41 Vent Hood UP FD FD FDFDFDFD FD FD FD FDFD FDFD FD FD6319217161314Dog Run Tot Lot Garage Entry Front Entry Patio Pedestrian Garage Entry Bike Parking 20 21 22 5251504948474645444342414039 3738 36 555657585960 61 62 63 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 90 89 88 87 86 85 84 83 82 81 80 79 76 75 74 73 72 71 70 69 68 67 66 65 78 64 19181716151413121110987654321 53 54 Sidewalk to relocate with boulevard 77 kaas wilson architects Wooddale Avenue ApartmentsSITE PLAN 2.0 3801 Wooddale Avenue North, St. Louis Park, MN 09/22/21 20-09-A 1" = 60'-0"1 SITE PLAN NCity council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 42 Level 1 100'-0" Level 2 110'-7 7/8" Level 3 121'-3 3/4" Level 4 131'-11 5/8" 7.2 7.1 4.1 48'-0 3/4"36'-6 5/8"4.2 Level 1 100'-0" Level 2 110'-7 7/8" Level -1 88'-8" Level 3 121'-3 3/4" Level 4 131'-11 5/8" 7.1 4.1 7.24.2 48'-0 3/4"Level 1 100'-0" Level 2 110'-7 7/8" Level -1 88'-8" Level 3 121'-3 3/4" Level 4 131'-11 5/8" 7.1 4.1 4.2 48'-0 3/4"kaas wilson architects Wooddale Avenue ApartmentsELEVATIONS 4.0 3801 Wooddale Avenue North, St. Louis Park, MN 08/17/2021 20-09-A 1" = 30'-0"1 West Elevation - 1 1" = 30'-0"2 South Elevation - 2 1" = 30'-0"3 West Elevation - 2 EXTERIOR MATERIALS Material Mark Description 4.1 Cultured Stone Veneer - Bucks County Tuscan Ledge 4.2 Splitface CMU - Shadow 7.1 Metal Shake Siding - Cedar 7.2 Edco Metal Lap Siding - Glazier White City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 43 Vent Hood UP FD FD FDFDFDFD FD FD FD FDFD FDFD FD FD6319217161314Level 1 100'-0" Level 2 110'-7 7/8" Level -1 88'-8" Level 3 121'-3 3/4" Level 4 131'-11 5/8" 4-Story Truss Brg. 141'-0 3/4" kaas wilson architects Wooddale Avenue ApartmentsSITE SECTION 8.0 3801 Wooddale Avenue North, St. Louis Park, MN 09/22/21 20-09-A 1" = 30'-0"1 SITE SECTION 1" = 100'-0"2 SITE PLAN City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 44 15000 CHK 15 916.47 PROPOSED BUILDING FFE - 919.70 GFE - 908.37 PROPOSED BUILDING RAISED PATIO (SEE ARCH PLANS) ROOFTOP PATIO (SEE ARCH PLANS) DOG RUN (SEE PLANS) TOT LOT (SEE PLANS) WALKING PATH TO OPEN GREEN SPACE MULTIPLE BENCH LOCATIONS MULTIPLE BENCH LOCATIONS MULTIPLE BENCH LOCATIONS OPEN GREEN SPACE LOUCKS W:\2021\21363A\CADD DATA\LANDSCAPE\_dwg Sheet Files\EX-1 DORA EXHIBITPlotted: 03 /29 / 2022 3:34 PM7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION WOODDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS ST. LOUIS PARK, MN REAL ESTATE EQUITIES 579 SELBY AVE, ST. PAUL, MN 55102 01/18/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 02/25/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 03/17/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 03/28/21 CITY SUBMITTAL C1-1 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLANS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 SWPPP C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 SANITARY AND WATERMAIN C4-2 STORM SEWER C8-1 CITY DETAILS C8-2 CIVIL DETAILS L1-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L1-2 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Douglas D. Loken - LA Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 45591 Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No.21363A PJD DDL DDL 03/28/22 - N SCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 DORA EXHIBIT EX-1 DORA CALCULATION: SITE AREA = 142,799 SQ.FT. DORA REQUIRED ( 12% OF LOT AREA) 142,799 X 12% = 17,136 SQ.FT. MULTIPLE BENCH LOCATIONS 4,401 SF TOT LOT AND DOG RUN 4,433 SF REAR WALKING PATH AND GREEN SPACE7,007 SF OUTDOOR RAISED PATIO 733 SF ROOFTOP PATIO 850 SF TOTAL DORA PROPOSED 17,424 SQ.FT. TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 45 PROPOSED BUILDING FFE - 919.70 GFE - 908.37 9.0' 18.0' 22.0' 18.0' 18.0' 18.0' 24.0' 24.0' 18.0' 9.0' 8.0' 24.0' 24.0' 9.0' 18.0' 9.0' MAIN ENTRY (5) -BIKE RACKS (FOR 10 TOTAL BIKES) GARAGE ENTRANCE DOG RUN FLAT CURB CURB TRANSITION CURB TRANSITION B612 CURB GUTTER-TYP ADA PED. RAMP (SEE DETAILS) ADA PED. RAMP (SEE DETAILS) ADA PED. RAMP (SEE DETAILS) ADA PED. RAMP (SEE DETAILS) CONCRETE APRON (SEE DETAIL) CONCRETE APRON (SEE DETAIL) HC SIGN-TYP PROPOSED BUILDING CURB/GUTTER/ PAVEMENT SECTION (TO MATCH EXISTING) R3.0' R3.0' R3.0' R3.0' R3.0' R10.0' R3.0' CONCRETE BLOCK WALL W/ORNAMENTAL FENCE TOT LOT 6.0' 5.0' 11.0' 5.0' 8.0' RAISED PATIO (SEE ARCH PLANS) R3.0'R3.0'R10.0' R3.0' R8.0' R8.0'R3.0' R6.0' R6.0' R50.0' R74.0' R3.0'R3.0'R3.0' R8.0'R3.0' R32.0' 24.0' 24.0' 24.7' 17.8' 57.0' 31.7' CMU BLOCK RETAINING WALL (SEE GRADING PLAN) 5.0' 6.0' MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION AND CURB/GUTTER STYLE 5.0' 35.7' TRASH INSIDE GARAGE TRASH TO BE HAULED OUT ON TRASH DAY 6.0' 6.0' 45.0' CONCRETE BLOCK WALL W/ORNAMENTAL FENCE 3'x6' CONCRETE PAD FOR BENCH - TYP 3'x6' CONCRETE PAD FOR BENCH - TYP 5' WIDE CONCRETE WIDE WALKING PATH LOUCKS W:\2021\21363A\CADD DATA\CIVIL\_dwg Sheet Files\C2-1 SITE PLANPlotted: 03 /29 / 2022 10:17 AM7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION WOODDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS ST. LOUIS PARK, MN REAL ESTATE EQUITIES 579 SELBY AVE, ST. PAUL, MN 55102 01/18/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 02/25/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 03/17/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 03/28/21 CITY SUBMITTAL C1-1 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLANS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 SWPPP C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 SANITARY AND WATERMAIN C4-2 STORM SEWER C8-1 CITY DETAILS C8-2 CIVIL DETAILS L1-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L1-2 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the laws of the State of Minnesota. PJ Disch - PE Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No. 49933 21363A PJD DDL PJD 03/28/22 - N SCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 SITE PLAN C2-1 PARKING STALL COUNT ACCESSIBLE PARKING STALL 2 LEGEND CATCH BASIN STORM SEWER SANITARY SEWER WATERMAIN STORM MANHOLE SANITARY MANHOLE HYDRANT GATE VALVE SPOT ELEVATION SIGN LIGHT POLE POWER POLE WATER MANHOLE / WELL CONTOUR CONCRETE CURB UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC CONCRETE TELEPHONE PEDESTAL UNDERGROUND TELEPHONE UNDERGROUND GAS OVERHEAD UTILITY CHAIN LINK FENCE BUILDING RETAINING WALL NO PARKING UNDERGROUND FIBER OPTIC SANITARY SEWER SERVICE WATER SERVICE ELECTRIC METER GAS METER TREE LINE EXISTING PROPOSED 972 DRAINTILE FORCEMAIN PARKING SETBACK LINE BUILDING SETBACK LINE 2 FENCE FLARED END SECTION POST INDICATOR VALVE BENCHMARK SOIL BORING DIRECTION OF FLOW 1.0% 972.5 1. MINNESOTA STATE STATUTE REQUIRES NOTIFICATION PER "GOPHER STATE ONE CALL" PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY GRADING, EXCAVATION OR UNDERGROUND WORK. 2. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY LOCATIONS AND ELEVATIONS OF EXISTING UTILITIES AND TOPOGRAPHIC FEATURES PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY DISCREPANCIES OR VARIATIONS FROM THE PLANS. 3. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AND MAINTAINING TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SUCH AS BARRICADES, WARNING SIGNS, DIRECTIONAL SIGNS, FLAGMEN AND LIGHTS TO CONTROL THE MOVEMENT OF TRAFFIC WHERE NECESSARY. PLACEMENT OF THESE DEVICES SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE ENGINEER PRIOR TO PLACEMENT. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL CONFORM TO THE APPROPRIATE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARDS. 4.ALL PAVING, CONCRETE CURB, GUTTER AND SIDEWALK SHALL BE FURNISHED AND INSTALLED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DETAILS SHOWN PER THE DETAIL SHEET(S) AND STATE/LOCAL JURISDICTION REQUIREMENTS. 5.ACCESSIBLE PARKING AND ACCESSIBLE ROUTES SHALL BE PROVIDED PER CURRENT ADA STANDARDS AND LOCAL/STATE REQUIREMENTS. 6.ALL CURB DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE TO THE FACE OF CURB UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 7.ALL BUILDING DIMENSIONS ARE TO THE OUTSIDE FACE OF WALL UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 8.TYPICAL FULL SIZED PARKING STALL IS 9' X 18' WITH A 24' WIDE TWO WAY DRIVE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 9.ALL CURB RADII SHALL BE 3.0' UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 10.BITUMINOUS IMPREGNATED FIBER BOARD TO BE PLACED AT FULL DEPTH OF CONCRETE ADJACENT TO EXISTING STRUCTURES AND BEHIND CURB ADJACENT TO DRIVEWAYS AND SIDEWALKS. 11.SEE SITE ELECTRICAL PLAN FOR SITE LIGHTING. 12.ANY EXISTING CONCRETE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PUBLIC SIDEWALKS, CURB AND GUTTER, AND ADA PEDESTRIAN RAMPS, THAT IS EITHER CURRENTLY DEFECTIVE OR THAT IS DAMAGED DURING THE TIME OF SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT, MUST BE REMOVED AND REPLACED AT TEH TIME OF SITE RE-DEVELOPMENT. 13.SNOW TO BE REMOVED FROM SITE AS NEEDED TO KEEP ALL PARKING STALLS OPEN. SITE PLAN LEGEND CONCRETE SIDEWALK BITUMINOUS PAVEMENT CURRENT ZONING:R-3 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENCE PROPOSED ZONING:P.U.D. RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION:51,265 ± SF NET PROPERTY AREA:142,799 ± SF TOTAL PROPERTY AREA :194,064 ± SF EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA: 89,247 SF (62.5%) PROPOSED IMPERVIOUS AREA: 82,705 SF (57.9%) SITE DATA HEAVY-DUTY CONCRETE PAVEMENT ELEVATION NOTES 919.50 = ARCHITECTURAL 100' 0" (VERIFY WITH ARCHITECTURAL) OFF-STREET PARKING CALCULATIONS TOTAL PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING PROVIDED = 90 STALLS (INCLUDES 4 ADA STALLS) PROPOSED GARAGE = 117 STALLS (INCLUDES 3 ADA STALLS) TOTAL STALLS = 207 STALLS SITE NOTES TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 46 DECIDUOUS TREES QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME CONT SIZE AM 16 ARMSTRONG MAPLE Acer freemanii `Armstrong`B & B 2.5"Cal BL 14 BOULEVARD LINDEN Tilia americana `Boulevard`B & B 2.5"Cal IH 9 IMPERIAL HONEYLOCUST Gleditsia triacanthos `Impcole` TM B & B 2.5"Cal SGM 19 SIENNA GLEN MAPLE Acer freemanii `Sienna Glen`B & B 2.5"Cal SKH 3 SKYLINE HONEYLOCUST Gleditsia triacanthos `Skycole`B & B 2.5"Cal WB 10 WHITESPIRE BIRCH CLUMP Betula populifolia `Whitespire Sr.`B & B 8` HGT EVERGREEN TREES QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME CONT SIZE AP 11 AUSTRIAN PINE FULL FORM Pinus nigra B & B 6` HGT BS 24 BLACK HILLS SPRUCE FULL FORM Picea glauca `Densata`B & B 6` HGT NOP 2 NORWAY PINE FULL FORM Pinus resinosa B & B 6` HGT ORNAMENTAL TREES QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME CONT SIZE PC 3 PRAIRIFIRE CRABAPPLE Malus x `Prairifire`B & B 1.5"Cal SSC 10 SPRING SNOW CRABAPPLE Malus x `Spring Snow`B & B 1.5"Cal SHRUBS QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME MIN CONT MIN SIZE AD 11 ARCTIC FIRE DOGWOOD Cornus sericea `Artic Fire`5 gal 24" HGT CV 29 COMPACT AMERICAN VIBURNUM Viburnum trilobum `Bailey Compact` 5 gal 24" HGT GC 37 GLOSSY BLACK CHOKEBERRY Aronia melanocarpa elata 5 gal 24" HGT GAC 14 GREEN MOUND ALPINE CURRANT Ribes alpinum `Green Mound`5 gal 24" HGT INH 4 INCREDIBALL HYDRANGEA Hydrangea arborescens `Incrediball` 5 gal 24" HGT ML 11 MISS KIM LILAC Syringa patula `Miss Kim`5 gal 24" HGT GRASSES QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME MIN CONT MIN SIZE FG 138 FEATHER REED GRASS Calamagrostis x acutiflora `Karl Foerster`1 gal CONIFEROUS SHRUBS QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME MIN CONT MIN SIZE BC 19 BLUE CHIP JUNIPER Juniperus horizontalis `Blue Chip`5 gal 18" SPRD MJJ 22 MINT JULEP JUNIPER Juniperus chinensis `Monlep`5 gal 18" SPRD SG 17 SEA GREEN JUNIPER Juniperus chinensis `Sea Green`5 gal 18" SPRD TY 10 TAUNTON YEW Taxus x media `Taunton`5 gal 18" SPRD TA 7 TECHNY ARBORVITAE Thuja occidentalis `Techny`10 gal 36" HGT UJY 5 UPRIGHT JAPANESE YEW Taxus cuspidata `Capitata`10 gal 36" HGT PERENNIALS QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME MIN CONT MIN SIZE BE 15 BLACK EYED SUSAN Rudbeckia fulgida `Goldstrum`1 gal LE 6 GAY FEATHER Liatris elegans 1 gal LS 8 LITTLE SPIRE RUSSIAN SAGE Perovskia x `Little Spire`1 gal SD 41 STELLA D` ORO DAYLILY Hemerocallis x `Stella de Oro`1 gal SSD 14 STELLA SUPREME DAYLILY Hemerocallis x `Stella Supreme`1 gal GROUND COVERS QTY COMMON NAME BOTANICAL NAME 8,096 sf STONE MULCH 1.5"-2.5" BUFF LIMESTONE- 3" DEPTH 23,272 sf TURF SEED 31,986 sf TURF SOD 1,377 sf WOOD MULCH PLACE OVER GEOTEXTILE FABRIC. MULCH COLOR TO BE DARK BROWN PLANT SCHEDULE TOTAL 71 TOTAL 37 TOTAL 13 TOTAL 101 TOTAL 138 TOTAL 80 TOTAL 84 15000 CHK 15 916.47 PROPOSED BUILDING FFE - 919.70 GFE - 908.37 915 913914 9119129139 1 4 90 8 9089099189199169 1 7910909 9189189179189109 0 9 91191691791 6 91 79189 1 7 9169179189179 1 6 9159129139149 1 6910 9 0 8910909915 916 917 918 9179189 1 9 9 1 8 917917916 9199189 1 8  3 SSC 3 BL 1 AP 2 SGM 3 WB 1 AP 1 BS 2 BL 1 BS 1 SGM 1 BS 1 SGM 3 BL 1 AP 2 BS 1 IH 2 BS 2 IH 2 IH 1 AP 2 BS 1 NOP 1 AP 3 BS 1 AP 1 NOP 1 AP 1 SGM 1 IH 1 BL 3 AM 2 AM 1 SGM 1 SGM 2 INH 7 TY 3 UJY 2 UJY 2 INH 3 TY 5 GC 12 BC 11 AD 2 WB 1 SGM 1 SGM 1 SGM 21 FG 3 BS 1 IH 2 AM 2 AP 1 SGM 2 BS 2 BS 2 BL 2 BL 1 BS 1 AP 2 IH 1 AP 1 SGM 3 AM 3 AM 1 SGM 4 GC 7 BC 13 SD 18 FG 2 SSC 2 SSC 1 AM 10 FG 5 GAC 10 SD 8 FG 15 FG 2 SG 3 CV 2 SG 2 SG 2 CV 2 SG 15 FG 6 GAC 2 SSC 3 CV 15 FG 3 CV 13 FG 3 GC 1 TA 4 ML 1 TA 1 TA 3 ML 1 TA 1 TA 4 ML 1 TA 3 CV 1 TA 3 CV 2 WB 2 CV 5 SG 10 SD 5 CV 15 FG 3 GAC 5 SD4 SG 3 SD 8 FG 1 SGM 1 WB 1 WB 1 WB 3 SKH 3 BS 1 SSC 1 BL 1 SGM 3 SGM 2 PC 1 PC 3 BE 3 BE 3 BE 3 BE 3 BE 8 LS 6 LE 14 SSD 11 MJJ 20 GC 11 MJJ 1 SGM 2 AM 1 BS 5 GC 5 CV DOG RUN TOT LOT EXISTING FENCE RAISED DECK/PATIO EDGER-TYP SOD SOD SOD SOD SOD ROCK OVER FABRIC BETWEEN WALL AND CURB EDGER EDGER PATIO-TYP LOUCKS W:\2021\21363A\CADD DATA\LANDSCAPE\_dwg Sheet Files\L1-1 LANDSCAPE PLANPlotted: 03 /29 / 2022 2:20 PM7200 Hemlock Lane, Suite 300 Maple Grove, MN 55369 763.424.5505 www.loucksinc.com PLANNING CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND SURVEYING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ENVIRONMENTAL CADD files prepared by the Consultant for this project are instruments of the Consultant professional services for use solely with respect to this project. These CADD files shall not be used on other projects, for additions to this project, or for completion of this project by others without written approval by the Consultant. With the Consultant's approval, others may be permitted to obtain copies of the CADD drawing files for information and reference only. All intentional or unintentional revisions, additions, or deletions to these CADD files shall be made at the full risk of that party making such revisions, additions or deletions and that party shall hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant from any & all responsibilities, claims, and liabilities. SUBMITTAL/REVISIONS PROFESSIONAL SIGNATURE QUALITY CONTROL CADD QUALIFICATION WOODDALE AVENUE APARTMENTS ST. LOUIS PARK, MN REAL ESTATE EQUITIES 579 SELBY AVE, ST. PAUL, MN 55102 01/18/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 02/25/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 03/17/22 CITY SUBMITTAL 03/28/21 CITY SUBMITTAL C1-1 DEMOLITION PLAN C2-1 SITE PLANS C3-1 GRADING PLAN C3-2 SWPPP C3-3 SWPPP NOTES C4-1 SANITARY AND WATERMAIN C4-2 STORM SEWER C8-1 CITY DETAILS C8-2 CIVIL DETAILS L1-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L1-2 LANDSCAPE DETAILS Douglas D. Loken - LA Review Date SHEET INDEX License No. Date I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Landscape Architect under the laws of the State of Minnesota. 45591 Project Lead Drawn By Checked By Loucks Project No.21363A PJD DDL DDL 03/28/22 - LANDSCAPE PLAN L1-1 GENERAL NOTES: CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT SITE PRIOR TO SUBMITTING BID. HE SHALL INSPECT SITE AND BECOME FAMILIAR WITH EXISTING CONDITIONS RELATING TO THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF WORK. VERIFY LAYOUT AND ANY DIMENSIONS SHOWN AND BRING TO THE ATTENTION OF THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT ANY DISCREPANCIES WHICH MAY COMPROMISE THE DESIGN AND/OR INTENT OF THE PROJECT'S LAYOUT. ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND REGULATIONS GOVERNING THE WORK OR MATERIALS SUPPLIED. CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL EXISTING ROADS, CURBS/GUTTERS, TRAILS, TREES, LAWNS AND SITE ELEMENTS DURING PLANTING OPERATIONS. ANY DAMAGE TO SAME SHALL BE REPAIRED AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALIGNMENT AND LOCATION OF ALL UNDERGROUND AND ABOVE GRADE UTILITIES. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE THE NECESSARY PROTECTION FOR THE UTILITIES BEFORE CONSTRUCTION / MATERIAL INSTALLATION BEGINS. CONTRACTOR TO NOTIFY GENERAL CONTRACTOR OF ANY CONCERNS PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF PLANTINGS. EXISTING CONTOURS, TRAILS, VEGETATION, CURB/GUTTER AND OTHER EXISTING ELEMENTS BASED UPON INFORMATION SUPPLIED TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT BY OTHERS. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ANY AND ALL DISCREPANCIES PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION AND NOTIFY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF SAME. THE ALIGNMENT AND GRADES OF THE PROPOSED WALKS, TRAILS AND/OR ROADWAYS ARE SUBJECT TO FIELD ADJUSTMENT REQUIRED TO CONFORM TO LOCALIZED TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS AND TO MINIMIZE TREE REMOVAL AND GRADING. ANY CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT MUST BE APPROVED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. IRRIGATION NOTES: VERIFY EXISTING/PROPOSED IRRIGATION SYSTEM LAYOUT AND CONFIRM COMPLETE LIMITS OF IRRIGATION PRIOR TO SUPPLYING SHOP DRAWINGS. LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR PROVIDING AN IRRIGATION LAYOUT PLAN AND SPECIFICATION AS A PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK WHEN BIDDING. THESE SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT PRIOR TO ORDER AND/OR INSTALLATION. IT SHALL BE THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO INSURE THAT ALL SODDED/SEEDED AND PLANTED AREAS ARE IRRIGATED PROPERLY, INCLUDING THOSE AREAS DIRECTLY AROUND AND ABUTTING BUILDING FOUNDATION. THE LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE THE OWNER WITH AN IRRIGATION SCHEDULE APPROPRIATE TO THE PROJECT SITE CONDITIONS AND TO PLANT MATERIAL GROWTH REQUIREMENTS. IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS NOT TO SPRINKLE ACROSS PAVEMENT NOR SHALL THE SYSTEM SPRINKLE THE BUILDING. THE SYSTEM SHALL INCORPORATE A RAIN SENSOR INTO IRRIGATION SYSTEM. PLANTINGS OUTSIDE THE LIMITS OF IRRIGATION ARE TO BE WATERED REGULARLY UNTIL PLANTING/SOD/SEED HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED. LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: CALCULATIONS BASED MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICT. 1- TREE PER DWELLING UNIT - (# OF UNITS = 114) REQUIRED TREES = 114 TREES - 6 EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN = 108 TREES REQUIRED INCHES FOR TREE MITIGATION =180 INCHES PROPOSED TREES (LANDSCAPE ORD.): = 58 OVERSTORY 37 CONIFER TREES 13 ORNAMENTAL TREES PROPOSED MITIGATION CAL INCHES:(13) 2.5" OVERSTORY TREES = 32.5 INCHES NOTE: REMAINING MITIGATION INCHES TO PAID IN CASH IN LIEU OF TREES. NOTE: CITY TO VERIFY CALCULATIONS. TREE REPLACEMENT CALCULATIONS: REFER TO THE DEMOLITION PLAN (C1-1) FOR TREE REPLACEMENT CALCULATIONS. INCHES OF REPLACEMENT TREES REQUIRED:180 N SCALE IN FEET 0 30 60 TOLL FREE: 1-800-252-1166 TWIN CITY AREA: 651-454-0002 Gopher State One Call CALL BEFORE YOU DIG! WARNING: THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR CALLING FOR LOCATIONS OF ALL EXISTING UTILITIES. THEY SHALL COOPERATE WITH ALL UTILITY COMPANIES IN MAINTAINING THEIR SERVICE AND / OR RELOCATION OF LINES. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTACT GOPHER STATE ONE CALL AT 651-454-0002 AT LEAST 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE FOR THE LOCATIONS OF ALL UNDERGROUND WIRES, CABLES, CONDUITS, PIPES, MANHOLES, VALVES OR OTHER BURIED STRUCTURES BEFORE DIGGING. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REPAIR OR REPLACE THE ABOVE WHEN DAMAGED DURING CONSTRUCTION AT NO COST TO THE OWNER. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 47 kaas wilson architects Wooddale Avenue ApartmentsIMAGES 5.0 3801 Wooddale Avenue North, St. Louis Park, MN 09/22/21 20-09-A City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 48 kaas wilson architects Wooddale Avenue ApartmentsIMAGES 5.1 3801 Wooddale Avenue North, St. Louis Park, MN 09/22/21 20-09-A City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 49 kaas wilson architects Wooddale Avenue ApartmentsIMAGES 5.2 3801 Wooddale Avenue North, St. Louis Park, MN 02/28/22 20-09-A City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 50 REPORT | www.transportationcollaborative.com | To: Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner City of St Louis Park From: Matt Pacyna, PE, Principal Transportation Collaborative & Consultants, LLC Date: December 21, 2021 Subject: 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study INTRODUCTION TC2 has completed a traffic study for the proposed multi-family residential development located at 3801 Wooddale Avenue in St Louis Park, MN. The subject site, shown in Figure 1, is the existing Aldersgate United Methodist church generally located west of Highway 100, east of Wooddale Avenue, and south of the Highway 100 on-/off-ramps. The main objectives of the study are to identify existing traffic operations within the study area, evaluate potential impacts of the proposed development under various access alternatives, and recommend improvements, if necessary, to ensure safe and efficient operations for all users. The following study assumptions, methodology, and findings are offered for consideration. Figure 1 Subject Site Subject Site Hwy 100 36th St Oxford St Alabama Ave Zarthan Ave Yosemite Ave Xenwood Ave Goodrich Ave Cambridge St 39th St City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 51 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS Existing conditions were reviewed within the study area to establish current operations to help determine impacts associated with the proposed development. The evaluation of existing conditions included collecting traffic volumes, observing roadway characteristics, and analyzing intersection capacity and crash history, which are described in the following sections. Traffic Volumes Intersection turning movement counts were collected during the a.m. (7 to 9 a.m.) and p.m. (4 to 6 p.m.) peak periods on Thursday, November 4, 2021, at the following locations: •Alabama Avenue and Oxford Street •Wooddale Avenue and Oxford Street •Wooddale Avenue and Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac * * Denotes a 13-hour count (6 a.m. to 7 p.m.) was conducted. In addition, historical counts and MnDOT detector data were reviewed to identify area travel patterns and traffic volumes within the adjacent Elmwood Neighborhood, including counts at: •Oxford Street and Zarthan Avenue •Goodrich Avenue and Zarthan Avenue •Cambridge Street and Yosemite Avenue This data was also used to compare historical trends and normalize data sets to reflect current conditions within the study area. To provide context, Chart 1 provides an overview of daily traffic volumes along Wooddale Avenue at the Highway 100 on-/off-ramps since 2013. The traffic volume trend in this location has been generally decreasing, despite area redevelopment. This trend is likely related to area regional transportation improvements (e.g., Highway 100 and Highway 7), as well as a stronger emphasis on multimodal transportation. It is also important to note the impacts of COVID in 2020 where daily traffic volumes decreased by approximately 25 percent, but have since rebounded to within 5 to 10 percent of pre-COVID conditions. Additional detail regarding area land use and transportation trends are outlined within the Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit. Chart 1 Historical Wooddale Avenue Daily Traffic Volumes *Data is from the first two-weeks of November (Tuesday through Thursday) using MnDOT detector data. 0 5000 10000 15000 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021ADT VolumeTotal ADT Linear (Total ADT) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 52 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 3 Roadway Characteristics Observations were conducted within the study area to identify various roadway characteristics such as roadway geometry, traffic controls, speed limits, and multimodal facilities. It is important to note that the City recently established new speed limits within the study area. A general overview of key roadways within the study area is as follows: •Wooddale Avenue – varies from a 40-foot-wide undivided roadway north of Oxford Street to a 60-foot-wide divided roadway as it nears the Highway 100 on-/off-ramps; the roadway has one travel lane in each direction, with select left- and/or right-turn lanes at the intersections with Oxford Street and the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac. There are a few on-street parking spaces near the Towerlight development on the east side. Sidewalk is present on the southwest side of this roadway segment, west of the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac, as well as the east side near the Towerlight development. The posted speed limit is 25-mph. •Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac and Goodrich Avenue – generally 40-foot-wide undivided roadways with one travel lane in each direction; there is on-street parking and a sidewalk along both sides of the roadway. The posted speed limit is 20-mph. •Alabama Avenue – generally a 36-foot-wide undivided roadway with one travel lane in each direction; there is on-street parking and a sidewalk along both sides of the roadway. The posted speed limit is 25-mph. •Oxford Street and Cambridge Street – generally 30-foot-wide undivided roadways with one travel lane in each direction; there is on-street parking and a sidewalk along both sides of the roadway. The posted speed limit is 20-mph. All study intersections are unsignalized. The Oxford Street and Zarthan Avenue intersection has all- way stop control (AWSC), while the Goodrich Avenue and Yosemite Avenue intersection is uncontrolled. The remaining study intersections have side-street stop (SSS) control. Existing geometrics, traffic controls, and volumes within the study area are illustrated in Figure 2. Intersection Capacity Intersection capacity was evaluated using Synchro/SimTraffic Software (version 11), which incorporates methods outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition. The software is used to develop calibrated models that simulate observed traffic operations and identify key metrics such as intersection Level of Service (LOS) and queues. These models incorporate collected traffic, pedestrian, and bicyclist volumes, traffic controls, and driver behavior factors. Level of Service (LOS) quantifies how an intersection is operating. Intersections are graded from LOS A through LOS F, which corresponds to the average delay per vehicle values shown in Table 1. An overall intersection LOS A though LOS D is generally considered acceptable in the Twin Cities. