Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022/04/25 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study Session AGENDA APRIL 25, 2022 The St. Louis Park City Council is meeting in person at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd. in accordance with the most recent COVID-19 guidelines. Members of the public can attend in person or watch via webstream at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil and on local cable (Comcast SD channel 17 and HD channel 859). Visit bit.ly/slpccagendas to view the agenda and reports. 5:45 p.m. STUDY SESSION – council chambers Discussion items 1. 30 min. Boards and commissions – considering new commissions 2. 10 min. Proposed study session agenda topic 5 min. Communications/updates (verbal) Written reports 3. March 2022 monthly financial report 4. First quarter investment report (January – March 2022) 5. Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 6. 2023 Budget process and ARPA funding overview 7. Business terms for contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equities 8. Draft sidewalk policy framework 6:30 p.m. RECONVENE 2022 LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION - council chambers The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of city hall and on the text display on civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available 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: Study session Meeting date: April 25, 2022 Discussion item : 1 Executive summary Title: Boards and commissions – considering new commissions Recommended action: None at this time. The purpose of this discussion is to review proposed topics previously requested by the council related to the creation of new commissions and the role of youth on commissions. Policy consideration: Does the council want to include the consideration of new commissions in the consultant’s scope of work for the boards and commissions program analysis? Summary: The city council previously requested discussions on the proposed creation of two new advisory bodies - a transportation commission and a youth commission – as well as a discussion on the role of youth in all boards and commissions programming. As a result of the request related to youth on commissions, membership opportunities and roles were expanded where possible to include multiple youth positions with voting power. Recruitment for youth positions has been and continues to be challenging. On March 28, 2022, the city council supported engaging a consultant to evaluate and provide a recommendation related to the structure, role, function, and authority of the city’s boards and commissions program. If the council wants to pursue the creation of new boards or commissions and explore opportunities to enhance the involvement of youth in current programming, staff recommends the consultant evaluation include an analysis of these topics to determine : •Internal and external needs •Capacity and resources needed to ensure both staff and council can effectively support and manage programming going forward. •Desired objectives and outcomes of new programming. Including this in the broader evaluation of the boards and commission program will provide an opportunity to assess if the creation of new advisory bodies is the appropriate strategy to address needs or if opportunities exist to modify or leverage existing programs to achieve desired outcomes. Evaluation of the recruitment and appointment process, including a focus on youth positions, was already included in the proposed scope of work. The consultant’s work and recommendations will be discussed with council in the fall of 2022 to determine next steps and implement any changes prior to the start of the 2023 recruitment process. Financial or budget considerations: Funding for any new boards and commissions, including administrative costs, would need to be evaluated and incorporated into the 2023 budget. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Supporting documents: Proposed study session topic request – youth on commissions Proposed study session topic request - transportation commission Proposed study session topic request – youth advisory commission Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Approve d by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager/operations and recreation director Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 1 ) Page 2 Title: Boards and commissions – considering new commissions Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 1 ) Page 3 Title: Boards and commissions – considering new commissions Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 1 ) Page 4 Title: Boards and commissions – considering new commissions Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 1 ) Page 5 Title: Boards and commissions – considering new commissions Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 1 ) Page 6 Title: Boards and commissions – considering new commissions Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 25, 2022 Discussion item : 2 Executive summary Title: Proposed study session agenda topic Recommended action: City council and deputy city manager review the proposed study session agenda topics and decide next steps. Policy consideration: Does the city council want to move forward with the proposed study session topic? Summary: A proposed study session agenda topic related to a tree canopy percentage goal was submitted for consideration. City staff provided a high-level analysis, including information related to timeline and recommended disposition. The next step in the process is for council to decide, as a group, if they would like to add the proposed topic to a future study session agenda. The item may be included with other items already scheduled for discussion. Topic Proposed by Councilmembers Establish a tree canopy percentage goal Larry Kraft, Margaret Rog, Tim Brausen Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Tree canopy percentage goal proposal and staff analysis Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, city clerk Approved by: Cindy Walsh , deputy city manager/director of operations and recreation Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: Proposed study session agenda topic Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 2) Page 3 Title: Proposed study session agenda topic Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 2) Page 4 Title: Proposed study session agenda topic Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 2) Page 5 Title: Proposed study session agenda topic Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 25, 2022 Written report: 3 Executive summary Title: March 2022 monthly financial report Recommended action: No action is required. Policy consideration: Monthly financial reporting is part of our financial management policies. Summary: The monthly financial report provides an overview of general fund revenues and departmental expenditures comparing them to budget throughout the year. Financial or budget considerations: Actual e xpenditures should generally be at about 25% of the annual budget at the end of March. G eneral f und expenditures are running approximately 2.5% under budget through March at 22.6%. Organized recreation expenditures are at 30% of budget due to payment of the annual community education contribution of $187,400 to the school district in February. This is a temporary variance and consistent with prior years. Engineering is also at 30% due to a lesser portion of staff hours allocated out to projects in the first quarter prior to the start of the construction season. Revenues are hard er to measure in the same way since they aren’t spread as evenly during the year, examples of which include property taxes and State aid payments. License and permit revenues are near 50% of budget in March because much of the business and liquor license fees have been received and there have been several larger commercial permits issued, including the permit for Beltline Residences and the Phase II of Parkway Residences. The oth er income of 35% of budget is private activity revenue bond fees. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Summary of revenues and departmental expenditures – general fund Prepared by: Darla Monson, accountant Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approve d by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager/operations and recreation director Summary of Revenues & Departmental Expenditures - General Fund As of March 31, 202220222022202020202021202120222022Balance YTD Budget Budget Audited Budget Unaudited Budget YTD MarRemaining to Actual %General Fund Revenues: General Property Taxes28,393,728$ 28,635,694$ 29,601,811$ 29,446,907$ 30,532,470$ 30,532,470$ 0.00% Licenses and Permits4,660,811 5,294,310 4,621,829 4,998,115 4,750,604 2,345,826 2,404,778 49.38% Fines & Forfeits280,000 126,192 231,000 150,965 231,000 21,150 209,850 9.16% Intergovernmental1,760,082 2,061,267 1,661,549 1,773,949 1,748,770 427,596 1,321,174 24.45% Charges for Services2,273,824 1,600,806 2,013,834 2,278,004 2,284,483 284,260 2,000,224 12.44% Rents & Other Miscellaneous1,456,102 1,201,119 1,499,091 1,493,432 1,589,934 373,625 1,216,309 23.50% Transfers In2,038,338 2,049,976 2,055,017 2,054,819 2,198,477 523,244 1,675,233 23.80% Investment Earnings 210,000 486,468 200,000 (506,561) 200,000 200,000 0.00% Other Income621,280 3,442,900 593,300 606,695 526,829 184,066 342,763 34.94% Use of Fund Balance25,000 250,000 250,000 Total General Fund Revenues41,694,165$ 44,898,732$ 42,502,431$ 42,296,326$ 44,312,567$ 4,159,766$ 40,152,801$ 9.39%General Fund Expenditures: General Government: Administration1,868,599$ 1,472,421$ 1,617,882$ 1,362,006$ 2,010,605$ 286,373$ 1,724,232$ 14.24% Finance1,124,045 1,194,828 1,129,591 1,190,180 1,178,516 253,137 925,379 21.48% Assessing808,171 792,277 798,244 767,705 821,530 201,627 619,903 24.54% Human Resources823,209 796,088 837,736 762,448 882,849 159,164 723,685 18.03% Community Development1,571,894 1,536,657 1,576,323 1,443,624 1,606,474 374,950 1,231,524 23.34% Facilities Maintenance1,265,337 1,246,439 1,349,365 1,413,873 1,407,116 326,134 1,080,982 23.18% Information Resources1,709,255 1,596,487 1,683,216 1,650,478 1,622,619 324,868 1,297,751 20.02% Communications & Marketing828,004 710,334 970,934 801,034 974,064 252,337 721,727 25.91%Total General Government9,998,514$ 9,345,531$ 9,963,291$ 9,391,348$ 10,503,773$ 2,178,589$ 8,325,184$ 20.74% Public Safety: Police10,853,821$ 10,611,141$ 11,307,863$ 11,347,597$ 11,846,760$ 2,832,786$ 9,013,974$ 23.91% Fire Protection5,040,703 4,764,337 4,998,636 5,066,748 5,364,179 1,288,612 4,075,567 24.02% Building 2,696,585 2,321,664 2,571,968 2,493,832 2,712,400 652,137 2,060,263 24.04%Total Public Safety18,591,109$ 17,697,142$ 18,878,467$ 18,908,177$ 19,923,339$ 4,773,534$ 15,149,805$ 23.96% Operations: Public Works Administration273,318$ 216,899$ 249,256$ 239,575$ 255,766$ 59,849$ 195,917$ 23.40% Public Works Operations3,331,966 3,168,538 3,285,820 2,957,465 3,523,669 760,206 2,763,463 21.57% Vehicle Maintenance1,278,827 1,207,998 1,303,159 1,259,534 1,368,929 325,907 1,043,022 23.81% Engineering551,285 531,801 523,547 655,722 556,115 164,450 391,665 29.57%Total Operations5,435,396$ 5,125,236$ 5,361,782$ 5,112,296$ 5,704,479$ 1,310,413$ 4,394,066$ 22.97% Parks and Recreation: Organized Recreation1,637,002 1,369,309 1,639,358 1,516,192 1,769,060 529,104 1,239,956 29.91% Recreation Center2,061,394 1,864,459 2,082,697 2,198,272 2,274,043 476,767 1,797,276 20.97% Park Maintenance1,906,363 1,802,534 1,916,643 1,857,392 2,034,509 450,300 1,584,209 22.13% Westwood Nature Center748,683 606,378 736,515 652,505 794,170 175,569 618,601 22.11% Natural Resources504,143 433,362 496,497 412,015 612,110 29,357 582,753 4.80%Total Parks and Recreation6,857,585$ 6,076,042$ 6,871,710$ 6,636,376$ 7,483,892$ 1,661,097$ 5,822,795$ 22.20% Other Depts and Non-Departmental: Racial Equity and Inclusion 314,077$ 272,994$ 341,293$ 185,280$ 292,194$ 16,797$ 275,397$ 5.75% Sustainability497,484 244,655 432,043 297,217 404,890 73,324 331,566 18.11% Transfers Out4,878,845 4,450,000 Contingency and Other144,860 225,000 67,183 Total Other Depts and Non-Departmental811,561$ 662,509$ 5,877,181$ 4,999,680$ 697,084$ 90,121$ 606,963$ 12.93%Total General Fund Expenditures41,694,165$ 38,906,460$ 46,952,431$ 45,047,877$ 44,312,567$ 10,013,755$ 34,298,812$ 22.60%Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 3) Title: March 2022 monthly financial reportPage 2 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 25, 2022 Written report: 4 Executive summary Title: First quarter investment report (January – March 2022) Recommended action: No action required at this time. Policy consideration: Reporting on investments each quarter is part of our financial management policies. Summary: The quarterly investment report provides an overview of the City’s investment portfolio, including the types of investments held, length of maturity and yield. Financial or budget considerations: The total portfolio value on March 31, 2022 was $77 million . Approximately $40 million of the portfolio is invested in securities that include certificates of deposit, U.S. Treasury notes, Federal agency bonds and municipal debt securities. The rest of the portfolio is held in money market accounts for capital project expenditures and operating cashflow needs between property tax settlements, as well as future investment opportunities as interest rates improve . The overall yield to maturity is .79% compared to .52% at the end of 2021. Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable. Supporting documents: Discussion Investment portfolio summary Prepared by: Darla Monson, accountant Reviewed by: Melanie Schmitt, chief financial officer Approve d by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager/operations and recreation director Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 4) Page 2 Title: First quarter investment report (January – March 2022) Discussion Background: The City’s investment portfolio is focused on cash flow needs and investment in longer term securities in accordance with Minnesota Statute 118A and the City’s investment policy objectives of: 1) preservation of capital; 2) liquidity; and 3) return on investment. Present considerations: The total portfolio value decreased by $15.3 million to $77 million at March 31, 2022 compared to $92.3 million at December 31, 2021. This decrease is typical of the first quarter each year after receiving the second half tax settlement in December. Approximately $11 million was needed in the first quarter for the February 1 debt service and pay as you go TIF note payments in addition to the normal cashflow requirements for payroll and operations which decreased money market balances. With some improvement in interest rate s, the overall yield to maturity of the portfolio increased from .52% at the end of 2021 to .79% on March 31, 2022. This is the combined yield including both liquid funds held in money market accounts and long-term investments. Interest rates on money markets have been near zero since early 2020 which brings down the yield of the overall portfolio . The yield to maturity on the $40 million of securities in the portfolio is 1.52%. The two-year Treasury increased from .73% on December 31, 2021 to 2.28% on March 31, 2022, which is a benchmark used by cities for yield comparison of their portfolio . Wh ile it is necessary to keep sufficient cash available in money market accounts for on-going cashflow needs for payroll, operating and capital expenses between the June/July and December property tax settlements, cash is also being held in the money market accounts to invest as interest rates increase . An agency bond, 2 certificates of deposit and a commercial paper security matured during the quarter. New investments purchased included 8 CDs with rates ranging from 1.35% to 2% and 7 municipal debt securities with rates to maturity of 1.5% to 2.51%. Five million dollars from the 4M money market fund was also invested to collateralize Pentagon Federal Credit Union, which will earn $25,000 of in terest before maturity in early 2023. A breakdown of the portfolio is show below and in more detail in the attachment. Next steps: None at this time. 12/31/21 3/31/22 <1 Year 77% 67% 1-2 Years 3% 4% 2-3 Years 9% 12% 3-4 Years 9% 11% >4 Years 2% 6% 12/31/21 3/31/22 Money Markets/Cash $59,961,590 $37,005,750 Commercial Paper/Other $799,640 $5,000,000 Certificates of Deposit $1,234,079 $2,605,806 Municipal Debt $2,567,479 $5,831,156 Agencies/Treasuries $27,741,466 $26,558,224 City of St. Louis Park Investment Portfolio Summary March 31, 2022 Institution/Broker Investment Type CUSIP Maturity Date Yield To Maturity Par Value Market Value at 3/31/2022 Estimated Avg Annual Income 4M Fund Liquid Asset Money Market 0.05%1,565,211 1,565,211 830 4M Fund Plus Money Market 0.07%28,005,471 28,005,471 20,444 UBS Institutional Money Market 0.06% 676,530 676,530 406 UBS Institutional Money Market (bond proceeds)0.06% 6,758,538 6,758,538 4,055 37,005,750 4M Fund Collateral - Pentagon Federal Credit Union, VA 01/20/2023 0.50% 5,000,000 5,000,000 25,000 UBS CD - Bank Hapoalim, NY 06251A3L2 06/29/2022 0.35% 245,000 244,939 858 4M Fund CD - Western Alliance / Torrey Pines Bnk, CA 11/16/2022 0.20% 249,400 249,400 499 4M Fund CD - Greenstate Credit Union, IA 11/16/2022 0.20% 249,500 249,500 499 UBS CD- Texas Exchange Bk TX 88241TNG1 02/04/2025 1.35% 245,000 237,378 3,308 UBS CD - Amer Express Natl UT 02589ABM3 03/03/2025 1.80% 245,000 240,058 4,410 UBS CD - Goldman Sachs Bank UT 38149M3C5 03/16/2026 2.00% 245,000 239,510 4,900 UBS CD - Comenity Bank DE 981993FX1 03/18/2026 2.00% 200,000 200,000 4,000 UBS CD - State Bank of Indi NY 856285E98 02/01/2027 1.75% 245,000 235,124 4,288 UBS CD - Beal Bank NV 07371CG37 02/17/2027 1.85% 245,000 236,114 4,533 UBS CD - Beal Bank Plano TX 07371AYL1 02/17/2027 1.85% 245,000 236,114 4,533 UBS CD - Medallion Bank UT 58404DNF4 03/08/2027 2.00% 245,000 237,670 4,900 2,605,806 UBS Muni Debt - Minnesota State Txble GO 60412ASE4 08/01/2022 1.76% 200,000 201,444 3,520 UBS Muni Debt - San Jose CA Txbl GO 798135H51 09/01/2023 2.13% 650,000 651,404 13,845 UBS Muni Debt - New York St Urban Dev Co Txbl Bds 64985TAZ4 03/15/2025 1.90% 300,000 293,124 5,712 UBS Muni Debt - University Calif Txbl Bds 91412GU94 07/01/2025 2.51% 600,000 603,006 15,042 UBS Muni Debt - Calif St Univ Txble Bds 13077DQD7 11/01/2025 1.51% 750,000 695,625 11,355 UBS Muni Debt - North Dakota Pub Fin Auth Tax 65887PWD3 12/01/2026 1.35% 500,000 475,935 6,755 UBS Muni Debt - La Habra Ca Pension Oblig Txble 503433AF1 08/01/2027 1.90% 500,000 473,945 9,510 UBS Muni Debt - Alabama Fed Aid Hwy Fin Tax 010268CP3 09/01/2027 1.50% 700,000 648,697 10,521 UBS Muni Debt - Connecticut St Health Txbl 20775DLB6 11/01/2027 2.22% 500,000 459,940 11,080 UBS Muni Debt - New York NY GO Bonds 64966ML31 12/01/2027 2.23% 400,000 413,516 8,928 UBS Muni Debt - San Ramon Valley CA Uni Tax 7994082H1 08/01/2028 1.69% 500,000 464,395 8,450 UBS Muni Debt - New York NY City Transit Txbl 64971XD47 08/01/2028 1.95% 500,000 450,125 9,735 5,831,156 UBS US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.12% 500,000 500,625 10,600 UBS US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.18% 800,000 801,000 17,440 UBS US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.69% 1,300,000 1,301,625 34,970 UBS US Treasury Note 912828TJ9 08/15/2022 2.76% 430,000 431,277 11,868 UBS US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.78% 925,000 929,773 25,715 UBS US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.51% 2,550,000 2,563,158 64,005 UBS US Treasury Note 912828N30 12/31/2022 2.55% 1,675,000 1,683,643 42,713 UBS FHLB 3130AJ7E3 02/17/2023 1.44% 620,000 618,884 8,928 UBS US Treasury Note 912828R69 05/31/2023 2.53% 1,000,000 997,110 25,300 UBS US Treasury Note 912828R69 05/31/2023 1.83% 350,000 348,989 6,405 UBS US Treasury Note 912828T91 10/31/2023 1.55% 75,000 74,408 1,163 UBS US Treasury Note 912828T91 10/31/2023 1.48% 450,000 446,450 6,660 UBS FHLB 3130AFW94 02/13/2024 2.58% 500,000 501,885 12,900 UBS US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 1.55% 1,050,000 1,041,138 16,275 UBS US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 1.66% 1,150,000 1,140,294 19,090 UBS US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 0.85% 260,000 257,806 2,210 UBS US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 1.36% 350,000 347,046 4,760 UBS US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 1.66% 1,150,000 1,140,294 19,090 UBS US Treasury Note 912828XX3 06/30/2024 0.41% 475,000 470,991 1,948 UBS FHLB 3130AGWK7 08/15/2024 1.55% 175,000 171,428 2,713 UBS US Treasury Note 91282CCT6 08/15/2024 0.41% 850,000 810,093 3,485 UBS US Treasury Note 912828YY0 12/31/2024 0.32% 1,900,000 1,863,634 6,080 UBS Fannie Mae 3135G0X24 01/07/2025 1.69% 650,000 635,252 10,985 UBS Freddie Mac 3137EAEP0 02/12/2025 1.52% 750,000 729,675 11,400 UBS US Treasury Note 912828ZW3 06/30/2025 0.36% 150,000 139,494 540 UBS US Treasury Note 912828ZW3 06/30/2025 0.58% 725,000 674,221 4,205 UBS US Treasury Note 912828ZW3 06/30/2025 0.39% 3,300,000 3,068,868 12,870 UBS US Treasury Note 912828ZW3 06/30/2025 0.72% 575,000 534,727 4,140 UBS US Treasury Note 91282CBC4 12/31/2025 0.75% 725,000 670,284 5,438 UBS US Treasury Note 91282CBC4 12/31/2025 0.70% 750,000 693,398 5,250 UBS US Treasury Note 91282CBC4 12/31/2025 0.82% 350,000 323,586 2,870 UBS US Treasury Note 91282CBC4 12/31/2025 0.57% 700,000 647,171 3,990 26,558,224 GRAND TOTAL 77,000,936 607,916 Current Portfolio Yield To Maturity 0.79% Page 2 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 4) Title: First quarter investment report (January – March 2022) Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 25, 2022 Written report: 5 Executive summary Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Recommended action: None . The attached report summarizes the status of major development projects in St. Louis Park. Policy consideration: Not applicable. Contact staff with any questions. Summary: The attached report is meant to keep the EDA/city council informed on a quarterly basis as to the metrics and tentative schedule of major development projects occurring in the city. “Proposed developments” are developments that have not yet had their planning applications considered by the city council. “Approved developments” are those whose planning applications have been approved by the city council and have not yet commenced cons truction (but whose financial assistance agreements may or may not still be under consideration ). “Under Construction” means that a building permit has been issued for the development. “Completed developments” are developments which have received their certificates of occupancy. The interactive map of St. Louis Park Developments on the city’s website has been replaced with a more detailed interactive development dashboard made in collaboration with the city’s GIS coordinator and is available at: https://stlouispark.