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation, while LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 53 Figure 2Existing Conditions 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study N 6 (6) 6 (6) 26 (25) 4 (2) 3 (3) 1 (8)2 (2)71 (132)17 (14)2 (5)143 (143)6 (14)38 (29) 33 (31) 1 63 (293 )42 (41 ) 2 4 4 ( 3 5 2 ) 9 ( 1 9 ) 5 (89) 2 (30)78 (8)35 (30)54 (2)10 (62)3 (1) 19 (74)11 (2) 88 (44)3 (14)1 (5)15 (51) 203 (291 ) 1 (1)7 (21)270 (36 0 ) 0 (2)1 (40)0 (0)4 (41)1 (3)0 (1)1 (2)4 (9) 18 (79)1 (25) 96 (36)0 (16)3 (10)XXX (XXX) X,XXX AM Peak Hour Volume PM Peak Hour Volume Estimated ADT Volume Stop Sign Legend 1,500 3,8001,900Cambridge St Highway 100Wooddale AveAlabama AveGoodrich AveZarthan AveOxford St Yosemite Ave4 (2)45 (30)34 (35) 17 (25) 26 (30) 0 (1) 10 (7) 4 (4) 2 (2) 2 (2) 2 (2) 2 (2)2 (2)10 (14)5 (10)2 (2)37 (23)0 (0)3 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 1 (3) 3 (3) 1 (1)2 (1)2 (4)1 (3)2 (2)4 (4)2 (2)7,650 5 , 2 0 0 2,600125225 125 1005751,1006002,450City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 54 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 5 Table 1 Level of Service Thresholds Level of Service Average Delay / Vehicles Stop, Yield, and Roundabout Intersections Signalized Intersections A < 10 seconds < 10 seconds B 10 to 15 seconds 10 to 20 seconds C 15 to 25 seconds 20 to 35 seconds D 25 to 35 seconds 35 to 55 seconds E 35 to 50 seconds 55 to 80 seconds F > 50 seconds > 80 seconds For side-street stop-controlled intersections, special emphasis is given to providing an estimate for the level of service of the side-street approach. Traffic operations at an unsignalized intersection with side- street stop control can be described in two ways. First, consideration is given to the overall intersection level of service, which takes into account the total number of vehicles entering the intersection and the capability of the intersection to support the volumes. Second, it is important to consider the delay on the minor approach. Since the mainline does not have to stop, most delay is attributed to the side-street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic volumes to experience high-levels of delay (i.e., poor levels of service) on the side- street approaches, but an acceptable overall intersection level of service during peak hour conditions. Results of the existing intersection capacity analysis shown in Table 2 indicates that all study intersections currently operate at an overall LOS A during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. In addition, side-streets and/or driveways operate at LOS C or better during the peak hours. Peak queuing at most locations range between approximately 25 to 75 feet, or the equivalent of one to three vehicles. Thus, no significant intersection capacity issues are present within the study area. Table 2 Existing Intersection Capacity Intersection Traffic Control AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour LOS (Delay) LOS (Delay) Oxford St / Alabama Ave SSS A / B (11 sec.) A / B (11 sec.) Oxford St / Zarthan Ave AWSC A (7 sec.) A (7 sec.) Wooddale Ave / Oxford St SSS A / B (12 sec.) A / C (15 sec.) Wooddale Ave / Wooddale Ave Cul-de-sac SSS A / B (13 sec.) A / C (16 sec.) Goodrich Ave / Zarthan Ave SSS A / B (10 sec.) A / A (9 sec.) Cambridge St / Yosemite Ave SSS A / A (9 sec.) A / A (9 sec.) AWSC – All-Way-Stop-Control SSS – Side-Street-Stop City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 55 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 6 Crash History Five (5) years of crash history were reviewed within the study area, which included data from January 2016 through December 2020. The crash data was obtained using MnDOT’s MnCMAT2 crash mapping tool. During this period, there were a total of seven reported crashes within the study area with no more than two (2) crashes having occurred in any year. Of the seven crashes, there was only one (1) intersection related crash which occurred at the Alabama Avenue and Oxford Street intersection. Two (2) crashes occurred within the Micro Center involving truck maneuvers, while three (3) crashes involved hitting an object (i.e., a parked car along Oxford Street, the curb along Wooddale Avenue, or trying to traverse the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de- sac). There was also one (1) crash near the Goodrich Avenue and Yosemite Avenue intersection which involved a driver pursuit/emergency. All crashes were property damage only. Therefore, the crash data does not indicate any crash trends, hotspots, or issues within the study area. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT The proposed development site is the Aldersgate United Methodist church, which is generally west of Highway 100, east of Wooddale Avenue, and south of the Highway 100 on-/off-ramps. The existing church, which also included a daycare land use, is proposed to be replaced with a 114-unit multifamily residential development, as shown in Figure 3. Construction is proposed to be completed by the end of 2023. Up to a total of 205 parking stalls are proposed for the site, which equates to approximately 1.8 stalls per residential unit. As shown, 117-spaces will be enclosed with controlled entry, with up to 88- spaces located in one of two outdoor surface parking lots. Note that the north lot may not be constructed, which currently has 22 spaces. This would allow for a minor site reconfiguration and the overall parking spaces would not be expected to significantly change. Two driveways are proposed along the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac. However, for purposes of this study, two primary site plan scenarios were reviewed to understand the potential benefits and impacts associated with different configurations. The access scenarios reviewed include the following: •Scenario A (North Access) – All vehicular access via the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac (developer proposal) •Scenario B (South Access) – All vehicular access via Wooddale Avenue (between Goodrich Avenue and Cambridge Street) By reviewing these two scenarios, the analysis can identify the range of traffic volume change under each access configuration, as well as the overall traffic operational change. Should a hybrid scenario be considered where access is provided to both locations, the resulting impact would be based on the amount of parking provided that has access to each driveway location. Further discussion regarding access is provided later in this report. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 56 Figure 3Proposed Site Plan 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study N City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 57 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 8 TRAFFIC FORECASTS Traffic forecasts were developed for year 2024 conditions, which represents one (1) year after completion. The forecasts include general background growth and trip generation from the proposed development. Background Growth To account for general background growth in the area, an annual growth rate of one (1) percent was applied to the existing peak hour and daily traffic volumes to develop year 2024 background forecasts. This growth rate was developed using a combination of historical average daily traffic (ADT) volumes from surrounding roadways as published by MnDOT dating back to 2005 (where applicable) and traffic forecasts from previous planning studies within the study area, including the St. Louis Park Comprehensive Plan. It is important to note that the one-percent growth rate represents a slightly conservative assessment, given the historical average growth rate within the area is closer to one-half (0.5) percent annually. This growth rate is expected to account for recently approved and proposed projects, such as the Place, Wooddale Station, and Union Park Flats. Proposed Development The trip generation estimate for the proposed development was developed using the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition and includes trips for typical weekday a.m. and p.m. peak hours, as well as daily. The proposed development, as shown in Table 3, is expected to generate on average 42 a.m. peak hour, 44 p.m. peak hour, and 518 daily trips. It should be noted that although the future Southwest LRT line is expected to be operational after 2023, in addition to the two existing transit routes that run along 36th Street, no multimodal reductions were applied to provide a conservative estimate. These transit facilities, as well as the SWLRT regional trail and enhanced bicycle route proposed along 36th Street, are approximately one-third (1/3) mile from the proposed development and would be expected to reduce vehicular activity to/from the proposed development. Table 3 Trip Generation Summary Land Use Type (ITE Code) Size AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily In Out In Out Proposed Development Multi-Family Residential (221) 114-units 10 32 27 17 518 Existing Church / Daycare (Potential) * Church (560) 30,000 SF 6 4 6 9 228 Daycare (710) 50 Students 21 18 19 21 205 Subtotal (former Land Use) 27 22 25 30 433 Total Site Change (from former land use peak activity) ( -17)+10 +2 ( -13)+85 *Size information based on data provided by City staff regarding historical use. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 58 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 9 To provide additional context, a trip generation estimate for the existing land use was also completed and included in Table 3 for comparison purposes. The trip generation potential of the existing church and daycare were also estimated using the ITE Trip Generation Manual. This comparison indicates that the existing land use would have been expected to generate 49 a.m. peak hour, 55 p.m. peak hour, and 433 daily trips. Thus, when comparing to the proposed development, the trip generation of the existing land uses are relatively similar in magnitude to the proposed development, although there are some differences in the travel patterns (i.e., in versus out trips). The trips generated by the proposed development were applied throughout the study area based on the directional distributions in Figure 4A and Figure 4B, which represent the routing for users of the north and south accesses, respectively. Separate routing distributions were needed based on the various route options depending on the access scenario and associated travel times/intersection delays to/from the overall directional distribution locations. The distribution was developed based on a combination of existing area travel patterns, Google travel times, and engineering judgment. No reductions were applied to account for the existing land use given the minimal activity that was observed during data collection. The resultant year 2024 build condition traffic forecasts are illustrated in Figure 5A and Figure 5B for Scenarios A and B, respectively. Further discussion regarding the traffic volume changes associated with the scenarios is provided later in this report. YEAR 2024 BUILD CONDITIONS Future Intersection Capacity To understand impacts associated with the proposed development, year 2024 build condition intersection capacity was evaluated using Synchro/SimTraffic Software (version 11). Results of the year 2024 intersection capacity analysis, shown in Table 4, indicates that all study intersections are expected to continue to operate at an overall LOS A during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under each scenario. In addition, side-streets are expected to operate at LOS C or better and peak queuing will continue to be within 25 to 75 feet, or the equivalent of one to three vehicles. Therefore, no infrastructure changes within the study area are needed from an intersection capacity perspective. However, further discussion regarding potential improvements is provided later in this report. Table 4 Year 2024 Build Intersection Capacity Intersection AM Peak Hour LOS (Delay) PM Peak Hour LOS (Delay) Scenario A Scenario B Scenario A Scenario B Oxford St / Alabama Ave A / B (11 sec.) A / B (11 sec.) A / B (12 sec.) A / B (12 sec.) Oxford St / Zarthan Ave A (7 sec.) A (7 sec.) A (7 sec.) A (8 sec.) Wooddale Ave / Oxford St A / B (13 sec.) A / B (13 sec.) A / C (15 sec.) A / C (15 sec.) Wooddale Ave / Wooddale Ave Cul-de-sac A / B (13 sec.) A / B (13 sec.) A / C (17 sec.) A / C (16 sec.) Goodrich Ave / Zarthan Ave A / B (10 sec.) A / B (10 sec.) A / B (10 sec.) A / B (10 sec.) Cambridge St / Yosemite Ave A / A (9 sec.) A / A (9 sec.) A / A (9 sec.) A / A (9 sec.) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 59 Figure 4ADirectional Distribution (North Access) 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study N 25% 35% 15% 75% 65%32.5% Internal Site Routing (to Site) Internal Site Routing (from Site) Overall Directional Distribution Legend 30% 10% 10% 2.5% 7.5%Xenwood AveHighway 100Wooddale AveAlabama AveGoodrich Ave Zarthan AveOxford St Yosemite AveBrunswick AveCambridge St 39th St Excel si o r Bl v d 36th St Highw a y 7 25% 30% 32.5% 47.5% 15% 2.5% 7.5% 5% 2.5% 17.5% 5% 22.5%70% 40% 60% 37.5% 52.5% 5% 30% 7.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 7.5% 15%5% City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 60 Figure 4BDirectional Distribution (South Access) 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study N 25% 35% 15% 75% 65%32.5% Internal Site Routing (to Site) Internal Site Routing (from Site) Overall Directional Distribution Legend 30% 10% 10% 2.5% 7.5%Xenwood AveHighway 100Wooddale AveAlabama AveGoodrich Ave Zarthan AveOxford St Yosemite AveBrunswick AveCambridge St 39th St Excel si o r Bl v d 36th St Highw a y 7 5% 30% 12.5% 7.5% 7.5%10% 20% 2.5% 22.5% 62.5% 37.5% 17.5% 37.5% 12.5% 40% 30% 30% 5% 5% 5% 17.5% 35% 25% 72.5%75% 5% 5% 12.5% 12.5% 10%20% 30% 32.5% 20% 5% 25% 2.5% 65% 42.5% 2.5% 22.5% 2.5% City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 61 Figure 5A2024 Build Conditions (Scenario A) 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study N 6 (6) 6 (6) 29 (27) 4 (2) 3 (3) 1 (8)2 (2)73 (136)18 (14)2 (5)147 (147)8 (20)39 (30) 36 (38) 1 84 (311 )46 (43 ) 2 5 6 ( 3 7 6 ) 9 ( 2 0 ) 5 (89) 2 (30)78 (8)35 (30)54 (2)10 (62)3 (1) 19 (74)11 (2) 88 (44)3 (14)1 (5)15 (53) 209 (300 ) 4 (9)7 (22)278 (37 1 ) 7 (21)1 (41)0 (0)4 (42)20 (13)0 (1)14 (9)4 (9) 18 (79)1 (25) 96 (36)0 (16)3 (10)1,500 3,8001,900Cambridge St Highway 100Wooddale AveAlabama AveGoodrich AveZarthan AveOxford St Yosemite Ave4 (2)46 (32)37 (37) 18 (26) 29 (36) 0 (1) 10 (7) 4 (4) 2 (2) 2 (2) 2 (2) 2 (2)2 (2)11 (15)5 (10)2 (2)38 (25)0 (0)3 (1) 2 (2) 3 (3) 1 (3) 3 (3) 1 (1)2 (1)2 (4)1 (3)2 (2)4 (4)2 (2)8,050 5 , 6 0 0 2,725125230 1306001,2006752,5253 (8)7 (19)3 (8)10 (5) 22 (12)10 (5)620XXX (XXX) X,XXX AM Peak Hour Volume PM Peak Hour Volume Estimated ADT Volume Stop Sign Legend City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 62 Figure 5B2024 Build Conditions (Scenario B) 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study N 6 (6) 6 (6) 27 (27) 4 (2) 3 (3) 1 (8)2 (2)75 (142)18 (14)2 (5)160 (154)6 (14)43 (31) 40 (35) 1 68 (302 )46 (50 ) 2 5 1 ( 3 6 3 ) 1 0 ( 2 2 ) 5 (89) 2 (30)78 (8)35 (30)54 (2)10 (62)3 (1) 19 (74)11 (2) 88 (44)3 (14)1 (5)15 (53) 212 (308 ) 1 (1)7 (22)284 (37 4 ) 0 (2)1 (41)0 (0)4 (42)1 (3)0 (1)1 (2)4 (9) 18 (79)1 (25) 96 (36)0 (16)3 (10)1,500 3,8001,900Cambridge St Highway 100Wooddale AveAlabama AveGoodrich AveZarthan AveOxford St Yosemite Ave4 (2)56 (36)35 (36) 21 (36) 27 (30) 0 (1) 20 (12) 17 (11) 2 (2) 2 (2) 5 (9) 2 (2)2 (2)10 (15)9 (20)2 (2)38 (24)0 (0)3 (1) 4 (3) 9 (6) 1 (3) 4 (4) 1 (1)2 (1)3 (5)1 (3)2 (2)4 (5)4 (10)8,000 5 , 4 0 0 2,825140575 275 1007751,3006252,6754 (12)2 (6)8 (5) 3 (1)16 (8)1 (3)3 (1)4 (12)16 (8) 5 (3)1 (3)3 (6)XXX (XXX) X,XXX AM Peak Hour Volume PM Peak Hour Volume Estimated ADT Volume Stop Sign Legend City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 63 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 14 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS In addition to intersection capacity, the following other considerations were identified. Scenario C (Hybrid Access) Preliminary discussions with project staff indicated the potential to allow garage access to both Wooddale Avenue and the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac, while the surface lot would only have access via the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac. Given that Scenario A and Scenario B conditions represent the range of operational changes associated with the proposed development, no intersection capacity issues are expected because of Scenario C. However, trips generated from the proposed development were routed based on Scenario C access and are illustrated in Figure 5C. Scenario C access would provide multiple routing options for residents. This scenario would also restrict the potential for any non-development traffic from traveling through the proposed development, as was previously the case for the Aldersgate Church before the driveway closure in 2019. Neighborhood Impacts Based on the intersection capacity analysis, the proposed development is not expected to necessitate infrastructure improvements from a capacity perspective, regardless of the scenario. However, Scenario B would have a larger increase in neighborhood traffic volumes, particularly along Goodrich Avenue and Cambridge Street. To help illustrate the potential range in traffic volume changes on neighborhood roadways, a summary of existing and projected year 2024 ADT volumes on area roadways by scenario is provided in Table 5. Table 5 Neighborhood ADT Volume Summary Roadway / Location Existing Year 2024 Scenario Increase Range A B C Goodrich Ave (east of Zarthan Ave) 225 230 575 265 5 to 350 Cambridge St (east of Yosemite Ave) 125 130 275 225 5 to 150 Zarthan Ave (south of Oxford St) 575 600 775 600 25 to 200 Oxford Street (west of Zarthan Ave) 600 675 625 660 25 to 75 Oxford Street (east of Zarthan Ave) 1,100 1,200 1,300 1,175 75 to 200 Yosemite Ave (north of Cambridge St) 125 125 140 125 0 to 15 Alabama Ave (north of Oxford St) 2,450 2,525 2,675 2,525 75 to 225 Alabama Ave (south of Oxford St) 2,600 2,725 2,825 2,725 125 to 225 On-Street Parking On-street parking is currently allowed along the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac, as well as Wooddale Avenue south of Goodrich Avenue. There is the potential that some residents and/or visitors may park on-street, depending on the access scenario. If on-street parking from residents of the proposed develop becomes an issue, coordination with apartment management could be considered. Parking signage should be reviewed to limit sight distance impacts at new driveways. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 64 Figure 5C2024 Build Conditions (Scenario C) 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study N 6 (6) 6 (6) 29 (27) 4 (2) 3 (3) 1 (8)2 (2)73 (136)18 (14)2 (5)147 (147)8 (16)39 (30) 36 (34) 1 80 (309 )45 (43 ) 2 5 4 ( 3 7 5 ) 9 ( 2 0 ) 5 (89) 2 (30)78 (8)35 (30)54 (2)10 (62)3 (1) 19 (74)11 (2) 88 (44)3 (14)1 (5)15 (53) 209 (300 ) 4 (8)7 (22)278 (37 1 ) 5 (16)1 (41)0 (0)4 (42)15 (11)0 (1)11 (7)4 (9) 18 (79)1 (25) 96 (36)0 (16)3 (10)1,500 3,8001,900Cambridge StAlabama AveGoodrich AveZarthan AveOxford St Yosemite Ave4 (2)46 (31)37 (37) 17 (26) 29 (33) 0 (0) 10 (7) 6 (5) 2 (2) 2 (2) 2 (3) 2 (2)2 (2)10 (14)5 (10)2 (2)38 (24)0 (0)3 (1) 3 (3) 8 (5) 1 (3) 4 (4) 1 (1)2 (1)2 (4)1 (3)2 (2)4 (4)3 (6)5 , 5 5 0 2,725125265 2256001,1756602,525XXX (XXX) X,XXX AM Peak Hour Volume PM Peak Hour Volume Estimated ADT Volume Stop Sign Legend Highway 100Wooddale Ave 8,025 0 (1)2 (1) 6 (3)2 (5)3 (9)5 (12)3 (9)10 (6) 14 (7)10 (6)485City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 65 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 16 Site Plan Review A preliminary review of the proposed site plan does not indicate any major issues. However, special care should be taken to locate signage and landscaping to avoid creating any sight distance issues. Wooddale Avenue / Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac Intersection Although there are no current crash or projected intersection capacity issues at this intersection, increased activity to/from the Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac (associated with Scenarios A and C) does introduce new conflicts to this location. There is currently no westbound left-turn lane at this intersection. Although the projected westbound left-turn volume is relatively low, the addition of a westbound left-turn lane is recommended under Scenarios A and C, assuming MnDOT concurrence. To implement this turn lane, the median would need to be modified/shortened. However, there is sufficient roadway width to accommodate this turn lane. Further discussion with MnDOT should occur to explore this turn lane implementation, as well as to review/discuss the findings of this analysis. It should be noted that this intersection has been the subject of previous planning efforts in the area, which have identified various transportation networks and infrastructure at this location. One of which would be the extension of Xenwood Avenue to this intersection if the adjacent shopping center were to redevelop. In that scenario, there is the potential to need additional intersection capacity in the form of a traffic signal and/or roundabout. However, there is no timetable or plans for this to occur, the need is not triggered by the proposed development, and additional analysis would be needed if this type of connection was pursued further. A review of the year 2024 build condition (Scenario A) traffic volumes at the Wooddale Avenue and Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac intersection indicates that no traffic signal warrants are expected to be met. It is also common practice that if a traffic signal warrant is not met, a roundabout would also not likely to be justified. To meet a signal warrant, traffic volumes on the side-street approaches would need to approximately double from the year 2024 build condition forecasts. The traffic volumes also do not meet the criteria for all-way stop control. A summary of the warrant analysis is included in the Appendix. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 66 3801 Wooddale Avenue Traffic Study December 21, 2021 Page 17 SUMMARY The following study conclusions and recommendations are offered for consideration. 1)All study intersections currently operate at an overall LOS A during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. 2)Review of the past five (5) years of crash data does not indicate any crash trends, hotspots, or issues within the study area. 3)Traffic forecasts were developed for year 2024 conditions, which represents one (1) year after completion. a.An annual growth rate of one (1) percent was applied to the existing peak hour and daily traffic volumes to develop year 2024 background forecasts. b.The proposed development is expected to generate on average 42 a.m. peak hour, 44 p.m. peak hour, and 518 daily trips. 4)Under year 2024 build conditions, all study intersections are expected to continue to operate at an overall LOS A during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under each access scenario; therefore, no infrastructure changes are needed from an intersection capacity perspective. 5)The addition of a westbound left-turn lane at the Wooddale Avenue / Wooddale Avenue Cul- de-sac intersection is recommended under Scenarios A and C to reduce potential conflicts, assuming MnDOT concurrence. a.Further discussion with MnDOT should occur to explore this turn lane implementation, as well as to review/discuss the findings of this analysis. 6)Year 2024 build condition (Scenario A) traffic volumes at the Wooddale Avenue and Wooddale Avenue Cul-de-sac intersection do not meet traffic signal or all-way stop warrant criteria. 7)If on-street parking from residents of the proposed development becomes an issue, coordination with apartment management and/or restricting on-street parking could be considered. 8)Special care should be taken to locate signage and landscaping to avoid creating any sight distance issues. https://transportationcollaborative.sharepoint.com/sites/Projects/Shared Documents/21-006 - SLP - 3801 Wooddale/Documentation/Final_3801WooddaleAve_TrafficStudy_211221.docx City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 67 APPENDIX City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 68 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 69 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 70 REPORT | www.transportationcollaborative.com | To: Debra Heiser, PE, Engineering Director City of St. Louis Park From: Matt Pacyna, PE, Principal Transportation Collaborative & Consultants, LLC Date: December 21, 2021 Subject: Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit INTRODUCTION The Elmwood Neighborhood within the City of St Louis Park is bound by Highway 7 to the north, Highway 100 to the east, Excelsior Boulevard to the south, and the CP Railroad to the west. The neighborhood has experienced a significant amount of change over the past 15+ years from a land use and transportation perspective. Dating back to the early 2000’s, several planning documents have been completed which planned and evaluated how the area was expected to change, as well as identified transportation infrastructure to accommodate the changes. Therefore, the purpose of this audit is to review these historical planning documents, identify actual land use and traffic volume changes, compare planning documents relative to actual construction, and determine if predicted traffic growth has occurred as projected. This information will help improve transportation planning for the City and aid in determining the future transportation system capacity needs within the study area. The following information provides an overview of the Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit. HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS The following list summarizes the planning documents reviewed as part of the traffic audit. The documents range from larger comprehensive planning studies to individual development traffic impact studies. Key data obtained from these resources include land use and traffic forecasts. •Elmwood Area Transportation Study (2003)•Place VIA Sol and Via Luna Traffic Study (2016) •Hoigaard Village Traffic Study (2005)•The Elmwood Traffic Study (2016) •Highway 7/Wooddale Avenue Interchange (2008)•Union Park Flats (2016) •36th Street Streetscape (2008)•Elmwood Traffic Management Study (2017) •Towerlight Traffic Study (2009)•Monterey/Beltline/36th Multimodal Study (2018) •Wooddale/36th Street Reconstruction (2013)•36th/Beltline Multimodal Feasibility Studies (2019) •SWLRT Final EIS (2016)•St. Louis Park Comprehensive Plan (2019) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 71 Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit December 21, 2021 Page 2 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMPARISON Redevelopment that has occurred in the Elmwood Neighborhood over the past 15+ years has centered around the 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue corridors. A summary of the redevelopments is illustrated in Figure 1. Most of the redevelopments replaced industrial type land uses with multi-family residential and/or mixed-use developments with first floor retail components. Also, there are a few redevelopments previously approved that are yet to be developed (i.e., the PLACE development (south site) now referred to as the Wooddale Station Redevelopment Site and the Union Congregation Church). There are also preliminary plans to redevelop Aldersgate Church. The trip generation data below is based on previous land uses (removed) that were identified using City records and/or estimated from historical aerial photography. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition was then used to estimate the approximate trip generation of the previously removed land uses. To estimate the trip generation of the current land uses (i.e., the “built” sites), data in the corresponding traffic study documents were reviewed. However, since some of the actual developments have changed from the study assumptions, a secondary estimate was developed using the ITE Trip Generation Manual to compare the change in trip generation between the previous land uses and the redevelopment sites. A summary of the total trip generation changes during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours, as well as a daily basis, between the previous and current land uses is provided in Table 1. This information focuses on the zones/sites that were removed and/or redeveloped between 2003 and 2018, which corresponds to available traffic data documented later in this audit. Note that year 2020 data was excluded due to COVID-19 related travel pattern impacts. A detailed summary of each development is in the Appendix. Based on the trip generation review, the change in land uses were estimated to increase activity within the study area by approximately 200 a.m. peak hour, 300 p.m. peak hour and 3,300 daily trips. Note that this assumes the previous land uses were still active and generating trips. These trips are also distributed throughout the study area and are not all added to one specific roadway within the transportation system. Table 1 Land Use Trip Generation Comparison Zone IDs Timeframe Land Use Summary Trip Generation* AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Daily 1 – 9 (Removed) 2003 - 2018 227,000 SF Industrial 86,900 SF Retail / Commercial 15,500 SF Fire Station 3 Single-Family Homes (- 219) (- 315) (- 2,915) 1 – 7 (Built) 2005 – 2013 564 Residential Units 175 Senior Units 35,000 SF Retail / Commercial 30,000 SF Fire Station +380 +546 +5,511 Change +198 +305 +3,274 * Does not include future sites not yet redeveloped, which includes the PLACE (south site)/Wooddale Station, Union Congregation, and Aldersgate Church City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 72 Figure 1HISTORICAL LAND USE & TRANSPORTATION CHANGES Elmwood Neighborhood Traf fic Audit LEGEND 1 2 5 2 7 6 8 9 11 10 A B C D E F #Land Use Change A Transportation Change 3 4 G ZONECHANGEYEAR(S) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A B C D E F G 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A B C D E F G ‘05-’08 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A B C D E F G 12 ZoneNamePreviousLand UseCurrent / Proposed Land UseRedevelopment Timeframe 1Village in the ParkIndustrialResidential2005-2008 2Hoigaard Village (Phase 1)IndustrialResidential / Mixed Use2007-2008 3VacatedIndustrialN/A2007 4VacatedIndustrialN/A2009 5TowerlightIndustrialSenior Living / Mixed Use2012 6Hoigaard Village (Phase 1)IndustrialResidential2012-2013 7Fire StationInstitutionFire Station2013 8PLACE (North Site)IndustrialResidential2020-2021 9The ElmwoodCommercialResidential / Mixed Use2021 10UnionCongregationDaycareResidentialFUTURE 11Aldergate ChurchWorshipResidentialFUTURE 12PLACE (South Site)IndustrialMixedUseFUTURE ZoneConstruction Timeframe A2010-2011 B2015 C2015 D2015-2016 E2018-2019 F2019 G2020SWLRT Construction Closure Transportation Improvement Highway 7 / Wooddale Avenue Interchange Wooddale Avenue / 36th Street Reconfiguration 36th Street / Xenwood Traffic Signal Highway 100 Reconstruction / Expansion OxfordStreet Two-Way Conversion Aldersgate Connection Removal Zone Former Site Name Current Site Name Redevelopment Timeframe 1 Quadion / MN Rubber Village in the Park 2005-2008 2 Hoigaards Hoigaard Village (Phase 1)2007-2008 3 Dworskly N/A - Vacated for Roadway 2007 4 Soomec Building N/A - Vacated for Roadway 2009 5 Quadion / MN Rubber Towerlight 2012 6 The Frantz Family Partnership Hoigaard Village (Phase 2)2012-2013 7 Fire Station / Residential Fire Station 2013 8 McGarvey Coffee PLACE Development (North Site)2020-2021 9 VFW #5632 Elmwood 2021 10 Union Daycare Union Congregation FUTURE 11 Aldersgate Church Aldersgate Church FUTURE 12 Nash Frame/Commercial PLACE (South Site) / Wooddale Station FUTURE Zone Construction Timeframe A 2010-2011 B 2015 C 2015 D 2015-2016 E 2018-2019 F 2019 G 2020SWLRT Construction Closure Transportation Improvement Highway 7 / Wooddale Avenue Interchange Wooddale Avenue / 36th Street Reconfiguration 36th Street / Xenwood Traffic Signal Highway 100 Reconstruction / Expansion Oxford Street Two-Way Conversion Aldersgate Connection Removal City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 73 Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit December 21, 2021 Page 4 TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE In addition to the land use changes within the Elmwood Neighborhood, there have been several transportation improvements on the regional and local transportation systems that have influenced traffic volumes within the Elmwood Area. Historically, the Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street corridors have experienced a significant amount of traffic from motorists avoiding congestion along Highway 7 and/or Highway 100 during peak periods. However, subsequent studies have shown that the following key regional transportation improvements have reduced traffic volumes along the Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street corridors: -Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue Interchange (2010-2011) -Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue Interchange (2013-2014) -Highway 100 Reconstruction / Expansion (2015-2016) In addition, several local roadway improvements have been completed to enhance mobility within the area, including: -Wooddale Avenue and 36th Street Intersection Improvements (2015) -36th Street / Xenwood Avenue Traffic Signal (2015) -Oxford Street Two-Way Conversion (2018-2019) Historical documents noted these transportation improvements would provide additional capacity, reduce vehicular diversion, and support area development to maintain adequate capacity within the study area. The City’s “Connect the Park” initiative has also incrementally improved biking and walking connectivity (initiative approved in 2013 with implementation beginning in 2015), which is expected to reduce the dependence on vehicular trips. This trend is expected to continue with future redevelopment, particularly with the completion of the Southwest LRT Green Line (after 2023) and the 36th Street Bikeway planned for 2022. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 74 Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit December 21, 2021 Page 5 TRAFFIC VOLUME COMPARISON Historical annual average daily traffic (AADT) volumes were obtained from MnDOT at multiple sites within the Elmwood Neighborhood dating back to 2005. A review of these traffic volumes, which are summarized in Table 2 and Figure 2, indicate that traffic volumes within the study area have been relatively stable. Average AADT volume growth rates are approximately one-third (0.3) percent per year. Historical background growth rates from planning documents have ranged from one-half (0.5) to one (1.0) percent annually. Note that year 2020 data was excluded due to COVID-19 related travel pattern impacts. Table 2 Historical Study Area AADT Volumes Location Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Percent Annual Growth 2005 2009 2013 2017 36th Street (west of Hwy 100) 13,200 13,700 12,900 12,600 (- 0.4%) 36th Street (west of Wooddale Avenue) 3,700 3,800 3,900 4,250 +1.1% Alabama Avenue (north of Oxford Street) 2,850 2,750 2,600 2,650 (- 0.6%) Alabama Avenue (north of Excelsior Blvd) 2,550 2,750 2,700 2,750 +0.6% Cambridge Street (west of Alabama Avenue) 1,450 1,550 1,700 1,600 +0.8% Wooddale Avenue (north of 36th Street) 10,200 11,300 10,500 11,000 +0.6% Wooddale Avenue (at Hwy 100) 4,950 4,900 4,950 6,000 +1.6% Edgewood Avenue (west of CP Rail) 2,850 2,700 2,900 2,550 (- 0.9%) Average (all sites) 5,219 5,431 5,269 5,425 +0.3% Figure 2 Historical Study Area AADT Volumes 0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 16,000 2005 2009 2013 2017AADT Volume36th Street (west of Hwy 100)36th Street (west of Wooddale Avenue) Alabama Avenue (north of Oxford Street)Alabama Avenue (north of Excelsior Blvd) Wooddale Avenue (north of 36th Street)Wooddale Avenue (at Hwy 100) Edgewood Avenue (west of CP Rail)Cambridge Street (west of Alabama Avenue) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 75 Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit December 21, 2021 Page 6 In addition to reviewing AADT volumes, three different peak hour data sets were reviewed (2005, 2012, and 2018). This data focused along 36th Street (east and west of Wooddale Avenue) and Wooddale Avenue (north and south of 36th Street). There was insufficient historical peak hour data within the rest of the Elmwood Neighborhood to draw specific conclusions from a peak hour perspective. A review of the available peak hour traffic volumes summarized in Table 3 and Figure 3, indicate that peak hour traffic volumes have increased by approximately two (2) percent per year, which is higher than the change in AADT volumes that has occurred over a similar period. This difference could be attributed to the change in land use from an industrial focus to more of a residential/commercial focus, which have different travel patterns associated with each. Commercial uses often have higher peaking characteristics as compared to industrial type uses. The peak hour growth appears to be in line with previous estimates associated with area redevelopment. Table 3 Historical Study Area Peak Hour Volumes Location AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Annual Growth 2005 2012 2018 2005 2012 2018 36th Street (west of Wooddale Avenue) 276 318 375 322 445 415 +2.2% 36th Street (east of Wooddale Avenue) 918 1,050 1,090 1,331 1,636 1,620 +1.4% Wooddale Avenue (north of 36th Street) 1,003 1,248 1,350 1,276 1,646 1,570 +1.9% Wooddale Avenue (south of 36th Street) 371 670 735 495 831 875 +4.9% Average (all sites) 2,568 3,286 3,550 3,424 4,558 4,480 2.3% Figure 3 Historical Study Area Combined AM & PM Peak Hour Volumes 0500100015002000250030003500 2005 2012 20182-Way Peak Hour Volume36th Street (West of Wooddale Avenue)36th Street (East of Wooddale Avenue)Wooddale Avenue (north of 36th Street)Wooddale Avenue (south of 36th Street) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 76 Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit December 21, 2021 Page 7 ROADWAY TRANSPORTATION CAPACITY Future roadway capacity within the audit area was reviewed to understand if the transportation system can support the expected level of growth. First, planned area growth from the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan within the Elmwood Neighborhood was reviewed. This includes household (HH) and job (i.e., employment - EMP) growth as noted in Table 4, which indicates an increase of approximately 222 households and 479 jobs in the area. The increases by traffic analysis zone (TAZ) between the 2020 Baseline and 2040 Projections are noted in green. Based on industry standard daily trip rate assumptions, the projected growth equates to approximately 6,655 daily vehicular trips. Table 4 Elmwood Neighborhood Household and Employment Growth (TAZ) 2020 Baseline 2040 Projections Growth* (Change in Daily Trips) HH EMP Retail EMP Non-Retail HH EMP Retail EMP Non-Retail 64 440 114 295 526 (+86) 223 (+109) 359 (+64) 2,470 65 730 192 492 866 (+136) 381 (+189) 609 (+117) 4,185 Total Trips 6,655 *Daily Trip Rate Assumptions: HH – 9 trips, Emp (retail) – 13.5 trips, Emp (non-retail) – 3.5 trips Next, forecasted 2040 daily traffic volumes were reviewed and compared to planning-level street capacities by facility type from the City’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 6 -Mobility, Table 6-7). The 2040 forecasts incorporate planned neighborhood growth, as well as projected growth outside of the Elmwood Neighborhood. This review, summarized in Table 5, indicates that study area roadways are expected to operate at LOS C or better from a segment capacity perspective. It is important to note that the segment of 36th Street (west of Highway 100) is planned to be reconfigured as a 3-lane facility (i.e., 2-westbound lanes and 1-eastbound lane) with turn lanes in 2022 as part of a bikeway project. This configuration was evaluated as part of the 36th Street Multimodal Feasibility Study, which determined the planned configuration would provide sufficient future roadway capacity. Table 5 Planning Level Roadway Capacity Location Future Facility Type Forecasted 2040 ADT Future 2040 Daily Level of Service 36th Street (west of Hwy 100) 3-Lane*16,700 C* 36th Street (west of Wooddale Avenue) 2-Lane 4,700 B Alabama Avenue (north of Oxford Street) 2-Lane 3,000 A Alabama Avenue (north of Excelsior Blvd) 2-Lane 3,100 A Cambridge Street (west of Alabama Avenue) 2-Lane 1,800 A Wooddale Avenue (north of 36th Street) 4-Lane 12,300 B Wooddale Avenue (west of Hwy 100) 3-Lane 8,900 B Edgewood Avenue (west of CP Rail) 2-Lane 2,900 A *Represents 2-westbound and 1-eastbound travel lane per the planned bikeway project in 2022; the level of service is based on the average capacity of a 2-lane and 4-lane facility type. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 77 Elmwood Neighborhood Traffic Audit December 21, 2021 Page 8 CONCLUSION Regional and local transportation improvements, along with multimodal focused travel behavior changes, have offset the traffic growth associated with redevelopment in the Elmwood Neighborhood. Even with the forecasted growth assumptions, the existing and planned transportation system is expected to have reserve capacity and operate within acceptable levels of service. Thus, the Elmwood Neighborhood transportation network can support future planned redevelopment. https://transportationcollaborative.sharepoint.com/sites/Projects/Shared Documents/21-005 - SLP - Elmwood Audit/Documentation/Final_ElmwoodTrafficAudit_211221.docx City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 78 APPENDIX City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 79 Zone ID Year Removed Name Size / Type (ITE Code)*AM PM Daily Year Built Name Size / Type (ITE Code)*AM PM Daily AM PM Daily 1 2003 Quadion / MN Rubber 80,000 SF Industrial (110)59 52 390 2005-2008 Village in the Park 60 Senior Units (252) 144 Condo/Townhome Units (220)70 88 1165 11 36 775 2 2006 Hoigaards L&D Hjelle & H&A Ahrendt 42,000 SF Retail (861) 23,000 SF Industrial (110)37 105 1111 2007-2008 Hoigaard Village (Phase 1)298 Apartments (221) 25,000 SF Retail (822)169 281 2714 132 176 1603 3 2007 Dworskly 24,500 SF Industrial (110)18 16 119 N/A - Vacated for Roadway -18 -16 -119 4 2009 Soomec Building 21,900 SF Retail (890)6 11 139 N/A - Vacated for Roadway -6 -11 -139 5 2005 Quadion / MN Rubber 60,000 SF Industrial (110)44 39 292 2012 Towerlight 115 Senior Units (252) 4,000 SF Daycare (565) 6,000 SF Retail (822) 81 113 890 37 74 598 6 2006 The Frantz Family Partnership 12,000 SF Industrial (110)9 8 58 2012-2013 Hoigaard Village (Phase 2)22 Row Homes (220) 100 Apartments (221)46 50 602 37 42 544 7 2011 Fire Station / Residential 15,500 SF Fire Station (575) 3-Single Family Homes (210)9 10 128 2013 Fire Station 30,000 SF Fire Station (575)14 14 140 5 4 12 8 2017-2018 McGarvey Coffee 27,500 SF Industrial (110)20 18 134 2020-2021 PLACE Development (North Site) 217 Apartments (221) 5,100 SF Retail (822) 5-Employee Greenhouse (817) 95 129 1372 75 111 1238 9 2018 VFW #5632 11,500 SF Restaurant / Bar / Banquet (931) 11,500 Office (710)17 56 544 2021 Elmwood 50 Apartments (221) 4,400 SF Retail (822)29 49 467 12 -7 -77 Total Trip Generation (Previous Developments)219 315 2915 Total Trip Generation (Current Sites)504 724 7350 285 409 4435 Total Trip Generation (Less Zones 8 and 9)380 546 5511 198 305 3274 Future Development Zone ID Year Removed Name Size / Type (ITE Code)*AM PM Daily Year Built Name Size / Type (ITE Code)*AM PM Daily AM PM Daily 10 N/A Union Daycare 85 Kid Daycare (565)66 67 348 FUTURE Union Congregation Church 60 Apartments (221)22 23 272 -44 -44 -76 11 N/A Aldersgate Church 20,000 SF Church (560)6 10 152 FUTURE Aldersgate Church 114 Apartments (221)42 44 518 36 34 366 12 N/A Nash Frame/Commercial 15,000 SF Industrial (110) 24,000 SF Retail (822)68 168 1380 FUTURE Wooddale Station 293 Apartments (221) 17,000 SF Retail (822)148 226 2256 80 58 876 Total Trip Generation (Previous Developments)140 245 1880 Total Trip Generation (Current Sites)212 293 3046 72 48 1166 Net Change in TripsCurrent Land UsePrevious Land Use Previous Land Use Proposed Land Use (Latest)Net Change in Trips City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 80 Metropolitan District Waters Edge Building 1500 County Road B2 West Roseville, MN 55113 An equal opportunity employer MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 February 15, 2022 Laura Chamberlain Senior Planner City of St. Louis Park 5005 Minnetonka Blvd St. Louis Park, MN 55416 SUBJECT: MnDOT Review #P22-006 3801 Wooddale Avenue SW Quad MN 100 & Wooddale Avenue South St. Louis Park, Hennepin County Dear Ms. Chamberlain : Thank you for the opportunity to review the plans for 3801 Wooddale Avenue. MnDOT has reviewed the documents and has the following comments: Traffic: The Wooddale Ave and Wooddale Ave South (cul-de-sac) intersection has multiple risk factors for crashes, including being on a horizontal curve and marginal sight distance to vehicles from the MN 100 exit ramp. Incidents here have the potential to impact MnDOT facilities. The provided traffic study shows volumes on Wooddale Ave lower than current MnDOT data (9400 AADT as of 2020). The trip generation numbers are also lower than MnDOT estimates. If access is provided to the proposed development from Wooddale Ave South (cul-de-sac), a dedicated westbound left turn lane should be provided at the Wooddale Ave and Wooddale Ave S (cul-de-sac) intersection. Questions regarding these comments should be directed to Eric Lauer-Hunt, MnDOT Metro District Traffic at eric.lauer-hunt@state.mn.us or 651-234-7875. Right-of-Way: MnDOT will not allow anything permanent to be constructed or located on or within MnDOT Right-of-Way (ROW). Questions regarding this comment should be directed to Doug Nelson, MnDOT Right-of-Way at douglas.nelson@state.mn.us or 651-234-7583. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 81 MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 Multi-Modal: MnDOT recommends that the City and the applicant work together to create a safe and accessible crossing of the Wooddale Ave ramp to the retail center to the north. There will likely be an increase in pedestrian trips between the two destinations with the change of land use. The City commercial driveway details appear to inadequately show how return curb can be integrated within a sidewalk located back of curb and mitigate the return curb as a tripping hazard. Consider utilizing driveway details found in MnDOT Standard Plan 5-297.254 (see attached) as a guide for accessible and safe driveways that cross pedestrian facilities outside of MnDOT ROW. For questions regarding these comments, contact Jesse Thornsen, Metro Multimodal, at Jesse.Thornsen@state.mn.us or 651-234-7788. Water Resources: A MnDOT drainage permit will be required to ensure that current drainage rates to MnDOT right-of-way will not be increased. The drainage permit application, including the information below, should be submitted online to: https://dotapp7.dot.state.mn.us/OLPA/ The following information must be submitted with the drainage permit application: 1) A grading plan showing existing and proposed contours. 2) Drainage area maps for the proposed project showing existing and proposed drainage areas. Any off-site areas that drain to the project area should also be included in the drainage area maps. The direction of flow for each drainage area must be indicated by arrows. 3) Drainage computations for pre and post construction conditions during the 2, 10, 50 and 100 year rain events. 4) Time of concentration calculations. 5) An electronic copy of any computer modeling used for the drainage computations. 6)See also the attached Drainage Permits Checklist for more information. Once a drainage permit application is submitted, a thorough review will be completed and additional information may be requested. Please direct questions concerning drainage issues to Jason Swenson (651-234-7539) or Jason.Swenson@state.mn.us of MnDOT’s Water Resources section. Permits: In addition to the Drainage permit mentioned above, any use of, or work within or affecting, MnDOT ROW will require a permit. Permits can be applied for at this site: https://olpa.dot.state.mn.us/OLPA/. Please upload a copy of this letter when applying for any permits. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 82 MnDOT Metropolitan District, Waters Edge Building, 1500 County Road B2 West, Roseville, MN 55113 Please direct questions regarding permit requirements to Buck Craig of MnDOT’s Metro Permits Section at 651-775-0405 or Buck.Craig@state.mn.us. Review Submittal Options MnDOT’s goal is to complete reviews within 30 calendar days. Review materials received electronically can be processed more rapidly. Do not submit files via a cloud service or SharePoint link. In order of preference, review materials may be submitted as: 1. Email documents and plans in PDF format to metrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us. Attachments may not exceed 20 megabytes per email. Documents can be zipped as well. If multiple emails are necessary, number each message. 2. PDF file(s) uploaded to MnDOT’s external shared internet workspace site at: https://mft.dot.state.mn.usmetrodevreviews.dot@state.mn.us. Contact MnDOT Planning development review staff at for uploading instructions, and send an email listing the file name(s) after the document(s) has/have been uploaded. If you have any questions concerning this review, please contact me at (651) 234-7797. Sincerely, Cameron Muhic Senior Planner Copy sent via E-Mail: Buck Craig, Permits Lance Schowalter, Design Jason Swenson, Water Resources Eric Lauer-Hunt, Traffic April Crockett, Area Manager Doug Nelson, Right-of-Way Michael Samuelson, Multimodal Jesse Thornsen, Multimodal Jason Junge, Transit Russell Owen, Metropolitan Council City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 83 The Wooddale Ave and Wooddale Ave South (cul-de-sac) intersection has multiple risk factors for crashes, including being on a horizontal curve and marginal sight distance to vehicles from the MN 100 exit ramp. Incidents here have the potential to impact MnDOT facilities. The city agrees that there are certain risk factors at this intersection, not unlike many other intersections in the city. While there have been 5 recorded crashes in the last 5 years, none of those incidents were attributed to the intersection geometrics or high traffic volume. When asked about the “multiple risk factors” at this intersection, MnDOT was unable to pinpoint specific problems which would lead to increased crashes or unsafe conditions. MnDOT cited the observed 7.5 – 8 second reaction times as low, but also noted these times fit within the acceptable levels. The provided traffic study shows volumes on Wooddale Ave lower than current MnDOT data (9400 AADT as of 2020). The trip generation numbers are also lower than MnDOT estima tes. The traffic audit completed did not use the 2020 AADT numbers in the report as they appear to be inaccurate or influenced by a road closure in another location. For example, the 9400 AADT volume recorded by MnDOT is 150% higher than the 2017 AADT volume in this location, while other area corridors experienced significant decreases in 2020 volumes. Due to the impact of COVID on vehicle travel, most AADT taken in 2020 appear to be skewed in some way and are not good indicators on “normal” traffic scenarios. If access is provided to the proposed development from Wooddale Ave South (cul -de-sac), a dedicated westbound left turn lane should be provided at the Wooddale Ave and Wooddale Ave S (cul-de-sac) intersection. Access to the proposed development from the Wooddale Avenue South cul-de-sac already exists and has been in use by both the former church and daycare center when they were active and generated similar traffic volumes as the proposed apartments. The benefit of a turn lane off Wooddale Avenue appears to be a subjective statement by the MnDOT reviewer. While a dedicated traffic lane would separate trips to the apartments from traffic headed north on Wooddale, none of the data from the traffic audit or MnDOT suggests that this would impact travel times or safety. The 3801 traffic study states this: “Although the projected westbound left-turn volume is relatively low, the addition of a westbound left-turn lane is recommended under Scenarios A and C, assuming MnDOT concurrence.” While MnDOT has suggested this change, it is also unclear at this point whether MnDOT would allow the change to take place in their right-of-way. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 84 From: ken savik Sent: Sunday, February 6, 2022 11:14 AM To: Lynette Dumalag <ldumalag@stlouispark.org> Subject: Church Project 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. Lynette My name is Ken Savik. I live at 5718 Cambridge St. I've lived here since 1980. First off, I don't believe that I'm on the mailing list for info on the Aldergate project. That being said, I was really concerned to see the plan change in regards to dumping the garage parking onto Woodale and Cambridge. We have so many kids living on Cambridge St and from past experience cars would fly down the block. We are a quiet neighborhood now and this influx of traffic is simply going to ruin it. I still don't believe that the project has sufficient parking which will lead to on street parking in the neighborhood and totally messing up the plowing efforts all winter long. The only appeal from the meeting for this project was the use of the cul de sac for entrance and exit. This sort of project will have a detrimental effect on not only the neighborhood but also on our property values and has no business in this neighborhood. I urge you to not let this plan go through. you represent all of us as well as the church and bringing in another high density project is uncalled for . Please do not ruin our neighborhood Ken Savik City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 85 From: Greta Ekern Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 1:05 PM To: Laura Chamberlain <lchamberlain@stlouispark.org> Subject: Aldersgate Development Comments 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 Laura- I will be unable to attend the public hearing on March 23rd regarding the development at the Aldersgate spot, however I did want to make a few comments. First, and most importantly, is the garage entrance that goes into the neighborhood traffic. From the previous listening sessions with the neighborhood, this was the single biggest concern raised in those forums. In the first forum, the rendering did not show the garage entrance opening into neighborhood, but everyone still expressed huge concern that post the MN-DOT traffic flow it would. Of course, the next rendering we see, it does in fact have the entrance into the neighborhood. Why was the plan altered to include the entrance via the neighborhood? This neighborhood as finally started to turn-over and retain some of its young families (mine included) vs. seeing them move to the west suburbs or over to Browndale. We already experience fast traffic on Alabama and on Yosemite, and having 114 units of traffic coming through will raise that drastically. I would imagine this will factor into a number of families' decisions on staying in this neighborhood. As a mother to 3 young kids who love to bike and scooter around to the parks, it certainly will for me. I will say that with this addition, the neighborhood residents feel that all of this 'public buy-in' and 'listening' is just performative and no one is actually listening or caring about actually addressing the residents concerns and getting to a mutually beneficial outcome for both the community and the neighborhood. Second, was the parking. Based on the # of spots on the flat lot and the cost for a garage spot (pretty expensive given the income requirements) there was concern about what this would do to a heavy increase in street parking. Has that been address, and if so, how? Thank you, Greta Hanson 3861 Yosemite Ave City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 86 From: Kenna Clark Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 8:40 PM To: Laura Chamberlain <lchamberlain@stlouispark.org> Subject: Wooddale Affordable Apartments (Aldersgate property) 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, Thank you for taking the time today to discuss the Aldersgate property. Here are my major concerns, pulled from the content below. 1.Too many high density housing developments, for a small neighborhood foot print. 2.The additional traffic will exacerbate the current situation with cars and delivery semis to/from Holiday and Speedway. 3.Added congestion to the Yosemite/Excelsior Blvd intersection, especially with a south garage entry/exit. (Tied to #2) Over populating the exiting small footprint: During the February meeting, it was noted by Elmwood residents that developing the Aldersgate property, Congregational Church day care and the Jenssen Press property as ‘high-density housing’ seems to be an extensive for the existing footprint of the Elmwood neighborhood. Traffic burdens: The original plan was updated with another driveway, exiting south from the underground parking onto Wooddale/Cambridge streets. I cannot support this design, since the traffic flow will over populate Cambridge to Yosemite and Zarthan. I would propose the south driveway curve around to the parking lot, to exit onto Wooddale Avenue by the fire station. You’ll have to find another location for your Tot Play and Dog Play areas. •Yosemite Avenue is the first street west of Hwy 100 that allows access to Excelsior Blvd. The intersection at Yosemite/Excelsior is already over capacity with all the traffic arriving and departing from the Holiday store. I’ve complained previously about this intersection to Lynette and adding more cars is not feasible. •Think about where the closest gas stations are from the Wooddale Apartments! The three closet gas stations are on Excelsior Blvd at Yosemite, Zarthan and Alabama. Question: Did the traffic study include the impact of increased cars from Wooddale via Cambridge to Yosemite and Zarthan? •As a side note for Yosemite Avenue, north of Excelsior Blvd, it currently is the route that all the delivery trucks take after making their deliveries to the Holiday store. These semis and large delivery vehicles (Coke, Pepsi trucks) are overweight for what is allowed on our residential streets, yet we have been unsuccessful in getting our SLP government to take any action. My City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 87 guess it that the city enjoys to taxes paid from Holiday, so they turn a blind eye to all the overweight delivery trucks traveling on Yosemite to 39th St, then west to Alabama. •This is likely the same Zarthan and the Speedway store, but I cannot speak to the specifics. Transportation: As we know, not everyone owns a car and the development of the light rail has been promoted as the ‘main transportation’ method for several new apartment buildings in and around the new light rail. Question: What did this project determine to be the percent of the 114 units that will not own a car and need to take public transportation? With the light rail start date bumped out to 2027, what bus routes are available for the Wooddale Apartment residents to take? •I've commuted via different bus routes to and from downtown and know that several of these routes are currently not running, since many employees are working remotely. The only bus route that provides decent access to Uptown and Downtown runs along Excelsior Blvd. •What walk path will the residents of Wooddale Apartments be taking to hop a bus on Excelsior Blvd? Likely Cambridge to Yosemite, the most direct route. o If these residents will be crossing Excelsior Blvd at Yosemite Avenue, I’d like to alert all of you that, not all the cars will stop for pedestrians in the crosswalk and may even ‘honk’ at pedestrians trying to cross Excelsior Blvd. I’ve had several experiences of my own and communicated these concerns to Lynette and Debra Heiser, who has reached out to Hennepin County to have a ’study’ completed for this intersection, with no response for over six months. The concerns I’ve listed reflect those discussed by the residents during the February meeting. Thank you, Kenna Clark Concerned Elmwood resident City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 88 From: Michael Munson Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 8:39 AM To: Info@stlouispark.org Subject: Wooddale Avenue Apartments 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'm a resident of the Elmwood neighborhood (Xenwood & 39th) and I am writing in full support of the proposed apartment project at 3801 Wooddale Ave. St. Louis Park is a dynamic and growing community that needs more housing options for people of diverse economic backgrounds. The project will provide much needed affordable housing for over 100 families and we welcome the development and future residents to the Elmwood community. Thanks - Mike Mike Munson City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 89 March 21,2022 Ms.Laura Chamberlain,Senior Planner City of St. Louis Park 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. St.Louis Park,MN.55416 REF. Special Meeting Wooddale Avenue Apartments St.Louis Park,MN. Ms.Chamberlain, After reviewing the March 23,2022 agenda,I have several it ms that should be reviewed before any action is taken. There are no guide lines and/or requirement for traffic cont of during the demolition phase and construction phase.This project is in the hea ofthe Elmwo d neighborhood and fails to address traffic control issues. It would be a major shortfall o the city not to rotect this neighborhood from these activities that will be on going for over a year.This is a quiet,eaceful,safe residential neighborhood. The planning commission and city staff needs to mandate saf ty guide lines and/or requirements upon the developer's agents, contractors and allot er contractors ngaged in Wooddale Avenue Apartments. These mandates should include no on-street arking of any kind and no street use of any kind except at the existing Wooddale Ave.cul-de-sac.In add tion,on page 2 ofthe staff's agenda,items 6b and 6c, should have "daily"inserted in lieu of "as nee ssary".It is un erstood that several construction activities would require the use of local streets. The city planning commission and city staff sh uld look at the exterior architectural design.It may meet the cities requirements for material type,but is lacking archit ctural elements that reflect the residential features that blend into this neighborhood.Look at the housi g project to the Northwest and across the street from Fire Station One.This is a good example of archit ctural features that blend very well into this neighborhood.Wooddale Avenue Apartments design wo ld fit very well at West End and along 36" street. The neighbors I have spoken with and I object to the South e try/exit from the underground parking as shown on Site Plan C2-1.Take an inventory of existing project ,just approved projects and projects under construction,most if not all have ONE entry/exit from nderground parking.When Aldersgate Methodist Church had a full service,the majority oftheir con regation used the Wooddale Ave.cul-de- sac to enter /exit their parking area without any issues with ooddale on and off ramp from Highway 100.The 114 residences can handle the intersection just as w II.Besides,ifthe city and MN DOT believe there is an issue, now is the time to fix the problem for all use s. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 90 The developer clearly stated in the neighborhood meeting of 9/28/2021,the underground parking will be available to the tenants for additional cost.If the tenants annot afford the extra cost fees or elect notto use the parking, is there enough surface parking?This ill lead to street parking,which will lead to street maintenance issues like sweeping and snow plowin .Street parking should have some kind of control that works for all users.Please recommend a solution The requirement to keep your neighbors,seniors,bike rides oung and old,dog walkers and children safe from traffic generation is paramount .As not all streets ave sidewalks on each side,it is therefore requested that a series of speed bumps be installed on Camb idge Street between Wooddale Ave.on the East and Yosemite Ave.Son the West along with Goodric between Wooddale Ave.on the East and Yosemite Ave.on the West and Wooddale Ave.between Ca bridge and Goodrich.This would also help enforce the new 20 MPH in our neighborhood.Along with ins alling the speed bumps, install vertical markers at each location to notify city workers and others . 1 es A.Johnson < 5700 Cambridge St. St.Louis Park,MN.55416 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 91 From: Frank Johnson Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 5:26 PM To: Laura Chamberlain <lchamberlain@stlouispark.org> Subject: Re: Wooddale apartments 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 share my concerns about the proposed Wooddale project: 1.Cambridge should not become a major thoroughfare. Nor should the other neighborhood streets. Traffic should be routed to Wooddale by the fire department. 2.I’m concerned about 100 or more kids without a significant on-site playground. 3.I’m concerned about planning for the K-12 education of possibly 100 additional students. 4.I’m concerned about this move away from distributed housing. Thank you, Frank Johnson City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 92 From: Greta Ekern Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2022 1:01 PM To: Sean Walther <swalther@stlouispark.org>; Laura Chamberlain <lchamberlain@stlouispark.org> Subject: Re: development comments 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 Sean and Laura- Thank you for reaching out. Unfortunately, work has been crazy these last few days as I am getting ready to leave for Spring Break. Laura was helpful in our conversation. I did want to add a few notes to the written submitted notes that I already provided. 1)I understand how developing the site at Aldersgate propels the future vision of the city forward, ensuring that we are creating opportunities for living across all income levels. And I support that vision. What I am unclear on is how having a garage entry into the neighborhood propels that vision forward. I am not opposed to the development. I am opposed to the traffic dumping into the neighborhood. Neighborhood will have developments flanked on 3 of 4 corners in future. Excluding the garage entrance will help reduce the total amount of traffic through our neighborhood, which will go up. 2) I understand that traffic studies were done---how did they account for reduced traffic flow that is occurring overall today due to continued WFH environment due to COVID? And while it is great that the tarffic studies shows that no additional infrastructure is needed (like stoplights or stop signs) how was the increased traffic considered as it relates to the neighborhood foot traffic safety given that Goodrich is a T intersection that people speed down, and Cambridge/Yosemite Intersection consistently has people running the stop-signs. Both of those streets are the streets our kids walk, bike, scoot down to get to the two neighborhood parks. So if you want Elmwood to be a neighborhood for all, like the city’s vision aspires, how are you ensuring the safety of those who live here with children? Thank you, Greta Hanson City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8a) Title: Wooddale Avenue Apartments Page 93 Meeting: City council Meeting date: April 4, 2022 Action agenda item: 8b Executive summary Title: Beltline Station Development (Ward 1) Recommended action: • Motion to adopt Resolution approving the preliminary and final plat for Beltline Station (requires 4 affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve first reading of Ordinance adding section 36-268-PUD 22 to the zoning code and amending the zoning map from IG – General Industrial to PUD 22 and set the second reading for April 18, 2022 (requires 5 affirmative votes). Policy consideration: Does city council support the proposed development? Summary: Sherman Associates proposes to construct the following building components on the 6.6-acre site at the southeast corner of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard: • Seven-story mixed -use building with six levels of market rate housing (156 units) and approximately 21,000 square feet of neighborhood commercial space, potentially anchored by a grocer. • Five -story market rate apartment building with 146 units and underground parking. • Four-story all affordable apartment building with 82 units and underground parking. Of these, 77 units would be available at 60% AMI , five units would be available at 30% AMI and 22 units would be three -bedrooms. • A 590-stall parking ramp, including 268 park and ride stalls, 322 residential stalls and approximately 2,000 square feet of retail/commercial space. • Sustainable features including on and off-site solar, greenspace, plazas, and public art distributed throughout the development. The development will adhere to the city’s green building policy as amended July 2020. The applicant applied for a comprehensive plan amendment to re -guide portions of the site to transit-oriented development. This application was approved by city council on March 7, 2022. The applicant has now submitted applications for a preliminary and final plat and preliminary and final planned unit development. The planning commission held a public hearing and voted 6 to 0 to recommend approval of the applications on March 16, 2022. Financial or budget considerations: See the economic development authority (EDA ) report from June 14, 2021 related to the application for tax increment financing assistance. 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; Traffic study; Beltline Station area framework and design guidelines; Draft planning commission minutes from March 16, 2022; Official exhibits & site renderings Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, redevelopment administrator Reviewed by: Sean Walther, planning manager Karen Barton, community development director Approve d by: Kim Keller, city manager City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 2 Title: Beltline Station Development Discussion Site information: The proposed redevelopment site is in the southeast quadrant of CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard. The site is immediately north of the Southwest Light Rail (SWLRT) Beltline Boulevard Station. The site is comprised of four tracts of land totaling approximately seven acres in the Triangle neighborhood: • 4601 Highway 7 (owned by the EDA) • 3130 Monterey Ave S (owned by the EDA), • road right of way (owned by the city) • 4725 Highway 7 (owned by Beltline Development LLC an affiliate of Sherman Associates). Site area (acres): 5.53 acres Beltline Blvd. Natchez Ave. S Monterey Ave. S 4601 Hwy 7 3130 Monterey 4725 Hwy 7 ROW City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 3 Title: Beltline Station Development Current use: Vacant land Surrounding land uses: North: CSAH25 East: General Office Products South: SWLRT Beltline Station West: Beltline Boulevard Current 2040 land use guidance Current zoning TOD - transit oriented development I-G general industrial ROW - right of way RRR - railroad Proposed 2040 land use guidance Proposed zoning TOD - transit oriented development PUD planned unit development ROW - right of way Background: In 2015 the city received a $6.4 million -dollar federal grant to construct a multi- level parking ramp in lieu of a large surface parking lot to serve the park and ride needs of the SWLRT at the Beltline Station. In summer 2017, the EDA entered into a preliminary development agreement with Sherman Associates to construct a development that meets the city’s objectives for the site which included: • Construct a signature, transit-oriented development (TOD). • Transform the SWLRT Beltline Boulevard Station Redevelopment Site into an active, TOD-focused place with: − Mixed use development (including multi-family residential, office and small commercial components), − Housing density to support transit ridership, − Mixed income housing (both market rate and affordable), and − High -quality shared site amenities . • Optimize the site’s development and employment potential. • Integrate development with the adjacent SWLRT Beltline Boulevard Station and connect with the surrounding areas. • Build a parking structure for required park-and-ride purposes. • Demonstrate high standards for environmental sustainability. The EDA determined Sherman Associates’ proposal most closely aligned with the city’s vision, development objectives and preferred programming for the site . City staff and Sherman Associates have been working on project details and financing of the project for the past several years, and the development team is now in the process of moving forward with their development proposal. The applicant applied for a comprehensive plan amendment in January 2022, to re-guide portions of the site from right-of-way and railroad to transit-oriented development. This application was reviewed by the planning commission on February 16, 2022 and was approved by city council on March 7, 2022. In addition, Sherman Associates submitted a vacation application to Hennepin County to vacate portions of CSAH 25 along the northern portion of the site, and the City of St. Louis Park has initiated vacation applications for various street, highway, alley, and easement rights-of-way to prepare the site for redevelopment. City council City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 4 Title: Beltline Station Development will be holding a public hearing and considering the first reading of the ordinance on April 4, 2022. Present considerations: The applicant requests the city: 1. Approve a preliminary and final plat to create four developable lots. 2. Amend the zoning map and zoning ordinance to rezone the subject properties from IG – general industrial to PUD - planned unit development. Architectural site plan Preliminary and final plat analysis: Sherman Associates seeks preliminary and final plat approval to combine numerous lots for the development. Lots: The subdivision proposal will create four lots. Lot 1, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota will have an area of 73,675 square feet or 1.69 acres. This lot will be the location of the 156 unit, 7-story mixed use building, with 20,000 square feet ground floor commercial (Building 1). The density for this site is 92.3 units per acre. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 5 Title: Beltline Station Development Lot 2, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota will have an area of 61,509 square feet or 1.41 acres. This lot will be the location of the 82 unit, 4-story all affordable residential building (Building 2). The density for this site is 58.2 units per acre. Lot 3, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota will have an area of 61,140 square feet or 1.40 acres. This lot will be the location of the 146 unit, 5-story all market-rate residential building (Building 3). The density for this site is 104.3 units per acre. Lot 4, Block 1, Be ltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota will have an area of 43,190 square feet or 0.9915 acres. This lot will be the location of the 7-story parking ramp, which includes 1,900 square feet of ground floor commercial (parking ramp). Easements: Drainage and utility easements are provided along all external and internal property lines. There is a 30-foot utility easement running along the interior north-south property lines to accommodate a large storm sewer utility, as well as water and sewer connections that serve the development. The applicant requests some reductions of drainage and utility easements surrounding the site, and the proposed widths vary. Staff support these reductions because all major utilities serving the surrounding area are located within right-of- way or are located within the 30-foot easement through the site. Additional easements surrounding the property would unlikely be utilized. Private access easements between all sites will be required prior to the issuance of building permits . Right of way: The city and Hennepin County are processing applications to vacate excess right- of-way along CSAH 25 and the former frontage road. The SWLRT project is removing the frontage road and will be buildable property when vacated. The City of St. Louis Park owns fee title to all the land under the right-of -way and intends to sell this land to Sherman Associates as part of the development. Park and trail dedication: The parks and recreation advisory commission (PRAC) reviewed the park and trail dedication for the proposed development on February 16, 2022. PRAC recommended collecting park and trail dedication fees in lieu of land. Several of the parcels have already been platted, and dedication fees have already been paid for the former commercial and industrial u ses that were on the site. However, park and trail dedication fees will need to be collected for all new dwelling units. The 2022 fee schedule sets the residential park dedication fee at $1,500 per dwelling unit and the residential trail dedication fee at $225 per dwelling units. 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 IG – General Industrial. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 6 Title: Beltline Station Development Building and site design analysis: Beltline Station Development 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. In addition, the following criteria shall be satisfied : (1) The design shall consider the project as a whole and shall create a unified environment within project boundaries by ensuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and design and efficient use of utilities. Staff finds the plan meets this requirement. (2) The design of a PUD shall achieve compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses, both existing and proposed, and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse effect of the surrounding land uses on the PUD. Staff finds these criteria will be met. (3) A PUD shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy. This criterion will be met. The development intends to use Enterprise Green Communities and use the Energy Design Assistance program to meet the requirements of the policy. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 7 Title: Beltline Station Development (4) The use of green roofs or white roofs and on-site renewable energy is encouraged. The building includes rooftop solar energy installation. This criterion will be met. In addition, Sherman Associates developed, owns, and operates two solar gardens under the community solar program totaling 6.75 megawatts. Buildings and tenants at Beltline Station Development could subscribe to Sherman’s solar gardens under the community solar program. (5) A PUD shall comply with the city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy. The development will include 20 percent of the units available at affordable rents. The development includes 82 affordable units with 5 units affordable at 30 percent area median income (AMI) and 77 units affordable at 60 percent AMI exceeding the city’s policy . This criterion will be met. Zoning analysis: The following table provides the development metrics. The property is proposed to be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The proposed performance and development standards, as indicated in the development plans, establish the development requireme nts for this property if approved. Zoning Compliance Table. Factor Required Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Ramp Met? Use Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Residential Residential Ramp Yes Lot Area 2.0 acres required 5.53 acres included 1.69 1.41 1.4 0.99 Yes Sidewalks Required Provided along all street frontages Yes Height None with PUD 7 stories: 83 feet 4 stories: 49 feet 5 stories: 60 feet 6.5 stories: 77 feet 92.5 feet clock Yes Building Materials Minimum of 60% Class I materials for buildings, and within 20 feet of right -of- way for parking ramps North: 63.3 South: 60.4 East: 64.4 West: 60.6 North: 60.2 South:60.2 East: 60.2 West: 64 North: 60.8 South: 64.8 East: 62.7 West: 75.5 North: 44.4 South: 50.5 East: 30.7 West: 67.7 TBD Dwelling Units Total Proposed: 211 156 82 146 0 Yes Density (units per acre TOD: Average 50-125 92.3 58.2 104.3 0 Yes Setbacks No minimum required front, rear or side setbacks. North: 3.7’ South: 5’ East: 29’ West: 4.6’ North: 10’ South: 35.7’ East: 4’ West: 27’ North: 6.5’ South: 7’ East: 7.5’ West: 14.6’ North: 0’ South: 1.5’ East: 27.6’ West: 1.9’ Yes City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 8 Title: Beltline Station Development Factor Required Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Ramp Met? Off-Street Parking Residential: 1 per studio 1 per 1-bed 1.25 per 2-bed 2 per 3-bed Allow 30% discount at LRT Commercial: 1 per 250 sf commercial Residential Required: 128 Provided in Ramp: 247 Commercial Required: 60 Provided in surface: 55 1.6 per unit Required: 89 Provided: 95 Garage: 59 Surface: 37 1 per unit Required: 125 Provided: 178 Garage: 96 Surface: 6 In Ramp: 77 1.29 per unit Required: Building 1: 128 Building 3: 23 Park&Ride: 268 Total: 419 Provided: Building 1: 247 Building 3: 77 Park&Ride: 268 Total: 592 Yes EV charging Stations Residential: 10% Level 2 Commercial: 5% Level 2 Residential Required: 13 Provided: 13 Commercial Required: 6 Provided: 6 Required: 9 Provided: 10 Required: 13 Provided: 13 Required: Building 1: 13 P&R:14 conduit Provided: Building 1: 13 P&R:14 conduit Yes Bicycle Parking Residential 1 per dwelling unit plus 1 per 10 automobile spaces Commercial 10% of required parking Residential Required: 181 Provided: 118 Proof: 70 Commercial Required: 6 Provided:6 Required: 92 Provided: Interior: 104 Exterior: 8 Required: 161 Provided: Interior: 156 Exterior: 8 Required: None Provided: Proof for Building 1: 70 Yes Uses: Beltline Station Development is a single -phased mixed-use, mixed-income development with three buildings. There are two market rate buildings and one all-affordable building. The buildings include a combination of studio, alcove, one -bedroom, one-bedroom + den, two- bedroom, two-bedroom + den and three -bedroom uses. The breakdown of unit type by building is as follows: Unit Type Summary Building Studio Alcove 1 bed 1bed + 2bed 2bed+ 3bed TOTAL Building 1: Market Rate 21 11 56 15 53 156 Building 2: Affordable 30% AMI - 1 60% AMI -14 30%AMI - 3 60%AMI - 42 30%AMI - 1 60%AMI - 21 5 77 Building 3: Market Rate 15 53 15 58 5 146 Total 21 26 124 30 156 5 22 384 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 9 Title: Beltline Station Development Inclusionary housing policy: The inclusionary housing policy requires any residential development that utilizes a planned unit development rezoning adhere to the city’s inclusionary housing policy. The required breakdown is 20 percent of units at 60 percent area median income (AMI), 10 percent of units at 50 percent AMI, or five percent of units at 30 percent AMI. The developer can choose what percentage of affordability they would like to provide. The Beltline Station Development would be mixed income with 82 units (20 percent) offered at affordable rents in one building. Specifically, 77 units would offer affordable rents to households at 60% AMI and five units would offer affordable rents to households at 30% AMI, exceeding the city’s inclusionary housing requirements. The development would also provide 22 three -bedroom units (27 percent of the affordable units) to accommodate larger families. An all-affordable building would differ from the Inclusionary Housing Policy requirement that all affordable units be spread between the various buildings, however, in this case, it is the most efficient financing and design structure for the affordable housing. It allows the developer to deliver more affordable housing units, targeting areas of greatest housing need including: • Family sized housing units. o 67 (82%) of the affordable units would be two bedrooms or larger. o 22 units (27%) would be three bedrooms. o The average unit floor area would be 1,029 square feet. • More deeply affordable units: Five (5) units at 30% AMI • Well-designed and quality housing units in any product type. Examples include: o Two- and three-bedroom units generally have two baths. o Structured/tempered parking. o Numerous common area amenities to serve the needs of residents/families. o Exterior building materials that complement and match the adjacent market rate buildings. o Most units would have a balcony or walk out patio. Amenities for the affordable building are similar to that of the market rate buildings but are designed more specifically with families in mind, and include a fitness room, club room, pet spa, playground, splash pad, and amenity deck. Per the Metropolitan Council, 60 percent AMI for a family of four is $62,940. Monthly rental rates at 60 percent AMI are presently $1,180 for a one -bedroom unit, $1,417 for a two - bedroom, and $1,635 for a three -bedroom unit. 30 percent AMI for a family of four is $31,450. Monthly rental rates at 30 percent AMI are presently $590 for a one-bedroom unit, $708 for a two-bedroom unit, and $817 for a three-bedroom unit. Wetlands: There is an existing wetland on the southeast corner of the site. This wetland will be filled, and the developer will work with the city and watershed district to add wetland credits elsewhere in St. Louis Park. This wetland impact was reviewed as part of the e nvironmental assessment worksheet (EAW). Utilities and easements: There is an existing 66-inch storm sewer pipe running north to south through the site connecting storm water from north of CSAH 25 to Bass Lake Preserve. This pipe City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 10 Title: Beltline Station Development is proposed to be relocated and reconstructed slightly to the east and would be located in the center of the development. An existing easement would be vacated, and a new 30-foot easement would be recorded to provide for operation and maintenance of the utility line. There are two Metropolitan Council sewer force main lines running along the north side of the site. A portion of these lines sit under what is currently the CSAH 25 frontage road. Portions of these force sewer lines will be relocated further north within the CSAH 25 right-of-way in order to add additional development land to this property. There are several other highway, street, alley, and utility easements that are requested to be vacated as part of the proposed development. The need for these easements will go away with the development. These applications are being reviewed by various agencies and will be considered by city council on April 4, 2022. All additional new utility services to the building will be placed underground. Utility service structures, such as generators or transformers, will be screened completely from off -site with materials consistent with the main building façade. Per the development agreement, buildings will provide the necessary infrastructure to take advantage of fiber-optic service lines in the vicinity of the development. Façade: The mixed-use and residential buildings are comprised primarily of glass, brick , and architectural cladding all of which are considered class I materials. Class II materials include metal and fiber cement panels. The parking garage is comprised of brick, glass, and architectural cladding for class I materials. The first three floors of the building facing Beltline Boulevard and the backage road utilize a perforated metal panel system which is considered a class II material. The intent is this material will allow for green walls on the levels of open -aired park and ride spaces. The amount of class II material on the south facade of the ramp exceeds what is permitted on a parking ramp located within 20 feet of a public right-of-way. However, during a 2018 neighborhood meeting for the site, neighbors expressed an interest in unique design, different from other buildings within the city. These elevations were shared at several city council meetings, a planning commission study session, with the parks and recreation advisory committee, and a neighborhood meeting. Elected and appointed officials and residents seemed open to and liked the idea of a green wall in this location and the perforated metal panel. A similar material is utilized on the Mozaic parking ramp in Uptown Minneapolis. Staff are supportive of the use of this product for the parking garage. The proposed PUD ordinance includes a provision to allow 50% class I materials on the south elevation, and requires a higher 67% class I material minimum requirement on the west elevation, of the parking structure. The commercial uses meet the transparency requirements on all ground floor street facing facades. Transparency levels on building 1’s ground floor commercial spaces on the north and west elevation exceed the city’s minimum requirements of 50 percent. There are no ground floor transparency requirements for residential buildings, however the city’s draft form-based code recommends a minimum of 20 percent transparency for residential uses in this area. The development provides more than 20 percent ground floor transparency on all street facing facades. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 11 Title: Beltline Station Development Traffic study: Several mobility network improvements are being completed as part of the SWLRT project, including the removal of the Highway 7 frontage road adjacent to this redevelopment site, the construction of a “backage” road near the LRT station, a new road connection at Monterey Boulevard with a right-in only off CSAH 25, and a new signalized intersection at Lynn Avenue and CSAH 25. Sherman proposes pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure on all street frontages surrounding the site. A multi-use trail and a sidewalk are proposed along CSAH 25 and sidewalks are proposed along the west side of Beltline Boulevard, the north side of the backage road and on the west side of Monterey Avenue adjacent to the project. Pedestrian connections are also provided through the site. The developer proposes relocating portions of the backage road slightly north to accommodate the installation of a ¾-intersection on Beltline Boulevard to allow southbound cars on Beltline to turn left into the development, rather than a right-in/right-out only intersection. Left-hand turns from the backage road onto Beltline Boulevard would be prohibited. Similar intersections have been installed on Wooddale Avenue near the Highway 7 Frontage Road and were installed in 2020 at Monterey Drive and Park Commons Drive. The developer hired Kimley-Horn to complete a traffic study for the development. S.E.H., a third -party expert, was then hired by the city to review the traffic study. The study analyzed three scenarios for existing conditions and opening day (2024) scenario 1 and opening day (2024) scenario 2. Scenario 1 included the traffic configuration with SWLRT infrastructure improvements. Scenario 2 included the added altered ¾ intersection from Beltline Boulevard and also considered a right -out at Monterey Drive and CSAH 25. This right-out from Monterey Drive and CSAH 25 is no longer being pursued due to lack of support from Hennepin County. The study looked at six intersections including CSAH 25 and Beltline Boulevard/Ottawa Avenue South, Beltline Boulevard & CSAH 25 South Service Road, Beltline Boulevard and Park Glen Road, CSAH 25 and Lynn Avenue, CSAH 25 and Monterey Avenue, and Beltline Boulevard and the backage road. Summarized below is the overall vehicular level of service (LOS) for the six intersections for each scenario. Existing Conditions Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Intersection AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour CSAH 25 & Beltline Blvd. C D C D C D Beltline Blvd. & CSAH 25 service rd. A C A C A C Beltline Blvd. & Park Glen Rd. A E A E A F CSAH 25 & Lynn Ave. A A B B A A CSAH 25 & Monterey Ave. A A A A A A Beltline Blvd. & backage rd. A B A C A C City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 12 Title: Beltline Station Development All intersections operate at an acceptable LOS during AM and PM peak hours except for the Park Glen Road and Beltline Boulevard intersection. The traffic study recommends the installation of a signal at this intersection in the near future. The Beltline Station Development itself does not trigger the need for the signal, but with additional development occurring along Beltline Boulevard, the city plans to install the signal in 2024 as part of the Park Glen Road pavement management construction project. Access: All vehicular access is provided off Beltline Boulevard to the backage road, and from CSAH 25 via a right-in only at Monterey Drive and a signalized intersection at Lynn Avenue. There are driveways into the development site from the backage road and Monterey Drive. As mentioned above, the developer proposes to install a ¾ intersection at Beltline Boulevard and the backage road, shifting the access point slightly to the north, which varies from SWLRT plans. This redesign provides the opportunity for a public plaza on the south side of the backage road adjacent to the Beltline Blvd. LRT station. The proposed intersection change has been reviewed and is supported by city, SWLRT and Hennepin County staff. All loading and utility access is provided internally within the development. Trash and loading are provided on the south side of building 1 adjacent to the parking ramp. Trash and loading for building 2 and building 3 are located within the internal driveway/parking area on the site. Shared access agreements will be required between all sites as each site is reliant upon other the other sites for access. Pedestrian access is provided via sidewalks surrounding the site along all right-of-way, and a 10- foot-wide multi-use trail is provided along CSAH 25. Additional pedestrian access is provided through the site on north-south and east-west internal sidewalk connections. Bike connections are made via a bike lane on Beltline Boulevard, and on the proposed 10-foot- wide multi-use path along CSAH 25. In addition, the site can be accessed via the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail and trail bridge over Beltline Boulevard. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 13 Title: Beltline Station Development Parking: The developer proposes 845 onsite parking spaces, which is similar to the amount of parking provided on a per unit basis for the Beltline Residence and Risor developments located to the south along Beltline Boulevard. The plan provides 98 stalls in surface lots, 155 stalls in underground parking, and 592 stalls in an above ground structured garage. The plan dedicates 268 of the parking stalls in the parking garage for the SWLRT Metro Green Line Extension Beltline Blvd Station park -and-ride and the remainder of the stalls in the garage provide parking for residential parking for building 1 and building 3. City code requires one parking space for studios, alcoves, and one-bedroom units, 1.5 spaces for two-bedroom units, and two spaces for three-bedroom units. The code also requires one space for every 250 square feet of commercial space. In addition, code allows for an overall reduction of thirty percent of parking when located within a quarter mile of a light rail station, making the total required parking on site 369 spaces for residential and commercial uses. This does not include the required 268 SWLRT spaces, which puts the total required space count to 637 spaces. The developer exceeds the city’s requirements to meet market demand and are providing 575 spaces for residential and commercial uses and the 268 park and ride stalls. They are providing this additional parking on-site due to lack of surrounding over-flow parking as there is no on-street parking permitted anywhere nearby. The development will adhere to the city’s building readiness ordinance, which requires 800 MHz radios and security cameras in the parking garage. Electric vehicle parking: The development meets the city’s electric vehicle parking ordinance. A total of 22 level 2 spaces for residential uses and six level 2 spaces for commercial uses will be provided. Additional conduit will be provided for 14 future level 2 spaces within the park and ride portion of the ramp, which is not required to adhere to city ordinances. Bicycle parking: 440 bicycle parking spaces are required, and 400 spaces are provided. Bicycle parking is located near the building entrances for each building and in bicycle storage rooms within the buildings’ structured parking areas. The applicant requests utilization of proof of bicycle parking for 70 bike parking spaces for building 1. Based on the applicant’s experience on other similar-sized, market rate apartment buildings, including developments in downtown Minneapolis, they are providing enough bicycle parking to meet the needs of their future residents. There is space to add 70 bicycle parking spaces within the parking garage , and this area is included in the official exhibits. Under proof- of-parking requirements, the city may administratively require installation when the need is demonstrated, and the developer may install this additional parking at any time. Lighting: Lighting around the site is minimal and is focused toward the main entrances of the buildings and the surface parking lots. The lighting in the parking garage will utilize screening and shields to minimize off -site views of the lighting fixtures. All lighting will meet the city requirements. Landscaping: A total of 1,532 caliper inches of significant trees are being removed from the site. The city’s tree replacement calculation requires 1,838.4 caliper inches be replaced. The plan City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 14 Title: Beltline Station Development would replant 711 caliper inches, and the developer will be required to pay the difference of 1,127 caliper inches into the city’s tree fund at a rate of $140 per caliper inch ($157,780). The landscape plan indicates 179 new canopy trees, 79 new ornamental trees, 6 new evergreen trees, 706 new shrubs, and 302 new perennials throughout the site. The project does not meet the city’s planting and tree replacement requirements. Code allows for alternative landscaping measures to meet the intent of the landscape ordinance including but not limited to outdoor grills, the playground and amenity areas, pocket park spaces throughout the site, outdoor space located on the roof and multiple locations for public art. Staff will work with the developer to ensure the development meets the intent of the ordinance as the outdoor spaces are further refin ed. Designed outdoor recreation area (DORA): There is no minimum DORA requirement for planned unit developments, but 31 percent of the site is designed as DORA. This includes 35 percent DORA for building 1, 37 percent for building 2, and 29 percent for building 3. There are several outdoor recreation and gathering spots including multi-use trail along CSAH25, a dog run, shared outdoor areas between building 1 and building 2, a rooftop pool and terrace for building 1, a splash pad, playground, and amenity deck for building 2, and a pool and amenity deck for building 3. In addition, the ground floor units all have individual patio entrances, and most units have external balconies, providing more private outdoor amenity spaces for residents. In addition, the site is immediately adjacent to the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail. The city requires 12% in other districts. Public spaces: Public and semi-public spaces are located throughout the site. These spaces include a pocket park and dog run between the two northern buildings, a wide pedestrian space running north-south through the site, a covered seating area between the parking ramp and building 1, some public space located near a water retention garden on the northeast corne r, and a public plaza south of the “backage” road, immediately adjacent to Metro Transit’s bus stop. Signs: A sign plan was not submitted for review. The site will be required to adhere to the sign requirements for the mixed-use zoning districts, except the maximum height for stand-alone signs will be limited to fifteen feet in the PUD. Green building policy: The development will adhere to the city’s green building policy and Sherman intends to exceed the city’s requirements. Examples of sustainable design standards Sherman has implemented in the past include LEED, Minnesota Green Communities, National Green Building Standards, SB2030/B3 and ENERGY STAR. In general, the development will pursue goals to achieve energy efficiency within the building envelopes, increased indoor environmental quality to enhanced occupant health and productivity, the buildings will utilize green products and materials during product sourcing and manufacturing. In general, the site is situated and designed to provide for local multimodal connectivity. Some strategies that will be utilized throughout the buildings include: • Energy star qualified appliances and equipment, • Energy conservation strategies that include improvements to the building envelope, lighting control, higher efficiency HVAC equipment, efficient water heating systems, and City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 15 Title: Beltline Station Development on-site and off-site renewable energy. • The site is designed to conserve water, control erosion, and protect water quality. Some best management practices include permeable paving, roof deck plants, and underground stormwater storage. • Construction waste management and recycling. • Waste management that includes recycling and trash chutes and resident training manuals. • Reduction in light pollution. • Low -emitting materials including flooring adhesives, carpets, paints, and furnishings. • Radon control and mitigation. In addition, Sherman Associates developed, owns, and operates two solar gardens under the community solar program totaling 6.75 megawatts. Buildings and tenants at Beltline could subscribe to Sherman’s solar gardens under the community solar program. Climate Action Plan: Th e developer understands the city’s desire to reduce the city’s overall carbon emissions by 55 percent by 2030 and would contribute to the city’s goal of reducing vehicle emissions by 25 percent. The site is adjacent to the SWLRT Beltline Boulevard station and the Cedar Lake LRT Regional Trail creating great multimodal access immediately adjacent and surrounding the site. Mobility access includes LRT, sidewalks, multi-use trails, and frequent bus service once LRT is operational. These modes link the site to the immediate amenities, but also to the greater metro area without needing to rely on a vehicle. Diversity, equity, and inclusion: Sherman Associates indicates they are committed to advancing equitable developments and utilize their projects to advance social, racial, and economic equity. They indicate they are committed to advancing these goals throughout the development process itself and with the product being delivered. Examples of strategies Sherman Associates has employed to advance social, racial, and economic equity include: • Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Program contracting • Corporate charitable giving strategy with a corporate match • Commitment to developing/owning/managing quality affordable housing • Partnering to provide housing and supportive services to families and individuals at risk of homelessness • Partnering to provide housing and supportive services to individuals with significant and long- term disabilities • Leadership involvement and mentorship in industry professional programs promoting diversity initiatives Environmental assessment worksheet (EAW): An EAW was completed summer 2021 for the Beltline Station Development. The draft EAW was published in the Environmental Quality Board Monitor on July 6, 2021, and the comment period ended August 5, 2021. The EAW examined the potential for environmental impacts of the proposed project including: a detailed project description, review of required permits, and analysis of land use and zoning; geology, soils, topography; water resources; contamination and hazardous materials; ecological resources; historic properties; visual effects; air emissions; noise; and transportation. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 16 Title: Beltline Station Development Six regulatory agencies and three public written comments were submitted. On August 23, 2021 the city council approved a record of decision, finding of fact, and the negative declaration of the need for an environmental impact statement. Other relevant guidance documents: In 2012 the city completed the Beltline Area Framework & Design Guidelines to provide guidance for anticipated redevelopment in the area around the SWLRT Beltline Station. The plan is not a mandated design, rather it offers guidance to communicate building design, massing and community preferences to potential developers and city officials. The vision for the Beltline area states “The Beltline area is home to a number of existing community assets. The future Southwest LRT line and transit station present a valuable opportunity for building upon and connecting the area’s assets to create a vibrant new community hub in the Beltline area.” The document provides guidance on the design of future buildings with specifications for building form and character, building façade design, street frontage design, and site design. Typical characteristics of a buildings in the “CSAH 25 South Wedge” character district, where the development site is located, include orientation towards the Beltline Station, plazas, and the regional trail. Buildings should also be oriented towards Be ltline Boulevard and include “active” ground-floor uses. Neighborhood meeting: A virtual neighborhood meeting was held on February 10, 2022. The developers presented their development proposal for the site. There were four attendees at the meeting who asked questions about rooftop solar, the number of small retail spaces, pedestrian access through the site and to the light rail platform, impacts from the delay of the light rail construction, and if there are any interior amenities in the affordable building for children due to Minnesota’s cold winters. The developers answered the attendees’ questions and are going to explore adding interior play areas in the affordable building. The overall comments were positive. The recording of this meeting is posted on the city’s development projects webpage. The developers also expressed interest in having further community engagement specifically to seek input on the neighborhood commercial use for the parking ramp. Planning Commission: The planning commission held a public hearing and considered the applications on March 16, 2022. There were no public comments made. The commission commented on all the affordable units in one building and thanked the developer for constructing the building with similar amenities and features as the market rate buildings. The commission noted that the preliminary development contract was first signed in 2018, yet the development will exceed the requirements under the city policies currently in place in 2022. Questions were asked about the parking garage and preservation and utilization of park and ride stalls for SWLRT. The commission also applauded the developer and staff for working through such a large development with so many complexities. Next steps: City council is scheduled to hold a second reading of the PUD ordinance on April 18, 2022. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 17 Title: Beltline Station Development The EDA will be receiving a report on the business terms regarding applications for tax increment financing (TIF) on April 11, 2022, and the establishment of TIF districts is tentatively scheduled for May 16, 2022. The applicant will also be submitting applications for a registered land survey, which will allow them to vertically divide the ownership of the buildings or structures. This provides for different owners to own portions of the parking ramp. The process for approval of a registered land survey is like a preliminary and final plat. The timing of this application is still to be determined . The developer might apply in the coming weeks or may wait to submit their application once construction is complete. Recommendations: Staff recommends approval of the Beltline Station plat subject to the conditions included in the plat resolution. Staff recommends approval of the preliminary and final planned unit development for the Beltline Station Development 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 and maintenance of all public improvements including, but not limited to, sidewalks, trails, boulevards the public plaza south of the backage road and the execution of necessary easements related to such improvements. iv. Easements related to electronic communication and fiber infrastructure. v. A performan ce 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, trails, boulevards, lighting), 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. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 18 Title: Beltline Station Development 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, water, and sewer systems 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. 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 ne cessary. 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 irrigat ion, 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 April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 19 Title: Beltline Station Development Zoning map amendment exhibit City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 20 Title: Beltline Station Development Resolution No. 22-____ Resolution approving preliminary and final plat of Beltline Station, 4725 Highway 7, 4601 Highway 7, and 3130 Monterey Avenue South Whereas, Sherman Associates 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. 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this resolution , 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: a. The applicant shall submit evidence that Hennepin County vacated the highway right -of -way as proposed and indicated in the preliminary plat. 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 and maintenance of all public improvements including, but not limited to, sidewalks, boulevards, multi-use trails, the public plaza south of the backage road, and the execution of necessary easements related to such improvements. ii. The applicant shall reimburse city attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final plat approval. iii. 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. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the City. b. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction, private utility, and city representatives. c. All necessary permits shall be obtained. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 21 Title: Beltline Station Development d. The developer shall pay to the city the tree replacement fee. 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 in the amount of 1.25 times the estimated costs for the installation of all public improvements (including but not limited to : force main relocation, storm sewer reconstruction, street, sidewalks, multiuse trails, boulevards, utility, streetlights, landscaping, etc.), placement of iron monuments at property corners, the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. 5. The on-site underground storm water management system, and on-site water and sanitary sewer connections shall be privately-owned and privately maintained. Access to the systems 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. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following conditions shall be met: a. All necessary permits shall be obtained. b. The developer shall pay to the city the park dedication fee of $579,000 and trail dedication fee of $86,400 for residential uses. i. The park dedication fee of $234,000 and trail dedication fee of $35,100 for residential uses shall be paid prior to starting any land disturbing activitie s for building 1. This fee shall be collected prior to permitting . ii. The park dedication fee of $219,000 and trail dedication fee of $32,850 for residential uses shall be paid prior to starting any land disturbing activities for building 2. This fee shall b e collected prior to permitting. iii. The park dedication fee of $123,000 and trail dedication fee of $18,450 for residential uses shall be paid prior to starting any land disturbing activities for building 3. This fee shall be collected prior to permitting. Now therefore be it resolved the proposed preliminary and final plat of Beltline Station 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: 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. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 22 Title: Beltline Station Development Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 4, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 23 Title: Beltline Station Development Exhibit A KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Beltline Development LLC, a Minneapolis limited liability company, fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit: Lot 1, Block 1, Brooks McCracken Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Part of the above being registered land, legally described on Certificate of Title No. 1481669 as follows: That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Brooks McCracken Industrial Park, lying Northerly of a line described as beginning at the Southeast corner of Lot 6, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co., Minn., thence Westerly along the South line of said Lot 6 and its extension to the centerline of the vacated alley in said Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co., Minn.; thence South along said centerline to its intersection with the Easterly extension of the South line of Lot 11, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co., Minn.; thence Westerly along said extension and along said South line of Lot 11 to the Southwest corner of said Lot 1 and there terminating. And that the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a Minnesota municipal corporation, fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit: Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, Block 2; That part of Lots 10, 11, 17 and 18, Block 2, lying South of the Southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; All of the vacated alley in Block 2 lying South of the Southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; That part of Natchez Avenue vacated, lying east of the West line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, North of the South line of said Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, and South of the Southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; That part of West 32nd Street, vacated, lying between the extensions across it of the East line of Lot 14 and the West line of Lot 15, Block 2; All in "Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park," Hennepin County, Minnesota; That part of vacated Monterey Avenue (formerly Oakenwald Avenue as shown on the plat of "OAKENWALD ADDITION ST. LOUIS PARK," lying North of the South line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 6, Township 28, Range 24 and south of the Easterly extension of the North line of Lot 10, Block 2, "OAKENWALD ADDITION ST. LOUIS PARK". AND City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 24 Title: Beltline Station Development That part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, Hennepin County, Minnesota described as beginning at the Northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence South along the West line thereof 288.7 feet; thence East to a point on the Northerly right -of-way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, distant 46 feet from the intersection of said right -of-way line with the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter as measured along said right-of-way line; thence Northeasterly along said Northerly right -of-way line to its intersection with the extension South of the East line of Monterey Avenue; thence North along the extension of the East line of Monterey Avenue to the North line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence West along said North line to the point of beginning. And that the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation, fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit: Lot 17, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn. And Lot 1, 2, 3, 4, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn., except that part of said Lots described as follows: Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Lot 4; thence Westerly along the South line of said Lot 4, a distance of 6.00 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence North 00 degrees 19 minutes 53 seconds East, assumed bearing, parallel with the East line of Lots 5 and 6, said Block 1, a distance of 114.27 feet; thence Northwesterly along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 15.00 feet and a central angle of 61 degrees 46 minutes 23 seconds, a distance of 16.17 feet; thence North 61 degrees 26 minutes 30 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 40.60 feet; thence Westerly along a tangential curve to the left, having a radius of 24.00 feet and a central angle of 76 degrees 35 minutes 00 seconds, a distance of 32.08 feet; thence Southwesterly along a reverse curve to the right, having a radius of 361.58 feet and a central angle of 26 degrees 53 minutes 32 seconds, a distance 169.71 feet; then ce South 43 degrees 00 minutes 19 seconds, West, not tangent to said curve, a distance of 71.07 feet to the intersection with a line distant 46.00 feet Easterly of as measured at a right angle to and parallel with hereinafter described "Line A"; thence Southerly along said parallel line, a distance of 26.00 feet to the South line of said Lot 13; thence Easterly along said South line and the easterly extension thereof, a distance of 128.10 feet to the centerline of alley; thence Northerly along the centerline of said Alley, a distance of 32.65 feet to the intersection with the westerly extension of the South line of said Lot 4; thence Easterly along said Westerly extension and along the South line of said Lot 4, a distance of 130.61 feet to the point of beginning. Said "Line A" is described as follows: Commencing at the most Southerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1 Belt Line Industrial Park 2nd Addition, thence South 59 degrees 15 minutes 24 seconds East of an assumed bearing along the Southeasterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 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 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 25 Title: Beltline Station Development tangential curve concave to the West having a radius of 785.30 feet and a central angle of 56 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds; thence North 25 degrees 19 minutes 54 seconds West, tangent to last described curve 180.04 feet; thence Northerly 589.17 feet along a tangential curve concave to the East having a radius of 1268.10 feet a central angle of 26 degrees 37 minutes 12 seconds, said line there terminating. Torrens Property - Certificate Title No. 697371 AND Lots 9 and 19, Block 2; Those parts of Lots 10, 11, 17, 18, Block 2, lying north of the southerly righ t-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; That part of Natchez Avenue vacated, lying east of the West line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, north of the southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk High way No. 7, and southerly of a line hereinafter referred to as Line 1; That part of the vacated alley in Block 2 lying north of the southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7, and southerly of the aforementioned Line 1. All in "Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park," Hennepin County, Minnesota; Line 1 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds East 51.97 feet; thence northeasterly 174.11 feet along a non - tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5790.08 feet, a central angle of 01 degrees 43 minutes 22 seconds, and a chord bearing of North 67 degrees 56 minutes 18 seconds East, and said line there terminating. AND That part of West 32nd Street, vacated, lying southerly of the centerline thereof, westerly of the northerly extension of the east line of Lot 1, Block 1, said plat of Lewiston Park, and easterly of a line hereinafter referred to as Line 2; That part of Natchez Avenue, vacated, lying southerly of the centerline of West 32nd Street, northerly of the north line of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, Hennepin County, and west of the West line of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24; That part of the vacated alley adjoining Block 1, said plat of Lewiston Park, lying southerly of West 32nd Street and northerly of Lot 1, Block 1, Brooks McCracken Industrial Park, Hennepin County. Line 2 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 26 Title: Beltline Station Development seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non -tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West; thence South 67 degrees 02 minutes 58 seconds West, not tangent to said curve, 65.29 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 00 degrees 20 minutes 22 seconds East 298.91 feet, and said line there terminating. AND Lots 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 2, Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND The east 37 feet of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota. AND That part of West 32nd Street, vacated, lying northerly of the centerline thereof, westerly of the southerly extension of the east line of Lot 14, Block 2, said plat of Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park, and easterly of the aforementioned Line 2; That part of Natchez Avenue, vacated, lying northerly of the centerline of West 32nd Street, southerly of a line hereinafter referred to as Line 3, and west of the West line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24; That part of the alley adjoining Block 2, said plat of Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park lying northerly of West 32nd Street and southerly of the aforementioned Line 3; Line 3 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, said county; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north – south quarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 seconds West 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest, having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearing of South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West, and said line there terminating. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 27 Title: Beltline Station Development Ordinance No. ___-22 Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park City Code relating to zoning by creating Section 36-268-PUD 22 as a Planned Unit Development Zoning District for the property located at 4725 Highway 7, 4601 Highway 7, and 3130 Monterey Avenue South 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. 22-06-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance Section 36-268-PUD 22. Section 2. The city council voted on March 7, 2022, to approve Resolution No 22-040 amending the 2040 Comprehensive Plan and the future land use designation for the subject property located at 4724 Highway 7, 4601 Highway 7, and 3131 Monterey Avenue South from Right of Way and Railroad to Transit-Oriented Development. Said comprehensive plan amendments are associated with this ordinance and require Metropolitan Council review and authorization to put it into effect. Section 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from IG-General Industrial to PUD 22: Lot 1, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota Lot 2, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota Lot 3, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota Lot 4, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota Section 4. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development Zoning District: Section 36-268-PUD 22 (a) Development Plan. The property shall be divided into four zones, as indicated on the A0.01 Architectural Site Plan of the Official Exhibits. The zones shall be established by dividing the site into four lots. The northwest lot shall be called “Site 1”, the northeast lot shall be called “Site 2”, the southeast lot shall be called “Site 3”, and the southwest lot shall be called “Site 4”. (1) Development A. Site 1, Site 2, Site 3, and Site 4 shall be developed, used, and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD Official Exhibits: 1. PP100 Preliminary Plat 2. PP200 Comprehensive Preliminary Plat 3. Final Plat 4. V1.00 Alta Survey City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 28 Title: Beltline Station Development 5. V1.01 Alta Survey 6. A0.01 Architectural Site Plan 7. A0.19 Shadow Study 8. C0.00 Cover Sheet 9. C1.00 General Notes 10. C2.00 Demo Plan 11. C3.00 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan – Phase 1 12. C3.01 Erosion and Sediment Control Plan – Phase 2 13. C.3.02 Erosion and Sediment Control Details 14. C3.03 SWPPP 15. C4.00 Site Plan 16. C4.01 Site Access Plan 17. C5.00 Grading Plan 18. C5.01 Storm Sewer Plan 19. C6.00 Utility Plan 20. C6.01 Sanitary Sew er Plan 21. C6.02 Water Plan 22. C6.03 Dry Utility Plan 23. C7.00 Construction Details 24. C7.01 Construction Details 25. C7.02 Construction Details 26. E0.00 Electrical Site Photometrics 27. V1.02 Tree Survey 28. G0.01 Cover Sheet 29. L.100 Overall Site – Landscape Plan 30. L.101 Overall Site – Planting Plan 31. L.106 DORA – Site Plan 32. L300 Construction Details 33. L301 Construction Details (2) Site 1 A. Site 1, legally described as Lot 1, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota, shall be developed, used, and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD O fficial Exhibits: 1. A1.01 Building 1 – Level 1 2. A1.02 Building 1 – Level 2 3. A1.03 Building 1 – Level 3 4. A1.04 Building 1 – Level 4 5. A1.05 Building 1 – Level 5-7 6. A1.06 Building 1 Elevations 7. A1.07 Building 1 Elevations 8. A1.08 Building 1 Data Summary 9. A1.09 Building 1 - Roof City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 29 Title: Beltline Station Development 10. L102 Building 1 – Planting Plan B. Site 1 shall also conform to the following requirements: 1. The property shall be developed with a mixed -use building with 156 residential units and 19,000 square feet of commercial uses. 2. The maximum height shall not exceed 83 feet and seven (7) stories 3. The site shall include a minimum 12 percent designed outdoor recreation area. 4. Parking shall be provided off-street in structured parking and surface parking lots i. A total of 55 parking spaces shall be provided off street in surface parking. 6 spaces shall include Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations. ii. A total of 247 parking spaces shall be provided off-site on Site 4, and an irrevocable covenant or easement shall be recorded by the county on Site 4 benefiting Site 1. 13 spaces shall include Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations. (3) Site 2 A. Site 2, legally described as Lot 2, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota, shall be developed, used, and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD Official Exhibits: 1. A2.01 Building 2 – Level P1 2. A2.02 Building 2 – Level 1 3. A2.03 Building 2 – Level 2 4. A2.04 Building 2 – Level 3 5. A2.05 Building 2 – Level 4 6. A2.06 Building 2 Elevations 7. A2.07 Building 2 Elevations 8. A2.08 Building 2 Data Summary 9. A2.09 Building 2 - Roof 10. L103 Building 2 – Planting Plan B. Site 2 shall also conform to the following requirements: 1. The property shall be developed with 82 residential units. 2. The maximum height shall not exceed 49 feet and four (4) stories 3. The site shall include a minimum twelve (12) percent designed outdoor recreation area. 4. Parking shall be provided off-street in structured parking and surface parking lots i. A total of 56 parking spaces will be provided in structured parking. ii. A total of 36 parking spaces will be provided in surface parking lots iii. 9 spaces shall include Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations. (4) Site 3 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 30 Title: Beltline Station Development A. Site 3, legally described as Lot 3, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota, shall be developed, used, and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD Official Exhibits: 1. A3.01 Building 3 – Level P1 2. A3.02 Building 3 – Level 1 3. A3.03 Building 3 – Level 2 4. A3.04 Building 3 – Le vel 3-4 5. A3.05 Building 3 – Level 5 6. A3.06 Building 3 Elevations 7. A3.07 Building 3 Elevations 8. A3.08 Building 3 Data Summary 9. A3.09 Building 3 - Roof 10. L104 Building 4 – Planting Plan B. Site 3 shall also conform to the following requirements: 1. The property shall be developed with 146 residential units. 2. The maximum height shall not exceed 60 feet and five (5) stories 3. The site shall include a minimum 12 percent designed outdoor recreation area. 4. Parking shall be provided off-street in structured parking and surface parking lots i. A total of 96 parking spaces will be provided in structured parking. ii. A total of 5 parking spaces will be provided in surface parking lots iii. A total of 77 parking spaces shall be provided off-site on Site 4, and an irrevocable covenant or easement shall be recorded by the county on Site 4 benefiting Site 3. iv. 13 spaces shall include Level 2 electric vehicle charging stations. (5) Site 4 A. Site 4, legally described as Lot 4, Block 1, Beltline Station, Hennepin County, Minnesota, shall be developed, used, and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD Official Exhibits: 1. A4.01 Parking Ramp – Level P1 2. A4.02 Parking Ramp – Level 1 3. A4.03 Parking Ramp – Level 2 4. A4.04 Parking Ramp – Level 3 5. A4.05 Parking Ramp – Level 4 6. A4.06 Parking Ramp – Level 5 7. A4.07 Parking Ramp – Level 6 8. A4.08 Parking Ramp – Level 7 9. A4.09 Parking Ramp Elevations 10. A4.010 Parking Ramp Elevations 11. A0.20 Parking Ramp Diagram 12. E0.01 Typical Internal Ramp Level Photometrics City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 31 Title: Beltline Station Development 13. E0.02 Parking Ramp Roof Photometrics 14. E0.03 Parking Ramp Level 1-6 Photometrics 15. L105 Parking Garage – Planting Plan B. Site 4 shall also conform to the following requirements: 1. The property shall be developed with 1,900 square feet of commercial uses on the southwest corner of ground floor. 2. The maximum height shall not exceed 77 feet and six and one half (6.5) stories for the ramp structure and shall not exceed 93 feet to the peak of the clock tower. 3. The site shall include a minimum 12 percent designed outdoor recreation area. 4. Parking shall be provided in a structured parking ramp: i. A total of 247 parking spaces will be provided for Site 1 ii. A total of 77 parking spaces will be provided for Site 3 iii. A total of 268 parkin g spaces will be provided for transit station park and ride. 5. The property shall utilize a minimum of 67 percent class 1 one materials on the west facade and a minimum of 50 percent class 1 materials on the south facade. (b) Uses. A. Permitted uses: The following uses are permitted in PUD 22: 1. 