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/1a9c5e7002394459854c06f366bd3b97 The dashboard provides project metrics for all large developments or additions that have been approved, under construction, or completed within the city since 2010. The dashboard includ es website links, market rate and affordable unit counts by bedroom size, parking information for overall stalls, bike facilities, and electric vehicle charging stations , and more . In addition, a listing of all proposed, approved, and completed developments may also be found on the city’s website at: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments-divisions/community - development/development-projects 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: Major developments in St. Louis Park – 2nd Quarter 2022 Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, redevelopment admin istrator Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager Karen Barton, community development director, EDA executive director Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 2 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Major Development s in St. Louis Park 2nd Quarter 2022 Multifamily housing development summary Total Market rate Affordable Proposed units 322 252 71 Approved units 1045 647 390 Units under construction 1094 862 232 Recently completed units 149 124 25 All units 2,610 1,885 718 Proposed developments Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Minnetonka Blvd redevelopment 5707 – 5639 Minnetonka Blvd GMHC (Greater Metropolitan Housing Corporation) & (WHAHLT) West Hennepin Affordable Housing Land Trust Proposed is the removal of four modest single-family houses and construction of four twin homes (eight -units), providing eight affordable home -ownership opportunities. Estimated total development cost $3.7 million Website: NA – too early in the process Project plans could be presented to council by Q2 2022 Construction commencement Q1 2023 upon securing LIHTC financing Wooddale Station redevelopment site  5950 W. 36th St. & 5802 36th St. Saturday Properties and Anderson Companies Proposed mixed -use, mixed income, transit-oriented development next to SWLRT Wooddale Station. Two 6-story, mixed use buildings with 314 total apartment units •252 market rate units •32 units affordable to households @ 50% AMI •31 units affordable to households @ 60% AMI •12,600 SF of ground floor commercial space •3,500 SF of co -working/community space •15,000 SF public plaza for public events, site amenities, and public art Entitlement applications April 2022 Construction anticipated Q1 2023 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 3 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Proposed developments Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Estimated total development cost: $88.7 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/wooddale- station -redevelopment -site Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 4 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Approved developments Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Wooddale Ave Apartments (Aldersgate) 3801 Wooddale Ave. S. Real Estate Equities LLC Redevelopment of former Aldersgate Church property adjacent to Burlington Coat/Micro Center and Highway 100. Proposed is a 114-unit, all affordable apartment building, with 205 parking stalls, of which 117 stalls w ould be underground. Five units affordable to households at 30% AM I Five units affordable to households at 50% AMI 104 units affordable to households at 60% AMI Estimated total development cost $30.1 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community -development/development- projects/aldersgate Awarded $17.5 million in LIHTC bonds Jan. 2022 Planning applications approved on April 18, 2022 Financial request scheduled for EDA/CC consideration on June 6, 2022 Beltline Blvd Station Site SE quadrant of CSAH 25 & Beltline Blvd Sherman Associates Proposed mixed-use, mixed income, transit-oriented, multi-phase development adjacent to SWLRT Beltline Blvd. Station. Building I includes: • Seven-story mixed -use building with six levels of market rate housing (156 units) and 19,500 SF of neighborhood commercial space, potentially anchored by a grocer. • A 592-stall parking ramp, which would include 268 park & ride stalls, 326 residential stalls and approximately 1,800 SF of commercial space. Estimated development cost $55 million Building 2 includes: • Four-story all affordable apartment building with 82 Awarded $13.7 million in LIHTC bonds Jan. 2022 for affordable components. Received $418k grant from Hennepin County for site cleanup in Jan. 2022 Planning applications approved on April 18, 2022 TIF request scheduled for EDA/CC consideration on May 16, 2022 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 5 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Approved developments Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule units, 77 units will be affordable to households at 60% AMI and five units will be affordable to households at 30% AMI. 22 units will have three -bdrms. Estimated development cost $25 million Building 3 includes: • Five -story market rate apartment building with 146 units Estimated development cost $47 million Altogether, the multi-phase redevelopment will have 384 apartment units of which 82 (21%) would be affordable . Estimated total development cost: $139 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/beltline- development Construction on all phases anticipated Q4 2022 9920 Wayzata (former Platia Place ) 9808 & 9920 Wayzata Blvd Bigos Management Redevelopment of former Santorini’s restaurant property at northwest quadrant of I-394 & US 169. Six -story, 233-unit, mixed income apartment building with 20% (47) of the units affordable to households at 50% AMI. Estimated total development cost $68.6 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/slp-living Planning applications approved EDA/council approved TIF in March 2022 Construction commencement spring 2022 Arlington Row East & West 7705 Wayzata Blvd. & 7905 Wayzata Blvd. Melrose Company Planning applications approved Tentative construction commencement summer 2022 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 6 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Approved developments Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Two development sites: • 7905 Wayzata includes two three -story apartment buildings with 34 units total and off-street parking covered by a solar power carport. • 7705 Wayzata includes a three -story apartment building with 27 units and surface parking. Estimated construction cost: $TBD Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/arlington -row- amendment Bremer Bank 7924 State Highway 7 Frauenshuh The retail building containing Knollwood Liquor and Papa Murphy’s Pizza to be removed and replaced with a two-story, 5,850 SF office building to be occupied by Bremer Bank. Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/bremer -bank Developer’s conditional use permit extended to 6/15/2022 Rise on 7 8115 Hwy 7 CommonBond Redevelopment of former Prince of Peace church property across from Shops at Knollwood. Includes a four-story, 120- unit, all affordable apartment building with units affordable to households between 30%-80% AMI along with a 6,600 SF “affordable” early childhood center. Estimated total development cost $39.3 million Planning applications approved in July 2021 Awarded $20.5 million in LIHTC bonds Jan. 2022 Financial request scheduled for EDA/CC consideration on June 6, 2022 Construction commencement Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 7 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Approved developments Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/rise-on-7 fall 2022 upon securing TIF Union Park Flats 3700 Alabama Ave & 6027 37th St W PPL (Project for Pride in Living) Redevelopment of the north portion of the Union Congregational Church with a three story, 60-unit affordable apartment building on. All units would be affordable to households ranging from 30%-80% AMI. Union Congregational Church plans to remain on the south portion of the property. Estimated total development cost: $22.2 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/union- congregational-church Planning applications approved in July 2020 Applying for additional funding from MHFA June 2022 and from SLP AHTF in fall 2022. Construction commencement Q1 2023 upon securing additional financing Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 8 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Under construction Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Beltline Residences 3440 Beltline Blvd. Opus Group Five -story, 250-unit mixed -use, mixed income development with two retail spaces totaling 7,445 square feet and Six live/work units. 10% of the units (25) will be affordable to households at 50% AMI. Estimated total development cost $78.1 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/3440-beltline- blvd Building permit issued March 2022 Risor 3510 Beltline Blvd Roers Company Six -story, 170-unit apartment building with 4,100 square feet of ground floor commercial space and 14 ground floor live - work units. The development will be an age restricted (55+) community with 10% (18) of the units affordable to households at 50% AMI. Estimated construction cost: $56.5 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/3510-beltline- boulevard Planning applications approved in October 2021 Footing and foundation permit issued April 2022 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 9 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Under construction Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Louisiana Crossing 3745 Louisiana Ave Loffler Companies Loffler Companies is renovating the 132,485 square foot former Sam’s Club building. The Midwest’s largest office- technology and IT-services company is consolidating its headquarters and warehouse operations here resulting in over 500 jobs. 30,000 square feet is available for lease. Loffler may sell off the south end of property for multifamily housing in the f uture . Estimated construction cost: $TBD Warehouse operations move in Q4 2021 Office renovation expected to be completed in Q2 2022 Luxe Residential 5235 Wayzata Blvd (Phase VI of Central Park West) Greystar Real Estate Partners Redevelopment of former Olive Garden property in The West End area. Luxe Residential is a six -story, 207-unit, apartment building (including eight units affordable to households at 60% AMI) along with two levels of underground parking. The development also includes a new pocket park along 16th Street and pedestrian improvements connecting the apartment building to the rest of The West End area. Estimated construction cost: $51.8 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/luxe - residential Construction commence ment October 2021 Complete by September 30, 2023 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 10 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Under construction Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Nordic Ware expansions  Buildings 8 & 9 5005 County Road 25 Dalquist Properties LLC 21,853-square -foot warehouse and loading dock addition to Building 8. 