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. B. Uses permitted with conditions: the following uses are permitted in PUD 22 if it complies with the conditions specified for the use in this subsection: 1. Commercial uses: Commercial uses limited to the following: bank, coffee shop, food service, grocery store, large item retail, liquor store, medical or dental office, office, private entertainment (indoor), restaurants, retail, service, showroom, and studio. These commercial uses shall meet the following conditions: i. Commercial uses are limited to the first floor. ii. Hours of operation, including loading/unloading of deliveries, for commercial uses shall be limited to 6 a.m. to 12 a.m. iii. In-vehicle sales or service is prohibited. iv. Outdoor storage is prohibited. C. Accessory uses: Accessory uses are as follows: City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 32 Title: Beltline Station Development 1. Home occupations as regulated by this chapter 2. Gardens. 3. Parking lots. 4. Parking ramps. 5. Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and not to exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use. 6. Public transit stops/shelters. 7. Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen, or retail bakery. 8. Food service. 9. Outdoor seating and service of food and beverages with the following conditions: i. No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted ii. b. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. 10. 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 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. 11. Outdoor storage is prohibited. 12. Communication towers are prohibited. 13. Small cell antennae are prohibited on the clock tower. (c) Special Performance Standards A. All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, transparency, architectural design, landscaping, parking, and screening requirements. B. 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. C. Signs shall be allowed in conformance with the approved final PUD site plan and development agreement in accordance with the following conditions: 1. Freestanding monument signs shall utilize the same exterior materials as the principal buildings and shall not interfere with pedestrian, bicycle or automobile circulation and visibility , and shall be a maximum height of 15 feet; 2. Maximum allowable number, sizes, heights and yards for signs shall be regulated by section 36-362, MX requirements. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 33 Title: Beltline Station Development 3. Wall signs of non -residential uses shall only be placed on the ground floor and exterior walls of the occupied tenant lease space, and/or a monument sign. 4. Wall signs shall not be included in calculating the aggregate sign area on the lot if they meet the following outlined conditions: i. Non-residential wall signs permitted by this section that do not exceed seven percent of the exterior wall area of the ground floor tenant lease space. ii. The sign is located on the exterior wall of the ground floor tenant lease space from which the seven percent sign area was derived. iii. No individual wall sign shall exceed 100 square feet in area. D. Awnings. 1. Awnings shall be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. 2. Backlit awnings shall be prohibited. Section 5. The contents of Planning Case File 22-05-S and 22-06-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Section 6. This ordinance shall take effect upon Metropolitan Council authorization of the associated comprehensive plan amendment approved by Resolution 22-040 and no sooner than 15 days after publication. Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council April 18, 2022 Kim Keller, city manager Jake Spano, mayor Attest: Approved as to form and execution: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Soren Mattick, city attorney First reading April 4, 2022 Second reading April 18, 2022 Date of publication April 28, 2022 Date ordinance takes effect Upon Metropolitan council authorization of the associated comprehensive plan amendment and no sooner than May 13, 2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 34 Title: Beltline Station Development DRAFT MINUTES Planning commission Members present: Jim Beneke, Matt Eckholm, Jessica Kraft, Michael Salzer, Tom Weber, Joffrey Wilson Members absent: none Staff present: Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison Guests: Members of Sherman and Associates 1.Call to order – roll call 2.Approval of minutes – Feb. 16, 2022 Commissioner Weber made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Eckholm to approve the Feb. 16, 2022, minutes of the planning commission as presented. The motion passed 6-0. 3.Hearings 3a. Beltline Station Development Applicant: Sherman Associates, Inc. Case No: 22-05-S , 22-06-PUD Ms. Monson presented the applications. Commissioner Salzar asked if the city is setting a precedent by putting all the affordable housing in one building, or if this has been done in the past. Ms. Monson stated typically the city’s policy does require the affordable units to be spread throughout the development evenly, but noted this is a unique site with a high number of affordable 2- and 3-bedroom units that make funding virtually impossible unless it was its own affordable housing building. She added the city is also an owner of the site and will sell the site to Sherman, so while it’s not ideal, it does help the city achieve many of its goals on this site. Commissioner Weber asked if this entire project is contingent on having a grocer that signs on and if something falls through, is the city back to square one. Mr. Anderson of Sherman Associates stated this project is not contingent on securing a grocer on that site, but certainly that is the ideal scenario for the project to move forward. He added the developer is willing to move forward with the project without the grocer also if that occurs. He stated the developer is committed to mixed-use development and to complex urban infill development and have done projects like this before. Commissioner Salzar asked if the original project agreement was Feb. 2018. Ms. Monson stated yes. Commissioner Salzar stated there was a change to the green requirement in 2020 and asked if this project now meets that standard. Ms. Monson stated yes. City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Page 35 Title: Beltline Station Development Commissioner Salzar asked if there are any other changes in city requirements since 2018. Ms. Monson stated there have been numerous changes for the inclusionary housing policy, but added this project complies with and exceeds the city’s requirements for inclusionary housing policy and green building policy. Chair Beneke opened the public hearing. Mr. Anderson stated Sherman is a local developer in business over 40 years and are long-term members of the community in which they do development, which drives them to produce quality long-term assets. Chair Beneke closed the public hearing. Commissioner Weber thanked staff for their work on this project which is a long time coming. Chair Beneke agreed. Commissioner Salzar asked about parking requirements. Ms. Monson stated the park and ride stalls are open to the public and the renters will utilize the security parking in the ramp as well as open surface parking spaces. She added it’s up to the developer to run the parking, and to ensure there are enough parking spots, while no on-street parking will be allowed in the area. She noted the first couple of spots will be reserved for park and ride users. Ms. Monson also noted there are separate entrances for all 3 parking areas with controlled door access, and only accessible by each building resident. Commissioner Wilson stated that he appreciated the diversity, equity, and inclusion goals that were presented, and asked the developer to consider DEI goals during the construction hiring process. Commissioner Kraft asked when the project would be complete. Ms. Monson stated the start of construction will be in June with grading, and the affordable building will start in July, after financing is closed. She added 3 of the 4 structures start in 2022 with building 3 beginning construction in early 2023. Commissioner Salzar stated he is supportive of this project, with some concerns about the clustering of the affordable housing, and to make sure the dignity of all residents is taken in to consideration. Mr. Anderson stated Sherman and Associates is a strong advocate of affordable housing, and one of the larger affordable housing builders in the mid -west. He stated having all the units in one affordable structure is better for the financing and over 80% are 2–3-bedroom units. He stated the product delivered is quality. He noted several of the amenities within the affordable building, including 2 bathrooms in the 2–3-bedroom units, a children’s play area and a pool area. Commissioner We ber made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Salzar to approve the preliminary and final plat and preliminary and final PUD subject to conditions recommended by staff. The motion passed 6-0. BELTLINE STATIONKNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS: That Beltline Development LLC, a Minneapolis limited liabilitycompany, fee owner of the following described property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, towit:Lot 1, Block 1, Brooks McCracken Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County,Minnesota.Part of the above being registered land, legally described on Certificate of Title No. 1481669 asfollows:That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Brooks McCracken Industrial Park, lying Northerly of a line described asbeginning at the Southeast corner of Lot 6, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co., Minn., thence Westerlyalong the South line of said Lot 6 and its extension to the centerline of the vacated alley in said Block 1,Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co., Minn.; thence South along said centerline to its intersection with the Easterlyextension of the South line of Lot 11, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co., Minn.; thence Westerly alongsaid extension and along said South line of Lot 11 to the Southwest corner of said Lot 1 and thereterminating.And that the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a Minnesota municipal corporation, fee owner of thefollowing described property situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lots 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16, Block 2;That part of Lots 10, 11, 17 and 18, Block 2, lying South of the Southerly right-of-way line of State TrunkHighway No. 7;All of the vacated alley in Block 2 lying South of the Southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7;That part of Natchez Avenue vacated, lying east of the West line of the Northwest Quarter of the NortheastQuarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, North of the South line of said Northwest Quarter of the NortheastQuarter, and South of the Southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7;That part of West 32nd Street, vacated, lying between the extensions across it of the East line of Lot 14 and theWest line of Lot 15, Block 2;All in "Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park," Hennepin County, Minnesota;That part of vacated Monterey Avenue (formerly Oakenwald Avenue as shown on the plat of "OAKENWALDADDITION ST. LOUIS PARK," lying North of the South line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter,Section 6, Township 28, Range 24 and south of the Easterly extension of the North line of Lot 10, Block 2,"OAKENWALD ADDITION ST. LOUIS PARK".ANDThat part of the Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter, Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, HennepinCounty, Minnesota described as beginning at the Northwest corner of said Southwest Quarter of the NortheastQuarter; thence South along the West line thereof 288.7 feet; thence East to a point on the Northerlyright-of-way line of the Minneapolis and St. Louis Railway Company, distant 46 feet from the intersection of saidright-of-way line with the West line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter as measured along saidright-of-way line; thence Northeasterly along said Northerly right-of-way line to its intersection with the extensionSouth of the East line of Monterey Avenue; thence North along the extension of the East line of Montery Avenueto the North line of said Southwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence West along said North line to thepoint of beginning.And that the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation, fee owner of the following describedproperty situated in the County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, to wit:Lot 17, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn.AndLot 1, 2, 3, 4, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 1, Lewiston Park, Hennepin Co. Minn., except that part of said Lotsdescribed as follows:Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Lot 4; thence Westerly along the South line of said Lot 4, adistance of 6.00 feet to the point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence North 00 degrees19 minutes 53 seconds East, assumed bearing, parallel with the East line of Lots 5 and 6, said Block 1, adistance of 114.27 feet; thence Northwesterly along a tangential curve to the left having a radius of 15.00 feetand a central angle of 61 degrees 46 minutes 23 seconds, a distance of 16.17 feet; thence North 61 degrees26 minutes 30 seconds West, tangent to said curve, a distance of 40.60 feet; thence Westerly along atangential curve to the left, having a radius of 24.00 feet and a central angle of 76 degrees 35 minutes 00seconds, a distance of 32.08 feet; thence Southwesterly along a reverse curve to the right, having a radius of361.58 feet and a central angle of 26 degrees 53 minutes 32 seconds, a distance 169.71 feet; thence South43 degrees 00 minutes 19 seconds, West, not tangent to said curve, a distance of 71.07 feet to theintersection with a line distant 46.00 feet Easterly of as measured at a right angle to and parallel withhereinafter described "Line A"; thence Southerly along said parallel line, a distance of 26.00 feet to the Southline of said Lot 13; thence Easterly along said South line and the easterly extension thereof, a distance of128.10 feet to the centerline of alley; thence Northerly along the centerline of said Alley, a distance of 32.65feet to the intersection with the westerly extension of the South line of said Lot 4; thence Easterly along saidWesterly extension and along the South line of said Lot 4, a distance of 130.61 feet to the point of beginning.Said "Line A" is described as follows:Commencing at the most Southerly corner of Lot 1, Block 1 Belt Line Industrial Park 2nd Addition,thence South 59 degrees 15 minutes 24 seconds East of an assumed bearing along theSoutheasterly extension of the Southwesterly line of said Lot 1 a distance of 40.00 feet to the point ofbeginning of said line; thence North 30 degrees 44 minutes 36 seconds East 112.38 feet; thence Northerly768.57 feet along a tangential curve concave to the West having a radius of 785.30 feet and a central angleof 56 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds; thence North 25 degrees 19 minutes 54 seconds West, tangent to lastdescribed curve 180.04 feet; thence Northerly 589.17 feet along a tangential curve concave to the Easthaving a radius of 1268.10 feet a central angle of 26 degrees 37 minutes 12 seconds, said line thereterminating.Torrens Property - Certificate Title No. 697371ANDLots 9 and 19, Block 2;Those parts of Lots 10, 11, 17, 18, Block 2, lying north of the southerly right-of-way line of State Trunk HighwayNo. 7;That part of Natchez Avenue vacated, lying east of the West line of the Northwest Quarter of theNortheast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, north of the southerly right-of-way line of State TrunkHighway No. 7, and southerly of a line hereinafter referred to as Line 1;That part of the vacated alley in Block 2 lying north of the southerly right-of-way line of State TrunkHighway No. 7, and southerly of the aforementioned Line 1.All in "Oakenwald Addition St. Louis Park," Hennepin County, Minnesota;Line 1 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, saidcounty; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north - southquarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet to the point of beginning; thence North 73 degrees14 minutes 47 seconds East 51.97 feet; thence northeasterly 174.11 feet along a non-tangential curveconcave to the northwest, having a radius of 5790.08 feet, a central angle of 01 degrees 43 minutes 22seconds, and a chord bearing of North 67 degrees 56 minutes 18 seconds East, and said line thereterminating.ANDThat part of West 32nd Street, vacated, lying southerly of the centerline thereof, westerly of the northerlyextension of the east line of Lot 1, Block 1, said plat of Lewiston Park, and easterly of a line hereinafter referredto as Line 2;That part of Natchez Avenue, vacated, lying southerly of the centerline of West 32nd Street, northerly of thenorth line of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, Hennepin County, and west of the West line of theSouthwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24;That part of the vacated alley adjoining Block 1, said plat of Lewiston Park, lying southerly of West 32nd Streetand northerly of Lot 1, Block 1, Brooks McCracken Industrial Park, Hennepin County.Line 2 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, saidcounty; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north - southquarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 secondsWest 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest,having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearingof South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West; thence South 67 degrees 02 minutes 58 seconds West,not tangent to said curve, 65.29 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South 00degrees 20 minutes 22 seconds East 298.91 feet, and said line there terminating.ANDLots 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16, Block 2, Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park, according to therecorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota.ANDThe east 37 feet of Lot 4, Block 1, Dalquist Industrial Park, according to the recorded plat thereof, HennepinCounty, Minnesota.ANDThat part of West 32nd Street, vacated, lying northerly of the centerline thereof, westerly of the southerlyextension of the east line of Lot 14, Block 2, said plat of Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park, andeasterly of the aforementioned Line 2;That part of Natchez Avenue, vacated, lying northerly of the centerline of West 32nd Street, southerly of a linehereinafter referred to as Line 3, and west of the West line of the Northwest Quarter of the Northeast Quarter ofSection 6, Township 28, Range 24;That part of the alley adjoining Block 2, said plat of Mazey & Langan's Addition To St. Louis Park lying northerlyof West 32nd Street and southerly of the aforementioned Line 3;Line 3 is described as commencing at the north quarter corner of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, saidcounty; thence South 00 degrees 26 minutes 06 seconds West, assumed bearing along the north - southquarter line of said Section 6, a distance of 1092.89 feet; thence South 73 degrees 14 minutes 47 secondsWest 10.28 feet; thence southwesterly 220.70 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the northwest,having a radius of 5802.14 feet, a central angle of 02 degrees 10 minutes 46 seconds, and a chord bearingof South 70 degrees 30 minutes 32 seconds West, and said line there terminating.Have caused the same to be surveyed and platted as BELTLINE STATION and do hereby dedicate to the public forpublic use the public ways and the drainage and utility easements as created by this plat.In witness whereof said Beltline Development LLC, a Minneapolis limited liability company, has caused thesepresents to be signed by its proper officer this __________ day of _________________________, 20_____.Signed: Beltline Development LLC, LLCBy:___________________________________, ManagerSTATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________________This instrument was acknowledged before me this__________ day of _________________________, 20_____ by_______________________________, Manager of Beltline Development LLC, a Minneapolis limited liability company,on behalf of the company.__________________________________________________________________________Printed NameNotary Public, ________________ County, MinnesotaMy commission expires __________________________In witness whereof said St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hascaused these presents to be signed by its proper officer this __________ day of _________________________,20_____.Signed: St. Louis Park Economic Development AuthorityBy:___________________________________STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________________This instrument was acknowledged before me this__________ day of _________________________, 20_____ by_______________________________, _______________________________ of the St. Louis Park EconomicDevelopment Authority, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the company.__________________________________________________________________________Printed NameNotary Public, ________________ County, MinnesotaMy commission expires __________________________In witness whereof said City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation, has caused these presents to besigned by its proper officer this __________ day of _________________________, 20_____.Signed: City of St. Louis ParkBy:___________________________________STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF ___________________________This instrument was acknowledged before me this__________ day of _________________________, 20_____ by_______________________________, _______________________________ of the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesotamunicipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation.__________________________________________________________________________Printed NameNotary Public, ________________ County, MinnesotaMy commission expires __________________________I Daniel Ekrem do hereby certify that this plat was prepared by me or under my direct supervision; that I am a dulyLicensed Land Surveyor in the State of Minnesota; that this plat is a correct representation of the boundary survey;that all mathematical data and labels are correctly designated on this plat; that all monuments depicted on this plathave been, or will be correctly set within one year; that all water boundaries and wet lands, as defined in MinnesotaStatutes, Section 505.01, Subd. 3, as of the date of this certificate are shown and labeled on this plat; and all publicways are shown and labeled on this plat.Dated this __________ day of _________________________, 20_____._____________________________________Daniel Ekrem, Licensed Land SurveyorMinnesota License No. 57366STATE OF MINNESOTACOUNTY OF HENNEPINThe instrument was acknowledged before me this__________ day of _________________________, 20_____ byDaniel Ekrem.__________________________________________________________________________Printed NameNotary Public, ________________ County, MinnesotaMy commission expires __________________________CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTAThis plat of BELTLINE STATION was approved and accepted by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,Minnesota at a regular meeting thereof held this __________ day of _________________________, 20_____, and saidplat is in compliance with the provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Section 505.03, Subd. 2.City Council, City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota_____________________________________ Mayor_____________________________________ ClerkRESIDENT AND REAL ESTATE SERVICESHennepin County, MinnesotaI hereby certify that taxes payable in 20_____ and prior years have been paid for land described on this plat, datedthis__________ day of _________________________, 20_____.Mark V. Chapin, County AuditorBy ___________________________________, DeputySURVEY DIVISIONHennepin County, MinnesotaPursuant to MN. STAT. Sec. 383B.565 (1969), this plat has been approved this __________ day of_________________________, 20_____.Chris F. Mavis, County SurveyorBy ___________________________________COUNTY RECORDERHennepin County, MinnesotaI hereby certify that the within plat of BELTLINE STATION was recorded in this office this __________ day of_________________________, 20_____ at _____ o’clock ___M.Amber Bougie, County RecorderBy _____________________________________, DeputyREGISTRAR OF TITLESHennepin County, MinnesotaI hereby certify that the within plat of BELTLINE STATION was recorded in this office this __________ day of_________________________, 20_____ at _____ o’clock ___M.Amber Bougie, Registrar of TitlesBy _____________________________________, DeputyCity council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 36 S67°02'58"W65.29N74°51'29"E44.73N70°09'26"E 321 .60 S00°29'31"W 166.01 N89°41'38"W15.00S00°29'31"W 227.63N64°21'38"E 305.86N00°16'46"E 192.48N89°37'36"W8.46R =1 2 2 2 .1 0 L =2 0 5 .3 2Δ=9 °3 7 '3 3 "C .B r g =S 5 °4 7 '3 7 "E N89°45'05"W 144.24N00°23'03"E 78.37N89°41'50"W55.27S00°20'22"E60.00N89°41'50"W29.64N00°26'06"E3.90S89°47'57"E25.00N00°29'32"E40.00N89°46'11"W 144.26S89°47'57"E 135.62S89°47'57"E 135.55N00°26'06"E 80.35 S00°27'42"W62.64N00°24'34"E70.80R=5790.08L=15.19=0°09'01"C.Brg=N67°35'31"ES00°27'42"W28.49N73°14'47"E31.22R=5802.14L=21.60=0°12'48"C.Brg=N69°31'33"ES00°26'06"W18.70R=5802.14L=14.82=0°08'47"C.Brg=N71°13'18"EN00°24'34"E35.75R=5802.14L=220.70Δ=2°10'46"C.Brg=S70°30'32"WL=153.53Δ=1°30'58"L=30.75Δ=0°18'13"N73°14'47"E62.266.0325.01R=5790.08L=174.11Δ=1°43'22"C.Brg=N67°56'18"EL=114.44Δ=1°07'57"L=44.47Δ=0°26'24"S68°03'55 "W88.04 -S00°20'22"E 298.91-103.51 128.36S77°02'07"E18.69N84°51'22"E 174.21N68°59'28"E58.48R=88.00L=24.37=15°51'55"N90°00'00"E 276.04N00°02'02"W 213.11 N68°59'28 "E 160 .27N68°59'28"E 125 .17S21°00'32"E17.30N68°59'28"E 313 .59 N00°30'36"E 134.87 N03°30'51"E 69.59 N05°31'00"E 56.0 0 N00°06'56"E 140.29 61.81 7.7895.94 34.36N00°02'45"W 101.98 N16°12'0 1 " E 1 3 0 . 3 0 R=40.00L=31.87=45°38'48"C.Brg=N22°41'23"WBLOCK 1LOT 1LOT 2LOT 3LOT 4HIGHWAY NO. 7HIGHWAY NO. 7HIGHWAY NO . 7HIGHWAY NO . 7 BELT LINE BOULEVARDBACKAGE ROAD MONTEREY AVENUEBACKAGE ROAD7.04S02°34'40"E66.72 BELTLINE STATIONCity council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 37 880879 878 878878877 87 7 885878880 879 881 882 883 884 878 875884 8808 7 9 878877876 875883 880 884 885 883 882 881 880 87 9879879 880 8 8 1 8 8 2 883 886 885 88 4 883 882 881 880 880880 879879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 887 886 885877 878877878878879879 876877878879880 881 882881880879 876875 877878 8758748 7 6 8 7 7 879 880 881 882 883883886 8808818828838 8 1 882885 882 883884886 886 887 880877878879881880881PROPOSED BUILDING 3 PROPOSED BUILDING 2 PROPOSED BUILDING 1 PROPOSED PARKING GARAGE ±34,200 S.F.P1 FFE = 876.00L1 FFE=882.50 - 886.00 ±34,000 S.F. L1 FFE = 881.00-882.50 ±25,400 S.F.P1 FFE: 876.00 L1 FFE = VARIES 884.00-887.00 ±31,300 S.F.P1 FFE: 876.00 L1 FFE = VARIES 884.00-887.00 PROPOSED BUILDING 3 PROPOSED BUILDING 2 PROPOSED BUILDING 1 PROPOSED PARKING GARAGE ±34,200 S.F.P1 FFE = 876.00L1 FFE=882.50 - 886.00 ±34,000 S.F. L1 FFE = 881.00-882.50 ±25,400 S.F.P1 FFE: 876.00 L1 FFE = VARIES 884.00-887.00 ±31,300 S.F.P1 FFE: 876.00 L1 FFE = VARIES 884.00-887.00 PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED 5' D&U EASEMENT UTILITY, INGRESS/ EGRESS EASEMENT TO BE VACATED SEWER EASEMENT TO BE VACATED UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE VACATED DRAINAGE AND STORM SEWER EASEMENT TO BE VACATED DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE VACATED WALKWAY, SLOPE, AND UTILITY EASEMENT TO BE MODIFIED/VACATED PROPOSED 15' D&U EASEMENT PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE PROPOSED EASEMENT LEGEND This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the specific purpose and client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written authorization and adaptation by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2022 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 767 EUSTIS STREET, SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55114 PHONE: 651-645-4197 WWW.KIMLEY-HORN.COM K:\TWC_LDEV\SHERMAN\Beltline\3 Design\CAD\PlanSheets\PP1-PRELIMINARY PLAT.dwg March 04, 2022 - 3:46pm©PRELIMINARY - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTIONArchitectureInterior DesignLandscapeArchitectureEngineering 222 North Second StreetLong & Kees BldgSuite 101Minneapolis, MN55401612.339.3752 www.bkvgroup.com © 2021 BKV Group SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE DRAWN BY CHECKED BY COMMISSION NUMBER PROJECT TITLE CONSULTANTS NOT F O R CONST R U CTI O N CERTIFICATION ISSUE #DATE DESCRIPTION BPG XXX PRELIMINARY PLAT PP100 BELTLINE STATION MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT NORTH City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 38 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN A0.01 RETAIL 1,950SF 5-STORY MARKETRATE 146UNITS COMMERCIAL 20,001SF 7-STORY MIXEDUSE 156UNITS 4-STORY AFFORDABLE 82UNITS 882.5' FFE 887.0' FFE 887.0' FFE 883.5' FFE 882.5' FFE 887.0' FFE 886.5' FFE 6'-0"6'-0"5' -0"2'-0"3'-0" 4'-0" 5'-0"5'-0"10'-0"4'-0"6'-0"6'-0"10'-0"8'-0"2' -5"5' -0" 5'-0"3' -0"4' -2"5'-0"1' - 6"1'-6"4'-0" 6'-0" 10'-0"1'-6"1'-6"Surface Stalls Underground Enclosed Above Grade TOTAL Housing Ratio Building 1 2 0 247 (In Ramp)249 1.60 Building 2 36 59 0 95 1.16 Building 3 5 96 + 77 (In Ramp)0 178 1.22 Parking Ramp 0 See Above 268 (Metro Transit)268 Grocer Lot 53 0 0 53 TOTAL 96 232 515 843 1.36* SITE VEHICLE PARKING DATA * Does not include Metro Transit or Grocer Stalls 03/28/20222146.02BELTLINE BLVD. HOUSING UNITS EXTERIOR SPACES INTERIOR SPACES Building 1 156 70 118 Building 2 82 8 104 Building 3 146 8 156 Grocer 10% of auto spaces 6 TOTAL 384 92 378 BIKE PARKING STALLS * Multi-dwelling - One bike parking space per dwelling unit plus an additional space per 10 auto stalls City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 39 RAMP DN. 8 5 9 P A R K IN G S T A L L S TRANSFORMER TRANSFORMER 20 10 79 RAMP UP 16 AREA WELL 9 LOBBY 24' - 0" 2 4 ' - 0 "24' - 0"EXHAUST 77 PARKING STALLS (BLDG 3 RESIDENT PARKING) 9 6 P A R K IN G S T A L L S 19 2 0 ELEC MECH WATER LOBBY 1 7 LOBBY 2 7 3 1 5 876.0' FFE 876.0' FFE 876.0' FFE 876.0' FFE 9 24' - 0"15 16 21 LOBBY ABOVE 24' - 0"LOBBY ABOVE 880.3' FFE RAMP UP 3.2% RETAIL ABOVE (UNEXCAVATED) TENATIVE END OF TUNNEL CONSTRUCTION 396 SF ELEC. 398 SF TRASH/RECY. 424 SF TRASH/RECY. MECH. MECH. WATER AREA WELL AREA WELL RAMP DOWN (IN-SLAB HEATING) TRANSFORMER 313 SF MAINT. 1' - 6"1' - 6"N 03/09/2022 OVERALL PLAN - LEVEL P1 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.02 0'30'60'120'180' City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 40 8 LOADING 23 5 RAMP DN. AMENITY AMENITY AMENITY LOBBY/ LEASING LOBBY/ LEASING LOBBY LEASING 13 15 16 9 16 METRO TRANSIT (75 STALLS) 11 12 12 12 FUTURE TENANT RAMP UP 16% 8% 887.0' FFE 882.5' FFE 887.0' FFE 887.0' FFE 876.0' FFE 876.0' FFE 882.0' FFE 880.5' FFE 883.5' FFE 883.5' FFE 882.5' FFE 882.5' FFE 886.5' FFE 19 24' - 0"891.3' FFE RAMP UP 3.2% 27' - 0" RAMP UP 5% PLAZA 55 SURFACE STALLS 4 1 S U R F A C E S T A L L S 9' CLEARANCE 886.0' FFE LOBBY TWO-SIDED ELEVATOR 996 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 690 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD 1258 SF 3BD 1244 SF 3BD 805 SF 1BD 1226 SF 3BD 995 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 808 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1031 SF 2BD 1040 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 1260 SF 3BD 1001 SF 2BD 1251 SF 2BD +1060 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 1191 SF 2BD 910 SF 1BD +748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 1049 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 621 SF ALCOVE 748 SF 1BD 910 SF 1BD + 750 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD 1083 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 620 SF ALCOVE 620 SF ALCOVE 621 SF ALCOVE 871 SF 1BD + 750 SF 1BD LVL 1 LVL 2A ROOF DECK ABOVE MULTI-PURPOSE LAWN DOG RUN PLAYGROUND AMENITY DECK SPLASH PAD AMENITY DECK POOL 20'X40'6' - 0"5' - 0"RAMP DOWN RAMP DOWN (IN-SLAB HEATING)1' - 6"24' - 0"2' - 5"773 SF ALCOVE 24' - 0"* ALL TRANSFORMERS AND MECH. EQUIPMENT MUST BE SCREENED AND APPROVED BY CITY STAFF PRIOR TO INSTALLATION T T T T T (6) BIKE SPACES (4) BIKE SPACES (4) BIKE SPACES (4) BIKE SPACES (4) BIKE SPACES EV CHARGING STATION (LEVEL 2)EV CHARGING STATION (LEVEL 2) N 03/09/2022 OVERALL PLAN - LEVEL 1 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.03 0'30'60'120'180' Surface Stalls Underground Enclosed Above Grade TOTAL Housing Ratio Building 1 2 0 247 (In Ramp)249 1.60 Building 2 36 59 0 95 1.16 Building 3 5 96 + 77 (In Ramp)0 178 1.22 Parking Ramp 0 See Above 268 (Metro Transit)268 Grocer Lot 53 0 0 53 TOTAL 96 232 515 843 1.36* SITE VEHICLE PARKING DATA * Does not include Metro Transit or Grocer Stalls HOUSING UNITS EXTERIOR SPACES INTERIOR SPACES Building 1 156 70 118 Building 2 82 8 104 Building 3 146 8 156 Grocer 10% of auto spaces 6 TOTAL 384 92 378 BIKE PARKING STALLS * Multi-dwelling - One bike parking space per dwelling unit plus an additional space per 10 auto stalls City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 41 OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW METRO TRANSIT (88 STALLS) RAMP UP 5% OPEN TO BELOW AMENITY 1196 SF 3BD 1258 SF 3BD 1244 SF 3BD 995 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1001 SF 2BD 808 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1031 SF 2BD 1260 SF 3BD 1040 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 16 19 OPEN TO BELOW 898.0' FFE 1258 SF 3BD RAMP DN 16% 8% 8% 8% 907.6 FFE 8 24' - 0"24' - 0"893.2' FFE RAMP UP 3.2% 10 902.3' FFE 16 19 24' - 0" 1175 SF 2BD 1069 SF 2BD 1251 SF 2BD +1060 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1191 SF 2BD 1191 SF 2BD 910 SF 1BD +748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 1049 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 621 SF ALCOVE 748 SF 1BD 910 SF 1BD + 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD 1083 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 745 SF 1BD 620 SF ALCOVE 745 SF 1BD 871 SF 1BD +6' - 0"1070 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 690 SF 1BD LVL 3A 1220 SF 3BD 27' - 0" 710 SF 1BD 585 SF STUDIO 750 SF 1BD 639 SF CO-WORKING N 03/09/2022 OVERALL PLAN - LEVEL 2 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.04 0'30'60'120'180' City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 42 METRO TRANSIT (81 STALLS) RAMP UP 5% 19 AMENITY 1258 SF 3BD 1202 SF 3BD 1196 SF 3BD 1258 SF 3BD 1244 SF 3BD 995 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1001 SF 2BD 808 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1031 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1260 SF 3BD 1040 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD GAME POOL 909.0' FFE 16 19 16 24' - 0"24' - 0"903.8' FFE 87' - 5"913.3' FFE 27' - 0" RAMP UP 3.2% 10RAMP UP 16% 1 24' - 0" 1060 SF 2BD 1135 SF 2BD 1251 SF 2BD +1060 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1191 SF 2BD 679 SF ALCOVE 1191 SF 2BD 910 SF 1BD +748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 1049 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 621 SF ALCOVE 748 SF 1BD 910 SF 1BD + 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD 1083 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 745 SF 1BD 620 SF ALCOVE 745 SF 1BD 871 SF 1BD +6' - 0"720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 620 SF 1BD 1106 SF 2BD 990 SF 2BD 1078 SF 2BD 720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 1054 SF 2BD 1145 SF 2BD 1020 SF 2BD 619 SF ALCOVE 903 SF 1BD + 901 SF 1BD + 534 SF STUDIO 879 SF 1BD 635 SF ALCOVE 750 SF 1BD LVL 4A 546 SF STUDIO 540 SF STUDIO 1046 SF 2BD 1046 SF 2BD 690 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD 1070 SF 2BD 690 SF STUDIO SIM. N 03/09/2022 OVERALL PLAN - LEVEL 3 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.05 0'30'60'120'180' City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 43 METRO TRANSIT (24 STALLS) 6 6 1257 SF 3BD 1202 SF 3BD 1196 SF 3BD 1244 SF 3BD 995 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1001 SF 2BD 808 SF 1BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1258 SF 3BD 995 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1031 SF 2BD 995 SF 2BD 1260 SF 3BD 1040 SF 2BD 805 SF 1BD 924.3' FFE RAMP UP 5% 920.0' FFE RESIDENT PARKING (50 STALLS) 16 19 24' - 0"136' - 0" 24' - 0" 914.5 FFE RAMP UP 3.2% 10 1 8% RAMP UP 16% 8 8 TRANSPARENCY IN WALL FOR EXITING VEHICLES 1060 SF 2BD 1135 SF 2BD 1251 SF 2BD +1060 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1191 SF 2BD 679 SF ALCOVE 1191 SF 2BD 910 SF 1BD +748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 1049 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 621 SF ALCOVE 748 SF 1BD 910 SF 1BD + 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD 1083 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 745 SF 1BD 620 SF ALCOVE 745 SF 1BD 871 SF 1BD +6' - 0"720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 620 SF 1BD 1106 SF 2BD 990 SF 2BD 1079 SF 2BD 720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 1054 SF 2BD 1020 SF 2BD 690 SF 1BD 619 SF ALCOVE 1070 SF 2BD 661 SF 1BD 690 SF STUDIO 903 SF 1BD + 750 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD 1167 SF 2BD LINK HERE CONNECTS @ RESIDENTIAL LVL 5 LVL 5A 1145 SF 2BD 901 SF 1BD + 1046 SF 2BD 534 SF STUDIO 1046 SF 2BD 879 SF 1BD 635 SF ALCOVE 546 SF STUDIO 540 SF STUDIO N 03/09/2022 OVERALL PLAN - LEVEL 4 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.06 0'30'60'120'180' City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 44 ROOF 931.0' FFE RESIDENT PARKING (91 STALLS) RAMP UP 5% 16 21 9 16 19 24' - 0"24' - 0"925.2' FFE 935.3' FFE RAMP UP 3.2% 10 27' - 0" 1060 SF 2BD 1251 SF 2BD +1060 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1191 SF 2BD 679 SF ALCOVE 1191 SF 2BD 910 SF 1BD +748 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 1060 SF 2BD 1060 SF 2BD 1049 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 621 SF ALCOVE 748 SF 1BD 910 SF 1BD + 1060 SF 2BD 750 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD 1083 SF 2BD 748 SF 1BD 745 SF 1BD 620 SF ALCOVE 745 SF 1BD 871 SF 1BD + A M E N IT Y 6' - 0"720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 1106 SF 2BD 1167 SF 2BD 1079 SF 2BD 720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 1054 SF 2BD 1020 SF 2BD 690 SF 1BD 619 SF ALCOVE 903 SF 1BD + 750 SF 1BD LVL 6A 1094 SF 2BD 901 SF 1BD + 1046 SF 2BD 534 SF STUDIO 1046 SF 2BD 879 SF 1BD 635 SF ALCOVE 546 SF STUDIO 540 SF STUDIO 24' - 0" 620 SF 1BD 990 SF 2BD 1070 SF 2BD 661 SF 1BD 690 SF STUDIO 750 SF 1BD N 03/09/2022 OVERALL PLAN - LEVEL 5 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.07 0'30'60'120'180' City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 45 ROOF 942.0' FFE RESIDENT PARKING (56 STALLS) 16 21 9 24' - 0"24' - 0"935.8' FFE RAMP UP 3.2% 946.3' FFE 27' - 0"24' - 0" 106' - 0"LVL 7A RAMP UP 5% 720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 1106 SF 2BD 1167 SF 2BD 1079 SF 2BD 720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 1054 SF 2BD 1020 SF 2BD 619 SF ALCOVE 903 SF 1BD + 1094 SF 2BD 901 SF 1BD + 1046 SF 2BD 534 SF STUDIO 1046 SF 2BD 879 SF 1BD 635 SF ALCOVE 546 SF STUDIO 540 SF STUDIO 63 SF TRASH/RECY. 620 SF 1BD 990 SF 2BD 690 SF 1BD 849 SF 1BD + 1070 SF 2BD 661 SF 1BD 690 SF STUDIO 750 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD N 03/09/2022 OVERALL PLAN - LEVEL 6 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.08 0'30'60'120'180' City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 46 946.5' FFE 6' - 3"24' - 0"RAMP DN 5% SOLAR PANEL ARRAY STRUCTURE ABOVE OPEN PARKING STALLS RESIDENT PARKING (50 STALLS) 16 16 CLOCK TOWER 720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 1106 SF 2BD 1167 SF 2BD 1079 SF 2BD 720 SF 1BD 720 SF 1BD 1054 SF 2BD 1020 SF 2BD 619 SF ALCOVE 903 SF 1BD + 1094 SF 2BD 901 SF 1BD + 1046 SF 2BD 534 SF STUDIO 1046 SF 2BD 879 SF 1BD 635 SF ALCOVE 546 SF STUDIO 540 SF STUDIO 63 SF TRASH/RECY. 620 SF 1BD 990 SF 2BD 690 SF 1BD 849 SF 1BD + 1070 SF 2BD 661 SF 1BD 690 SF STUDIO 750 SF 1BD 750 SF 1BD N 03/09/2022 OVERALL PLAN - LEVEL 7 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.09 0'30'60'120'180' City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 47 1/24/2022 PARKING RAMP DIAGRAM 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.20PARKING RAMP DIAGRAM RAMP UP 16 9 77 PARKING STALLS (BLDG 3 RESIDENT PARKING) 876.0' FFE 15 16 21 24' - 0"880.3' FFE RAMP UP 3.2% RETAIL ABOVE 24' - 0"LOADING RAMP DN. 15 16 9 16 METRO TRANSIT (75 STALLS) RAMP UP 16% 8% 887.0' FFE 882.0' FFE 883.5' FFE 886.5' FFE 19 27' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0"891.3' FFE RAMP UP 3.2% 24' - 0" RAMP UP 5% 9' CLEARANCE 886.0' FFE LOBBY TWO-SIDED ELEVATOR LVL 1 LVL 2A36' -METRO TRANSIT (88 STALLS) RAMP UP 5% 16 19 898.0' FFE RAMP DN 16% 8% 8% 8% 907.6 FFE 8 24' - 0"24' - 0"24' - 0" RAMP UP 3.2% 10 902.3' FFE 16 19 24' - 0"5' - 4"LVL 3A METRO TRANSIT (81 STALLS) RAMP UP 5% 19 909.0' FFE 16 19 16 24' - 0"24' - 0"87' - 5"913.3' FFE 24' - 0" RAMP UP 3.2% 10RAMP UP 16% 1 24' - 0"5' - 4"LVL 4A METRO TRANSIT (24 STALLS) 6 6 924.3' FFE RAMP UP 5% 920.0' FFE RESIDENT PARKING (50 STALLS) 16 19 24' - 0"136' - 0" 24' - 0" RAMP UP 3.2% 10 1 8% RAMP UP 16% 8 8 IN G 5' - 4"LINK HERE CONNECTS @ RESIDENTIAL LVL 5 LVL 5A 931.0' FFE RESIDENT PARKING (91 STALLS) RAMP UP 5% 16 21 9 16 19 24' - 0"24' - 0"935.3' FFE RAMP UP 3.2% 10 24' - 0"5' - 4"LVL 6A LEVEL P1 LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 PARKING STALL KEY BUILDING 1 STALLS BUILDING 3 STALLS METRO TRANSIT STALLS OVERALL RAMP SECTION A AA AA AA AA AA AA TUNNEL TO BLDG 3 BLDG 1 RAMP LEVEL P1 LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 942.0' FFE RESIDENT PARKING (88 STALLS) 16 21 9 24' - 0"24' - 0"RAMP UP 3.2% 946.3' FFE 24' - 0"24' - 0" 106' - 0"LVL 7A RAMP UP 5% 16 16 LEVEL 6 UP TO 7 A A LEVEL 7 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 48 BUILDING 1 ELEVATIONS 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A1.06 0'15'30'60'90' 1 OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 2 OVERALL WEST ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" PROCELAIN CLADDING ALUMINUM STOREFRONT COMPOSITE WINDOWS METAL PANEL ALUMINUM STOREFRONT ALUMINUM BALCONY 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING METAL PANEL FACE BRICK 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8" LEVEL 2 121'-4" LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8" LEVEL 5 153'-4"LEVEL 6 164'-0"LEVEL 7 174'-8" ROOF 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8"LEVEL 2 121'-4" LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8" LEVEL 5 153'-4"LEVEL 6 164'-0"LEVEL 7 174'-8"ROOF 182'-8" TOP PARAPET 182'-8"TOP PARAPET FIBER CEMENT PANEL 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 03/09/2022 CLASS %MATERIAL I 10.1%Face Brick II 20.7%Metal Panel I 21.4% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 30.4%Glass II 15.9%Fiber Cement Panel I 1.4%Porcelain Cladding NORTH ELEVATION CLASS %MATERIAL I 0.0%Face Brick II 39.4%Metal Panel I 18.1% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 36.5%Glass I 6.0%Porcelain Cladding WEST ELEVATION GLASS %TOTAL SF North 775 35.2%2201 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY (Residential) GLASS %TOTAL SF North 928 50.4%1840 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY (Commercial) GLASS %TOTAL SF West 2071 50.5%4103 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY (Commercial) City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 49 BUILDING 1 ELEVATIONS 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A1.07 0'15'30'60'90' 3 OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 4 OVERALL EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" FACE BRICK COMPOSITE WINDOWS 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING METAL PANEL 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING FIBER CEMENT PANEL PORCELAIN CLADDING ALUMINUM BALCONY BUILDING LINK OPENING 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8" LEVEL 2 121'-4" LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8" LEVEL 5 153'-4"LEVEL 6 164'-0"LEVEL 7 174'-8" ROOF 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8"LEVEL 2 121'-4"LEVEL 3 132'-0"LEVEL 4 142'-8" LEVEL 5 153'-4"LEVEL 6 164'-0"LEVEL 7 174'-8"ROOF 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING FIBER CEMENT PANEL COMPOSITE WINDOWS 182'-8"TOP PARAPET 182'-8" TOP PARAPET 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING FIBER CEMENT PANEL 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 03/09/2022 CLASS %MATERIAL I 0.0%Face Brick II 10.0%Metal Panel I 30.0% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 20.7%Glass II 29.6%Fiber Cement Panel I 9.7%Porcelain Cladding SOUTH ELEVATION CLASS %MATERIAL I 2.2%Face Brick II 1.8%Metal Panel I 27.1% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 25.6%Glass II 33.7%Fiber Cement Panel I 9.5%Porcelain Cladding EAST ELEVATION City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 50 N BUILDING 2 ELEVATIONS 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A2.06 0'10'20'40'60'03/09/2022 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 1 OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 20'-0" 2 OVERALL EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 20'-0" 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8"LEVEL 2 121'-4"LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8"ROOF 97'-0" LEVEL 0 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8" LEVEL 2 121'-4"LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8"ROOF 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8"LEVEL 2 121'-4"LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8"ROOF 145'-8"PARAPET 145'-8"PARAPET 97'-0" LEVEL 0 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING - VERTICAL SPANDREL FIBER CEMENT PANEL - BETWEEN WINDOWS 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING - HORIZONTAL BAND CLASS %MATERIAL I 15.5%Face Brick II 21.8%Metal Panel II 18.1%Fiber Cement Panel I 19.3% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 25.4%Glass II 0.0%Burnished CMU EAST ELEVATION CLASS %MATERIAL I 10.4%Face Brick II 6.2%Metal Panel II 33.5%Fiber Cement Panel I 29.6% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 20.2%Glass II 0.0%Burnished CMU SOUTH ELEVATION GLASS %TOTAL SF East 426 25.6%1661 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 51 BUILDING 2 ELEVATIONS 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A2.07 0'10'20'40'60'03/09/2022 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 3 OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 20'-0" 4 OVERALL WEST ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 20'-0" 97'-0" LEVEL 0 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8" LEVEL 2 121'-4"LEVEL 3 132'-0"LEVEL 4 142'-8" ROOF 97'-0" LEVEL 0 100'-0" LEVEL 1 110'-8"LEVEL 2 121'-4" LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8"ROOF 145'-8"PARAPET 145'-8"PARAPET CLASS %MATERIAL I 22.8%Face Brick II 39.8%Metal Panel I 9.5% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 27.9%Glass II 0.0%Burnished CMU NORTH ELEVATION CLASS %MATERIAL I 13.8%Face Brick II 31.1%Metal Panel I 24.0% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 26.2%Glass II 4.9%Burnished CMU WEST ELEVATION GLASS %TOTAL SF North 716 30.2%2372 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 52 BUILDING 3 ELEVATIONS 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A3.06 0'15'30'60'90' CLASS %MATERIAL I 3.6%Face Brick II 11.0%Metal Panel II 22.8%Fiber Cement Panel I 33.2% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 24.0%Glass II 5.5%Burnished CMU NORTH ELEVATION CLASS %MATERIAL I 4.1%Face Brick II 23.3%Metal Panel II 11.2%Fiber Cement Panel I 48.4% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 23.0%Glass II 1.2%Burnished CMU WEST ELEVATION 03/09/2022 1 OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 2 OVERALL WEST ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 100'-0" LEVEL 1 110'-8"LEVEL 2 121'-4" LEVEL 3 132'-0"LEVEL 4 142'-8"LEVEL 5 153'-4" ROOF 97'-0"LEVEL 0 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8" LEVEL 2 121'-4" LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8"LEVEL 5 153'-4"ROOF 97'-0"LEVEL 0 156'-4"PARAPET 156'-4" PARAPET City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 53 BUILDING 3 ELEVATIONS 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A3.07 0'15'30'60'90' GLASS %TOTAL SF South 1108 37.6%2946 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY GLASS %TOTAL SF East 635 36.1%1759 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY CLASS %MATERIAL I 8.2%Face Brick II 32.1%Metal Panel II 0.0%Fiber Cement Panel I 28.4% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 28.2%Glass II 3.2%Burnished CMU SOUTH ELEVATION 03/09/2022 CLASS %MATERIAL I 8.0%Face Brick II 28.8%Metal Panel II 0.0%Fiber Cement Panel I 29.6% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 25.1%Glass II 8.5%Burnished CMU EAST ELEVATION 3 OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 4 OVERALL EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8"LEVEL 2 121'-4"LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8" LEVEL 5 153'-4" ROOF 97'-0" LEVEL 0 100'-0"LEVEL 1 110'-8"LEVEL 2 121'-4"LEVEL 3 132'-0" LEVEL 4 142'-8" LEVEL 5 153'-4" ROOF 97'-0" LEVEL 0 156'-4"PARAPET 156'-4"PARAPET City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 54 PARKING RAMP ELEVATIONS 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A4.09 0'15'30'60'90' 1 OVERALL WEST ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 2 OVERALL SOUTH ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 99'-0" LEVEL 0 115'-4" LEVEL 3A 126'-4"LEVEL 4A 137'-4" LEVEL 5A 159'-4" LEVEL 7A 104'-4"LEVEL 2A 148'-4" LEVEL 6A 99'-0"LEVEL 0 115'-4" LEVEL 3A 126'-4"LEVEL 4A 137'-4"LEVEL 5A 159'-4"LEVEL 7A 104'-4" LEVEL 2A 148'-4"LEVEL 6A 170'-4" PARAPET 170'-4" PARAPET 175'-4" ELEVATOR OVERRUN 191'-4"CLOCK TOWER ROOF 03/09/2022 CLASS %MATERIAL I 5.3%Face Brick I 39.0% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 6.2%Glass II 49.6%Perforated Metal Screen SOUTH ELEVATION CLASS %MATERIAL I 8.5%Face Brick I 54.2% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 5.0%Glass II 32.3%Perforated Metal Screen WEST ELEVATION City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 55 PARKING RAMP ELEVATIONS 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A4.10 0'15'30'60'90' 3 OVERALL EAST ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 4 OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION Scale: 1" : 30'-0" 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 100'-0" LEVEL 1 122'-0" LEVEL 3 133'-0" LEVEL 4 144'-0"LEVEL 5 155'-0" LEVEL 6 111'-0"LEVEL 2 100'-0" LEVEL 1 122'-0" LEVEL 3 133'-0" LEVEL 4 144'-0" LEVEL 5 155'-0"LEVEL 6 111'-0" LEVEL 2 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 5/8” THICK, THROUGH COLORED, ARCHITECTURAL WALL CLADDING 166'-0" LEVEL 7 166'-0" LEVEL 7 191'-4" CLOCK TOWER ROOF 177'-0" PARAPET 177'-0"PARAPET PARKING RAMP ELEVATIONS 03/09/2022 CLASS %MATERIAL I 6.6%Face Brick I 24.1% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 0.0%Glass II 69.3%Perforated Metal Screen EAST ELEVATION CLASS %MATERIAL I 2.5%Face Brick I 41.9% 5/8", through colored, architectural wall cladding I 0.0%Glass II 55.6%Perforated Metal Screen NORTH ELEVATION City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 56 1/24/2022 AERIAL VIEW FROM NW 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.10 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 57 1/24/2022 AERIAL VIEW FROM SW 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.11 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 58 RENDERING - PARKING RAMP 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.12 03/09/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 59 1/24/2022 RENDERING - BUILDING 1 NW VIEW 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.13 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 60 1/24/2022 RENDERING - BUILDING 2 SW VIEW 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.14 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 61 1/24/2022 RENDERING - BUILDING 3 NE VIEW 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.15 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 62 1/24/2022 RENDERING - BUILDING 1 SE VIEW 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.16 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 63 1/24/2022 RENDERING - POCKET PARK 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.17 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 64 1/24/2022 RENDERING - BUILDING 3 SOUTH VIEW 2146.02BELTLINE BLVD. A0.18 02/14/2022 City council meeting of April 4, 2022 (Item No. 8b) Title: Beltline Station Development Page 65