45,000-square -foot warehouse and loading dock addition to Building 9 along with a small café and outdoor patio on the property’s south side facing the regional trail. Estimated construction cost: $11.6 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/nordic-ware Construction commencement summer 2021, complete Q1 2022 Parkway Residences W 31st St between Inglewood Ave & Glenhurst Ave Sela Group & Affiliates Multi-phase redevelopment includes four, multi-family buildings with 211 units. The affordable housing includes 24 rehabilitated units at 50% AMI, and six new units at 60% AMI. • Phase I: • Parkway Place: Four-story, 95-unit apt. bldg. • Parkway Flats: Six -unit apt bldg. • Rehab of 24 NOAH apartment units. Estimated development cost $40.6 million • Phase II: Parkway Commons: Four-story, 37-unit apartment building Estimated development cost $14.6 million • Phase III: Eleven-story, 73-unit apartment building Estimated total development cost $36.2 million Phase I commenced May 2020 Complete April 30, 2022 (Parkway Place occupancy issued Jan. 14, 22) Parkway Flats under construction. Anticipated completion August 22 Phase II building permit issued March 2022 Phase III start Spring 2024 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 11 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Under construction Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community -development/development-projects/parkway - residences Volo at Texa-Tonka NE corner Texas Ave & Minnetonka Blvd Paster Development Mixed income redevelopment includes 101 apartment units in a three - to four-story building, and 11 walk-up style townhome units located in two two-story buildings on the northern end of the site. Twenty percent (23) of the units would be affordable to households at 50% AMI. Estimated total development cost $26.6 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/ne-corner- texa-tonka Construction commencement September 2021 Complete Q3 2022 VIA Sol SE quadrant Hwy 7 & Wooddale Ave 5855 Highway 7 PLACE Mixed -use, mixed-income , transit-oriented development including a five -story, 217-unit apartment bldg (65 market rate units, 22 at 50% AMI, and 130 at 80% AMI), e-generation, anaerobic digester, wind turbine, solar panels, and one-acre urban forest. Estimated total development cost $88.4 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/via -place Commenced Jan 2020 Closed on additional financing Jan. 2022 Complete apartments by 9/30/2022 Complete e-generation bldg by 6/30/23 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 12 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Recently completed developments Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule 10 West End (Phase IV of Central Park West) Excelsior Group and Ryan Co. Eleven story, 343,000 sq. ft. Class A , LEED certified, office building with 3,500 SF of ground floor commercial space, 5,000 sq. ft. of shared outdoor amenity space and 1,214 stall parking structure. Estimated construction cost $55.8 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/10 -west -end Completed January 2021 The Quentin 4900 Cedar Lake Road Crowe Companies LLC Project include d the removal of three substandard buildings and construction of a five story, 79-unit sustainable apartment building that includes two levels of structured parking. The housing includes eight units affordable to households at 50% AMI. Estimated total development cost: $21.3 million . Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/cedar-place Completed August 2021 Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 5) Page 13 Title: Quarterly development update – 2nd Quarter 2022 Recently completed developments Project, location & developer Project Description Tentative Schedule The Elmwood 5605 W. 36th St. Main Street Companies Five story, 70-unit mixed -use, mixed income senior development (53 market rate and 17 units affordable to households at 60% AMI), 4,400 SF of ground floor office/commercial space. Estimated total development cost $15.2 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/the-elmwood Complete d August 2021 Xchange Medical Office 6009 Wayzata Blvd. Davis Group Three -story, Class A, medical office development fronting I- 394. Ear Nose & Throat Specialty Care (ENTSC) and Surgical Care Affiliates (SCA) will anchor the 77,996 -square foot medical office building. Includes one level of underground parking with 51 stalls and 253 surface parking stalls on the building’s south side. Estimated construction cost: $13 million Website: https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments- divisions/community-development/development-projects/xchange- medical -office Complete d Nov 2021 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 25, 2022 Written report: 6 Executive summary Title: 2023 Budget process and ARPA funding overview Recommended action: No formal action required. This report is to outline the budget process for the 2023 budget along with allocation of American Recovery Plan Act (ARPA) dollars. Policy consideration: Council is required to set a preliminary levy by Sept. 30, 2022 for the 2023 tax year. Council is required to designate where we will spend the monies from the American Recovery Plan. Summary: This report outlines the 2023 budget process including high level timelines, topics for discussion and decision points. It will also discuss ARPA funding and the timeline for council discussion during the budget process. Financial or budget considerations: This report explains the process and timelines for the budget and levy. Strategic priority consideration: All areas of the adopted strategic priorities are impacted by the city’s budget and financial health. Supporting documents: Discussion Prepared by: Melanie Schmitt , finance director Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 6 ) Page 2 Title: 2023 Budget process and ARPA funding overview Discussion Background: Each year we start the budget process in April for the next year. This report lays out the council workshops and meeting for the 2023 budget cycle. It also talks about the process for allocating American Recovery Plan Act (ARPA) funds. Budget timelines May Study session: long range financial plan + ARPA approach June Study session: 2023 budget assumptions July Study session: Preliminary 2023 budget including general fund, capital, enterprise funds and ARPA allocation Aug. Study session: Preliminary 2023 levies and refined preliminary budget Sept. Council action: Approve 2023 preliminary tax levies Oct. Council action: Approval 2023 fees including utility rates Nov. Study session: Final 2023 budget, tax levies, capital, enterprise funds, ARPA Dec. Council action: Truth in taxation hearing; passage of 2023 levy, budget, and Capital Improvement Plan May: Review long -range financial plan, including such items as fund balances, debt, and this year, ARPA funds. Council has also expressed interest in discussing debt levels and the impacts of a debt-free approach. This study session will incorporate that discussion. We will also present a financial impact analysis of dedicating various levels of ARPA funds toward infrastructure projects and ask council to provide high level direction. June : Present levy estimates to the council. The estimate s use assumptions for insurance rates, utilities, cost of living increases, and any known inflation . The estimate is only inclusive of base operations, no new programs or staffing are in the estimate. Staff will model the levy using differing levels of ARPA funding based on council direction from May. In addition to our general levies, we will discuss the HRA and EDA levies . Staff will again want high level direction from council on the levies and ARPA spending. July: Capital projects and equipment for 2023 through 2032. Primary focus will be the 2023 capital with a high -level overview of the projects and spending levels in future years. August: Proposal of the preliminary levies. We will have budget numbers from departments and a solid expense estimate. Council should provide direction to staff on the desired preliminary levy. A draft ARPA plan will also be presented; council feedback is requested. September: Passage of 2023 preliminary levies. We can lower the final levies but are not allowed to increase them above the preliminary levy amount. Additionally, we will present a final plan for our ARPA dollars based on feedback from the council in budget meetings leading up to September. Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 6 ) Page 3 Title: 2023 Budget process and ARPA funding overview October: Adoption of 2023 fees. The utility rates are included in the fee schedule. All fees tie into our revenue projections in the 2023 budget. November: Final work session before the truth in taxation hearing. Final numbers for budget and levies will be presented for discussion. December: Truth in taxation hearing (TNT) and final budget presentation. The meeting following the TNT will include passage of the final 2023 levies, budgets and capital plans. Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 25, 2022 Written report: 7 Executive summary Title: Business terms for contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equitie s (Ward 2) Recommended action: Review proposed business terms for the EDA’s contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equities related to its proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartments development scheduled for formal consideration at the June 6, 2022, EDA meeting. Policy consideration: Are the proposed business terms for the provision of tax increment financing assistance and affordable housing trust funds for the Wooddale Avenue Apartments development consistent with the EDA’s expectations and are they acceptable? Summary: Real Estate Equities (REE and “Re developer”) has a purchase agreement to acquire the Aldersgate Methodist Church property at 3801 Wooddale Avenue . REE’s plan s for the site include removal of the existing church, and construction of a 114-unit, all affordable , workforce housing development. The proposed $34.26 million development includes a mix of one-, two-, and three-bedroom units, including five units at 30% AMI, five units at 50% AMI, and 104 units at 60% AMI for 26 years, exceeding the city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy requirements. The EDA/city council received a staff report detailing the Redeveloper’s TIF Application at the March 28, 2022 study session along with a recommendation for an appropriate level of assistance. The development also exceeds the city’s green building policy . Financial or budget considerations: REE has sought project financing from a variety of public agencies for the proposed development. It was awarded up to $17.49 million tax exempt bonds from Minnesota Management and Budget (MMB), Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) from Minnesota Housing and are applying for cleanup grants from Hennepin County. Despite these sources, and deferring over 70% of their developer fee, the project’s proforma exhibits a funding gap due to its considerable extraordinary costs. Consequently, REE applied for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance to enable the development to become financially feasible. Ehlers, the EDA’s financial consultant, examined the project’s pro forma to determine what, if any, level of financial assistance was necessary for the development to achieve financial feasibility . After review, Ehlers determined that up to $940,000 in TIF assistance is warranted to enable the project to proceed. Such assistance would be provided via a pay-as-you-go TIF Note. Given current estimates of market value, it is estimated that the development’s TIF Note would be paid off in approximately 15 years. Such assistance would derive from a new housing TIF district. In addition, a deferred loan of $850,000 from the city’s AHTF is needed to “buy down” the deeper levels of affordable housing at 30% and 50% AMI in the development. Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood oriented development. Supporting documents: Discussion Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, redevelopment administrator Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager Karen Barton, community development director, EDA executive director Approve d by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager/operations and recreation director Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 7) Page 2 Title: Business terms for contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equities Disc ussion Background: Real Estate Equities has a purchase agreement with Aldersgate Methodist Church and proposes to remove the existing building and re develop the site with an all-affordable, three - to four-story apartment building. The development would include 114 dwelling units that would be affordable to households between 30 and 60 percent of the area median income (AMI). The plan proposes accessing the site from Wooddale Avenue with driveways both north and south of the cul-de -sac. 117 parking stalls are provided underground, and 89 stalls are proposed in surface lots on the building’s west and north sides. Other proposed site improvements include sidewalks, new landscaping, an underground stormwater management system and a 40-53 kw rooftop solar array. The development would exceed the city’s inclusionary housing policy as amended in October 2021, which requires at least 20 percent of the units be affordable to households at 60 percent AMI. The proposed apartment building would be an all-affordable development with rents ranging from 30 percent to 60 percent AMI. Per the Metropolitan Council, the 60 percent AMI for a family of four is $62,940. A development of this size is required to provide at least four three -bedroom units per the city’s inclusionary housing policy. The Re developer plans to include 37 three -bedroom units in the building’s unit mix, exceeding the policy requirements by 32 units, to further the city’s goals for family -sized housing. As proposed, the development exceeds the city’s green building policy as amended in July 2020. The development will follow Enterprise Green Communities/Energy Star Program, and the redeveloper has agreed to include numerous energy efficient design features and components into the development (including a rooftop solar array installation capable of generating a 40-53 kWh) which exceed the city’s Green Building Policy requirements as amended July 2020 and consequently the Climate Action Plan. Rendering of proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartments Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 7) Page 3 Title: Business terms for contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equities Wooddale Avenue Apartments would be a single -phase, all-affordable, residential development marketed as workforce housing. Pending approval of its financing, the Redeveloper plans to commence construction of the building in summer 2022 and complete it by summer 2024. Real Estate Equities w ould own and manage the residential development for the long term. On April 4, 2022, city council approved a comprehensive plan amendment to reguide the site from civic to high -density residential, a preliminary and final plat, and a preliminary and final planned unit development zoning district to allow the proposed mixed income, multi-family residential development on April 18, 2022. Redeveloper’s request for financi al assistance: Due to the housing development’s extraordinary site preparation costs and decreased rental income from 100% of the units over 26 years, there is insufficient cash flow to provide a market rate of return, pay ongoing operating expenses, and service the outstanding debt on the property. This leaves a gap in the development’s funding making it financially infeasible without public financial assistance. To offset this gap, the Redeveloper applied to the EDA for tax increment financing (TIF) assistance. The EDA received a staff report detailing the TIF Application at the March 28, 2022 study session along with a recommendation for the appropriate amount of financial assistance. Level and type of financial assistance: In summary, the Redeveloper’s sources and uses statement, income and expense estimates, financing assumptions, cash flow projections, and investor rate of return (ROR) related to the proposed all-affordable development were reviewed by staff and Ehlers (the EDA’s financial consultant). Based upon its analysis of the Redeveloper’s financial proforma, Ehlers determined that tax increment assistance in the amount of $940,000 and a loan in the amount of $840,000 from the city’s Affordable Housing Trust Fund (AHTF) is necessary to enable the proposed development to become financially feasible. The TIF assistance would be committed to reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of its Public Redevelopment Costs (which includes the costs of site demolition and clearance, soil remediation and correction as well as construction of affordable housing). Upon completion of the building and verification of the Redeveloper’s qualified Public Redevelopment Costs, tax increment generated from the increased value of the property would be provided to the Redeveloper on a "pay-as-you-go" basis, which is the preferred financing method under the city's TIF Policy. It is projected that the TIF Note would be paid off in approximately 15 years with increment generated by the development, consistent with other redevelopments the EDA has previously facilitated. The AHTF loan of $850,000 would be non -interest bearing and would be repaid upon the earlier of 1) 25 years, 2) refinancing, or 3) sale of the development. The proposed development exceeds the requirements of the AHTF policy by providing five units at 30 percent AMI, five units at 50 percent AMI, and the remaining 104 units at 60 percent AMI. Additionally, the development will include 37 3-bedroom units. By providing additional assistance through the trust fund, this allows the development to achieve deeper levels of affordability for 10 of the units and to incorporate a greater number of larger units. Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 7 ) Page 4 Title: Business terms for contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equities Proposed business terms: The following is a summary of the proposed key business terms between the EDA and Real Estate Equities (“Redeveloper”), consistent with EDA Policy, AHTF policy, past practices , and previous discussions with the EDA/city council. The Redevelopment Property consists of the property highlighted in the aerial photo below. “Redevelopment Property” for proposed Wooddale Avenue Apartments 1. The Re developer agrees to construct an all-affordable multifamily rental housing development on the Redevelopment Property consisting of a 114-unit apartment building with approximately 117 underground parking stalls (the “Development”). The Development shall include a mix of one -bedroom, two-bedroom, and three -bedroom units (the “Minimum Improvements”). 2. The EDA agrees to reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of its Public Redevelopment Costs incurred during construction of the Development through tax increment financing (TIF) up to $940,000. 3. The EDA agrees to issue a tax increment revenue note (“TIF Note”) to the Redeveloper in the maximum principal amount of $940,000 payable from available tax increment, generated by the Development on a “pay-as-you-go” basis, over a period of approximately 15 years. The TIF Note will bear interest at 4.3% or the Redeveloper’s Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 7 ) Page 5 Title: Business terms for contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equities actual financing interest rate. The TIF Note would not constitute a business subsidy because the Redeveloper’s net costs of acquisition of and site improvements on the Redevelopment Property will meet the housing exception under Minnesota statutes. 4. In order to provide the tax increment to the Redeveloper, the EDA agrees to establish a new housing TIF district consisting of one parcel: 3801 Wooddale Avenue . 5. The EDA will issue the TIF Note to the Re developer upon completion of the Minimum Improvements and Re developer providing the EDA with a statement specifying the Public Redevelopment Costs incurred by the Re developer related to the Development along with evidence that each identified Public Redevelopment Cost has been paid or incurred by the Redeveloper. 6. The TIF assistance will be subject to a "look back" analysis to be performed by Ehlers, the EDA’s financial consultant. Under the provision, the Redeveloper would be required to submit final project costs related to the Development. The look back provision ensures that if the Development’s total Public Redevelopment Costs are lower, the EDA can reduce the amount of TIF assistance provided. 7. The EDA or the City will provide the Redeveloper an interest-free deferred loan from its Affordable Housing Trust Fund in an amount not to exceed $850,000. • The AHTF loan will be repaid upon the earlier of (i) 25 years, (ii) refinancing/re - syndication of the Affordable Housing Minimum Improvements, or (iii) sale or transfer of the Affordable Housing Minimum Improvements; provided, however, that Redeveloper may transfer the Affordable Housing Minimum Improvements to a related entity to the Redeveloper without such repayment obligation. 8. Construction of the Development will commence by August 31, 2022 and will be substantially completed by August 31, 2024. 9. Redeveloper will construct the Development and maintain it in good condition until the Contract terminates. 10. Redeveloper will comply w ith the TIF Act and city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy in effect at the time of its planning applications (February 28, 2022). Specifically, Developer agrees to a 26-year covenant beginning on the date a certificate of occupancy is issued providing that (i) at least 40% of the units as affordable to households at or below 60% AMI for purposes of complying with the TIF Act ; (ii) at least 104 of the units will be affordable to households at or below 60% AMI; (iii) at least five units will be affordable to households at or below 50% AMI (two one -bedroom units, two two-bedroom units, and one three - bedroom unit) and such units shall have free surface parking; (iv) at least five units will be affordable to households at or below 30% AMI (two one -bedroom units, two two- bedroom units, and one three -bedroom unit) and such units shall have free surface parking; and (v) households with incomes at or below 60% AMI will have the option to purchase underground parking at a cost not to exceed the greater of 60% of the market rate for underground parking as calculated by the City on an annual basis or $75 per month. Certain affordability requirements will remain in place for 30 years due to the requirements of the low-income housing tax credits to be received by the Redeveloper. Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 7) Page 6 Title: Business terms for contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equities 11. Redeveloper will use reasonable efforts to meet the following business enterprise and workforce participation goals for women and black, indigenous and people of color (BIPOC) in conjunction with construction of the Development: Participation Goals Women BIPOC Business Enterprises 6% 13% Workforce 6% 32% Participation goals would be applied to the Development as a whole and pertain to the total amount of construction and related contracts. Redeveloper would provide and use reasonable efforts to cause its contractors/subcontractors to provide certain information and resources to prospective contractors/subcontractors before bidding; to implement procedures designed to notify women and people of color about contracting opportunities; to document steps taken to comply with participation goals and the results of actions taken; and to provide compliance report(s), all as more particularly set forth in the Contract. Failure to achieve these goals would not constitute a breach or default by Redeveloper. 12. Redeveloper will comply with the City’s Green Building Policy in effect at the time of submittal for planning applications (February 28, 2022) and shall use Enterprise Green Communities/Energy Star Program with the Minnesota Overlay as its design rating system to meet the requirements of the policy. Among the sustainability features to be included are: • A rooftop solar array which produces approximately 40-53 kw • 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 13. Redeveloper will install the following items, at a minimum, in conformity with the City’s Planning Development Contract: • 19 Level 2 electric vehicle charging station s. • Landscaping on the Development Property. • All items required under the City’s Building Readiness Ordinances. 14. Redeveloper and EDA mutually agree to enter into a Minimum Market Value Assessment Agreement setting a minimum property tax value for the Development. 15. Redeveloper agrees to not discriminate on the basis of race, color, creed, sex, or national origin in the construction, maintenance, sale, lease, or rental of the Development Property or Minimum Improvements. Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 7 ) Page 7 Title: Business terms for contract for private redevelopment with Real Estate Equities 16. Redeveloper agrees to certify that the Minimum Improvements have been constructed in accordance with the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract and all applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations (including but not limited to environmental, zoning, building code, labor, and public health laws and regulations). Additionally, all costs related to the Minimum Improvements and the development of the Redevelopment Property, including payments to all contractors, subcontractors, and project laborers, have been paid prior to the date of the Redeveloper’s request for the Certificate of Completion and written lien waivers have been provided from each contractor for all work done and for all materials furnished by it for construction or installation of the Minimum Improvements. 17. Redeveloper agrees to pay reasonable administrative costs incurred by the EDA, including consultant and attorney fees, in connection with the Development. 18. If Redeveloper defaults under the Contract, the EDA may (among other things) terminate the TIF Note and the Contract. 19. The Contract and TIF Note will terminate upon the earliest of the final payment of principal and interest on the TIF Note, the required decertification of the TIF District, or an uncured Event of Default under the Contract. The above terms will serve as the basis for, and will be incorporated into, a contract for private redevelopment contract with the Re developer. Such terms are subject to further definition, revision and/or refinement by the EDA’s legal counsel. A copy of the contract for private redevelopment will be available for review in the community development department. Next steps: Staff will work wit h the EDA’s legal counsel and Real Estate Equities to finalize the formal contract for private redevelopment based on the proposed business terms and any input received by the EDA. Formal consideration of the proposed purchase and redevelopment contract is scheduled for the June 6, 2022, EDA meeting. Actions/public hearings Governing Body Date Establishment of Wooddale Avenue Apartments TIF District (action) EDA June 6, 2022 Contract for Private Redevelopment for Wooddale Avenue Apartments TIF District (action) EDA June 6, 2022 Wooddale Avenue Apartments/REE Approval of Contract for Private Redevelopment and Disbursement of AHTF approval (consent) City Council June 6, 2022 Public Hearing and establishment of Wooddale Avenue Apartments TIF District and conformance with comprehensive plan (public hearing and action) City Council June 6, 2022 Meeting: Study session Meeting date: April 25, 2022 Written report: 8 Executive summary Title: Draft sidewalk policy framework (Ward 3) Recommended action: To identify sidewalks to be evaluated as a part of the 2023 pavement management project, staff is recommending pilot ing a draft sidewalk policy framework. Additional discussion on sidewalk policy will be brought to council in June during the connected infrastructure system study session. Policy consideration: Does the city council support staff applying the proposed sidewalk policy framework as a pilot to develop a formal sidewalk policy to guide pavement management projects? Summary: Consistent with past council direction, the scope of the city’s transportation projects includes the evaluation of new sidewalk construction. The manner of identifying the location of these new sidewalks has evolved over the last nine years. More information on this evolution is in the discussion section of this report. During the approval process for the 2022 pavement management project (PMP) in Fern Hill, there was considerable discussion regarding the process used to identify new sidewalk locations and staff recommendations. It was suggested that a more consistent approach to identifying the location of new sidewalk construction would better reflect the city’s mobility priorit y and communicate that a continuous sidewalk network provide s connections for the entire community, not just for the people that live on the street. In June, staff will bring the topic of a sidewalk policy to the council as a part of our connected infrastructure system study sessions. However, the public process for the 2023 pavement management project will start in May. Due to this schedule, there is not adequate time to formally adopt a policy prior to kicking off the public process. Unless directed otherwise by the council, staff will use the framework described in the discussion section of this report to develop the locations for proposed sidewalk as a part of this project. These will be communicated to the public at the start of the public process. Staff have developed this draft framework based on previous direction from council. Financial or budget considerations: Construction of sidewalk segments as a part of our PMP projects is planned for and included in the 10-year capital improvement plan (CIP). 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 Prepared by: Debra Heiser, engineering director Reviewed by: Jack Sullivan, en gineering project manager Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 8) Page 2 Title: Draft sidewalk policy framework Discussion Background: The following timeline outlines the evolution of council direction regarding the construction of sidewalks in the city since 2013. May 28, 2013 - Complete Streets policy approved by council. The Complete Streets policy encompasses the planning, scoping, design, implementation, operation, and maintenance of roads to reasonably address the safety and accessibility needs of users of all ages and abilities. Comp lete Streets considers the needs of motorists, pedestrians, transit users and vehicles, bicyclists, and commercial and emergency vehicles moving along and across roads, intersections, and crossings in a manner that is sensitive to the local context and recognizes that the needs vary in urban, suburban, and rural settings. June 17, 2013 - Connect the Park Capital improvement plan (CIP) approved by council. Th is plan is the implementation of the majority of bikeway s, sidewalk s and trails identified in the Active Living Sidewalk and Trail Plan. The purpose is to make a measurable difference in how people travel around the community by constructing a comprehensive citywide system of bikeways, sidewalks, and trails. It builds on council policies and plans to set a course for implementation of the non-motorized transportation for the community J une 2014 - Council directed staff to identify gap segments near Connect the Park (CTP) sidewalk segments and add them to the implementation plan . A gap was defined as a sidewalk segment that, if completed , would create connections from the existing sidewalk system to the new sidewalks in the CTP plan. July 2018 - Definition of sidewalk gap expanded to include connections from multi-family naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) to the community sidewalk system. At the request of the city council, staff was asked to locate all the sidewalk gaps between NOAH properties and sidewalks along transit corridors. Staff include s these gaps into the scope of projects in the CIP. 2018 - 2040 Comprehensive Plan incorporates the policy, “The city will plan, design, build, and operate the city’s mobility system in a way that prioritizes walking first, followed by bicycling and transit use, and then motor vehicle use”. This is a significant change from previous comprehensive plan priorities. Flipping the prioritization enables staff to plan, design and implement projects to optimize the pedestrian and bicycle experience. 2018 - Climate Action Plan approved by council. The plan sets the goal of achieving carbon neutrality — having a net-zero carbon footprint — by 2040. The plan provides guidance for residents, businesses, and the city on reducing the greenhouse gas emissions and impacts of climate change. The construction of sidewalks will help in achieving the goals set forth in the Climate Action Plan goal 6.4: Enable reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from single -occupancy vehicles. Aug. 19, 2019 - Living Streets policy formally adopted. This policy includes the principle : Enhance walking/ biking conditions and connections. This principle is incorporated into the planning and design of transportation projects. To do this, as Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 8) Page 3 Title: Draft sidewalk policy framework a part of project development, the existing bikeway, sidewalk , and trail networks are reviewed. In addition, locations of naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) will be identified. Recommendations will be made to close gaps in the networks, provide additional connections, and make safety improvements based on the context of the specific transportation project under consideration. Since the adoption of the Living Streets policy, staff identified the location of new sidewalks to include in the project scope in one of the following ways: • Connect the Park plan: Staff will include any segment of sidewalk identified in the Connect the Park plan adjacent to a street segment included in the project. • Gap sidewalks: Staff will review the existing sidewalk network along streets segments in the project and recommend filling in gaps. F or purposes of discussion, a “gap” is considered a section of sidewalk that is missing on a continuous street block. • M ulti-family housing connections: where there is multi-family housing on a street segment, staff will include new sidewalk to connect these properties to commercial nodes, parks, and transit. • Resident requests: During the public process, residents request the inclusion of additional sidewalks. Staff will add these for con sideration. On street segments where there is no existing sidewalk and residents do not request a sidewalk , staff does not propose sidewalk installation. This process is consistent with past council policy direction . Current considerations: During the approval process for the 2022 pavement management project in Fern Hill, there was considerable discussion regarding how new sidewalk locations were identified. Council members and the public had questions regarding the location of sidewalks being evaluated and why they were on some streets and not all. There was also feedback requesting that the sidewalks run continuously on one side of the street vs. crossing from one side to the other. It was suggested that a more consistent approach to identifying the location of new sidewalk construction would better reflect the city’s mobility priority . In response to this, staff will brin g the topic of a sidewalk policy to the council as a part of our connected infrastructure system study sessions. The public process for the 2023 pavement management project will start in May. Due to this schedule, there is not adequate time to formally adopt a policy prior to kicking off the public process. To not miss this opportunity, staff recommends doing a pilot to improve how we identify sidewalks that are included in the PMP project. We have developed a draft sidewalk policy framework that we would like to pilot. The framework is based on feedback received by council and the public during the 2022 PMP process to identify proposed sidewalks at the beginning of the public process. Th e expectation is that providing a more consistent approach to identifying the location of new sidewalk construction will reduce confusion for the public, better reflect the city’s mobility priority and recognize that a continuous sidewalk network provides connections for the community, not just for the people that live on the street. Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 8) Page 4 Title: Draft sidewalk policy framework To develop the locations of the proposed sidewalk for the 2023 PMP, staff recommends using the following framework. It lays out basic principles for sidewalk location selection and design. Sidewalk policy - pilot framework: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably. One way to do this is by continuing to expand the network of sidewalks. As a part of transportation projects, the existing sidewalk system will be reviewed, and new sidewalks will be proposed to close gaps and create a connected sidewalk network along streets in the city. 1. Minimum sidewalk network: As vehicle volume increases, the relative comfort for pedestrians to cross the road decreases. To recognize this, we recommend that the policy be broken out into two different types of roads, low -volume and high-volume. Low-volume roads are those that have less than 2,000 vehicles a day. High -volume roads are those that have more than 2,000 vehicles a day. The streets in our pavement management projects are typically low -volume roads. • For low-volume roads: there will be continuous sidewalk on at least one side of the street. • For high -volume roads: there will be continuous sidewalk on both sides of the street. 2. Locations: At the start of the project scope development, staff will review the existing sidewalk network adjacent to streets that are scheduled for rehabilitation. Sidewalks will be proposed where sidewalk does not currently exist and to fill gaps in the sidewalk network on the project street segments. 3. Continuity: To promote a safe, comfortable sidewalk network and reduce the need for pedestrians to cross the street to get to a sidewalk. Continuous sidewalks are recommended to be constructed along all street segments included in a transportation project. For low-volume roads: Continuous sidewalks will be proposed on at least one side of all low -volume roads. • For locations where there is existing sidewalk on the blocks adjacent to the proposed sidewalk segment, the side of the street the existing sidewalk s are on will dictate which side the new sidewalk is recommended. • For locations where there is no existing sidewalk on the blocks adjacent to the proposed sidewalk segment, both sides of the street will be evaluated for sidewalk construction. One side will be recommended. For high-volume roads: Continuous sidewalks will be proposed on both sides of high- volume roads. 4. Design: The standard sidewalk design depends on the sidewalk designation: community or neighborhood. The proposed sidewalk segments will be designated as either community or neighborhood sidewalk based on the following definitions: Community sidewalks are located on a street that is directly adjacent to an activity node. They make major connections within the city and to neighboring cities’ systems. These pedestrian facilities (sidewalks and/or trails) are spaced roughly at 1/4-mile intervals across the city. Most of these sidewalks are located along collector and arterial roadways that have high traffic volumes. In general, activity nodes are community or Study session meeting of April 25, 2022 (Item No. 8) Page 5 Title: Draft sidewalk policy framework area destinations such as; the library, schools, retail areas, parks, regional trails, transit nodes, and places of worship. Neighborhood sidewalks are all other sidewalks in the city. They provide accessibility for pedestrians within the immediate area and feed into the community sidewalk system. These sidewalks are generally located on lower-volume roads. At the beginning of design, a standard sidewalk design section is applied to the corridor and adjustments are made, where possible, to minimize impacts to trees and private property. These standard designs are: Community sidewalks: A 6-foot-wide concrete sidewalk with a 5-foot-wide grass boulevard for community sidewalks. The extra foot of concrete on the sidewalk assists the city with snow removal due to the width of equipment. Neighborhood sidewalks: A 5-foot-wide concrete sidewalk with a 5-foot-wide grass boulevard. Staff will use the following techniques to minimize impacts to trees and private property: • Reduce the width of the boulevard – possible reduction between 0-5 feet. Trees are not recommended to be planted in boulevards less than 5 feet wide. • Reduce the width of the street – parking is allowed on both sides of streets that are 28 feet wide or more. To address concerns regarding emergency vehicle access, parking is recommended to be restricted on streets less than 28 feet wide. For streets that are less than 28 feet wide but more than 24 feet wide, parking would be restricted to one side. For streets 24 feet wide or less, parking would be restricted on both sides. Next steps: If council supports the general concepts presented above for the draft sidewalk policy framework, staff recommends that it be used to identify where sidewalks will be evaluated on the 2023 PMP. This annual transportation project rehabilitates several miles of local residential streets. In 2023, the streets to be rehabilitated are in Pavement Management Area 1 (Oak Hill, Texa-Tonka, and Lenox neighborhoods) - Ward 3. Street rehabilitation work consists of replacing the existing bituminous pavement, and replacing the concrete curb and gutter as needed. Other work includes sidewalk repairs, sewer repairs and watermain replacement. New sidewalks are also recommended as a part of this project. All the streets in this project are low -volume roads, so continuous sidewalks will be proposed on at least one side of each street segment included in the project where there is not already a sidewalk. As we work through this first project, we will be able to refine the policy and bring it to the June 20, 2022 study session. If the council would like to develop a formal sidewalk policy , additional components or considerations can be discussed at that time. Reconvene Meeting of April 25, 2022 Page 1 Title: 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Reconvene – April 25, 2022 PROPOSED AGENDA 1.Reconvene the St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization 2.Roll Call – Declaration of Quorum 3.Acknowledgement of Trained Members (Kraft & Rog) 4.Review of Properties in Appeal a.Board Action - Appellant & Assessing Staff are Not in Agreement b.Board Action – Appellant has requested referral to the County Board c.Board Action – Appellant has refused inspection, withdrawn or not responded d.Board Action - Appellant & Assessing Staff are in Mutual Agreement For appeals in groups a-b-c, it is suggested that the board review each parcel individually, discuss as you will and make individual board rulings. For the mutual agreement category, each parcel should be read into the record and the board may take one group action per DOR direction (April 2016). 5.Instruct Assessor to Complete Record of Changes for Submittal 6.Instruct Assessor to Inform Appellants of Board Action via Mail 7.Complete the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Certification Form 8.Adjourn if Board business is completed Reconvene Meeting of April 25, 2022 Page 2 Title: 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization BACKGROUND for the 2022 St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization All property owners are entitled to the right of appeal regarding their classification and market value. The City is required by statute to conduct a Local Board of Appeal & Equalization meeting to hear appeals or conduct an open book meeting with the next options being the County Board of Appeal & Equalization and ultimately to the Minnesota State Tax Court. The focus for the board is: the property classification which is determined by use; and the market value which is based on the characteristics of the real estate and market conditions as of the date of the assessment (January 2, 2022). Minnesota statute requires all properties to be assessed at full market value, fee simple. The dominant definitions of market value are: MN Statute 272.03 – “Market value” means the usual selling price at the place where the property to which the term is applied shall be at the time of assessment; being the price which could be obtained at a private sale or an auction sale, if it is determined by the assessor that the price from the auction sale represents an arm’s length transaction. The price obtained at a forced sale shall not be considered. Appraisal Institute – The most probable price, as of a specified date, in cash or in terms equivalent to cash, or in other precisely revealed terms, for which the specified property rights should sell after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably, and for self-interest, and assuming that neither is under undue duress. (The Appraisal of Real Estate, 13th Edition, Appraisal Institute [2008], page 23) The Board convened on April 11, 2022 at which meeting a total of fifty-one (51) parcels were recognized to be under appeal. The Board set the process and scheduled the reconvene meeting as April 25 to review the merit of each appeal and to rule on them. A few housekeeping observations are made for the reference of the board. •One trained and certified Board member (Kraft and/or Rog) must be present at each meeting the Board is in session. Best practice is for multiple trained members. •Timeline of the assessment: All valuations are set as of January 2, 2022 relative to market activity in the preceding year. Value influences arising from the pandemic have been reviewed from the perspective of market reactions in setting the assessment. •The time window for the board to conclude business is 20 days after convening. •It is essential that the Board rules on each question before it and likewise that the Board recognizes that it can reduce, sustain, or increase valuations as deemed necessary. •Important – DOR directive: “It is the board’s responsibility to hear all appeals presented until the board adjourns. A property owner can present their appeal at the initial meeting or at any of the reconvene meetings. The board must hear that appeal and Reconvene Meeting of April 25, 2022 Page 3 Title: 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization make a decision. The board cannot dismiss the property owner’s appeal, unless the meeting is adjourned.” The Hennepin County Assessor has reviewed that language and requested that Local Boards accept appeals until final adjournment. We are doing so. •At the writing of this Board packet, staff has added five (5) additional appeals to the roster and endeavored to respond in a timely fashion. •Prior to adjourning, the board should instruct the assessor to submit a record of their actions on the Department of Revenue required form. •Finally, the Local Board of Appeal Certification Form must be signed at each Board meeting by all Board members present. The Hennepin delegate takes care of this item. Background to Valuation Methodologies: The modeling associated with the mass assessment accommodates variations between neighborhoods, within neighborhoods and includes consideration of location, age, style, size, finish materials, condition, updating, etc. depending on the information available. Adjustments and valuation change orders have been made where necessary during the informal review process prior to the Board. The Board process differs from mass valuation modeling in that the assessing staff re-appraises the subject property individually by direct comparison to market transactions. As part of the review process, staff routinely re-inspects properties to review the accuracy of attributes and especially current condition which is often a highly important variable. Next steps are staff engaging the property owner in a candid conversation of the property value, local transactions and how the transactions provide a fact-based market indication of the subject property value. If staff believes a reduction is warranted, this is disclosed to the owner in an attempt to mutually resolve the valuation question. Likewise, if staff concludes that the valuation is at market or slightly below we inform the owner/appellant and discuss the market information. In cases where staff revaluation does not result in a conclusion satisfactory to the appellant, the board process is outlined. Additional questions are very common for those owners who desire to appear before the Board . As such, the Local Board depends on active participation from all parties involved including the property owner, assessing staff and the board members. All property owners are requested to state their basis of appeal, their opinion of the market value and informed that they may present information in written form and by testimony supporting their opinion of value and/or classification. Reconvene Meeting of April 25, 2022 Page 4 Title: 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Focal Points for the Board – Agenda as Indicated on Cover Sheet, decisions on: 1.Board Action – Four (4) appeals have not been resolved to a mutual agreement between the property owner and assessing staff. It is requested that the Board hear and decide the merits of the case. We have informed the owner that the Board allows 5- 10 minutes for their presentation followed by a 3–5-minute presentation by the assessing staff. The Board may adjust these time allowances as needed. 2. Board Action – there are three (3) appeals where owners have indicated preference to resolve the question at the county board level. These are a mixture of scheduling conflicts and timeline to arrange the inspection/re-valuation work-up. We therefore request that the board acknowledge each property as being on the roster record … to preserve their right and eligibility to move onward to the County Board. 3.Board Action – there are eight (eight) appeals where the appellant has refused inspection access, are non-responsive to repeated communication attempts or have chosen to withdraw their appeal. The Board is reminded that some cases end up in this category almost every year. We also remind the board that you may not make a value or classification change that would benefit the property owner where they have refused inspection access. We again ask that each property is acknowledged as being on the roster record and thus eligible to move onward to the County Board. 4.Board Action – Forty-one (41) appeals have been reviewed with the property owner and assessing staff reaching a mutually acceptable valuation (no classifications were appealed). It is requested that assessing staff read each parcel action into the meeting record after which the Board may take one group action to affirm the mutually agreed upon valuations. Per the DOR direction to accept appeals made after the notification date which has been published and posted per legal requirements… they are highlighted in yellow on the reconvene roster. Should there be additional late appeals in the time between this board packet and the date of reconvene, we will be requesting their addition to the roster with proviso that we may not have completed the review due to time constraints Following your decision, each property owner will be notified via letter of the Board action and to remind them that they are eligible to appeal to the County Board. The Hennepin County Board of Appeal and Equalization begins June 13, 2022. An application is requested by the County no later than May 18th. To appear before the County Board, all appellants must first have appealed to the St. Louis Park Board of Appeal and Equalization. Property owners may also appeal directly to the Minnesota State Tax Court. Thank you for serving on the Board. Prepared by: St. Louis Park Assessing Staff Reconvene Meeting of April 25, 2022 Page 5 Title: 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Tab Summary Background & Focal Points for the Board Tab 1: Roster of All Appeals for Board Action – At Time of Packet Assembly (the final roster update will be handed out to the Board at the meeting) Tab 2: Assessing Staff Report – 3706 France Ave S (Owner did not supply materials for the Board report) Tab 3: Assessing Staff Report – 2235 Quebec Ave S (Owner did not supply materials for the Board report) Tab 4: Assessing Staff Report – 2541 Quebec Ave S (Owner did not supply materials for the Board report) Tab 5: Assessing Staff Report – 6114 Excelsior Boulevard (Owner did not supply materials for the Board report) Reference 2022 Appealed Assessing Owner Board Name Property Address Property ID #2021 Value Classification 2022 Value Revaluation Indicated Action Patrick Cotter & Joleen Cotter 3706 France Ave S 06-028-24-44-0006 $454,500 R -Single Family - H $505,300 $479,000 Appeal Pushpa Leadholm 2235 Quebec Ave S 08-117-21-22-0034 $535,100 R -Single Family - H $625,200 Sustain Appeal Jacqueline Holmbeck 2541 Quebec Ave S 08-117-21-23-0007 $329,600 R -Single Family - H $393,400 Sustain Appeal David Hansen 6114 Excelsior Blvd 21-117-21-23-0131 $1,100,000 A- Apartment $1,265,000 Sustain Appeal Dimitrios Lalos 2951 Rhode Island Ave S 08-117-21-33-0132 $499,700 R - Residential - H $623,000 Hold/Inspect?To County Board Robert Thompson Jr 8441 35th St W 18-117-21-42-0014 $283,700 R -Single Family - H $327,000 Hold/Inspect?To County Board Brett Hoffman & Samantha Bystedt 8624 35th St W 18-117-21-42-0080 $337,400 R -Single Family - H $395,000 Hold/Pending To County Board Steve & Margo Henke 3601 Huntington Ave S 06-028-24-41-0037 $773,200 R -Single Family - H $856,400 Inspect?Appeal Thomas Snook & Andrea Snook 3725 Huntington Ave S 06-028-24-44-0170 $666,600 R -Single Family - H $738,800 Inspect?Appeal Dan Cashman 2924 Texas Ave S 07-117-21-44-0007 $344,500 DB - Duplex $420,700 Inspect?Appeal Brigita Petrovic by representative 3675 Independence Ave #43 18-117-21-33-0164 $205,000 Y - Townhome - H $251,900 Inspect?Appeal Andrew Stoner 8201 Virginia Cir S 07-117-21-14-0054 $289,200 R -Single Family - H $326,300 Sustain No Response Jordan Queckboerner 3224 Webster Ave S 16-117-21-24-0044 $318,000 R -Single Family - H $378,800 Inspect?No Response RH Residential Renewal Inc.5922 34th St W 16-117-21-32-0024 $229,400 R -Single Family - NH $264,100 Sustain No Response Erik Evans 4236 Salem Ave S 07-028-24-32-0147 $428,500 R -Single Family - H $460,400 N / A Withdraw Kyle Flagstad 1425 Kentucky Ave S 05-117-21-42-0091 $343,100 R - Residential - H $386,600 $362,400 Mutually Agreed Sandra Metzger 3009 Montery Ave S 06-028-24-12-0024 $237,200 RZ -Residential ZLL - H $284,500 $262,000 Mutually Agreed Diane Siegel 3325 Glenhurst Ave 06-028-24-14-0082 $492,000 R -Single Family - H $550,700 $544,000 Mutually Agreed Mieczyslaw Konczyk 3707 Grand Way 313 06-028-24-34-0097 $326,200 X - Condominium - H $340,100 $310,000 Mutually Agreed Gary Krupp & Barbara Krupp 8736 Westmoreland La 06-117-21-43-0002 $624,800 R -Single Family - H $725,200 $694,000 Mutually Agreed Stephen May 3901 Joppa Ave S 07-028-24-11-0080 $510,500 R -Single Family - H $570,900 $540,000 Mutually Agreed Michelle Barry & Phillip Barry 4524 39th St W 07-028-24-12-0082 $422,000 R -Single Family - H $471,300 $425,000 Mutually Agreed Thomas Enlow & Susan Enlow 4721 Vallacher Ave 07-028-24-21-0068 $388,800 R -Single Family - H $434,900 $424,000 Mutually Agreed Lucas Rhode 4242 Wooddale Ave 07-028-24-31-0085 $333,800 R -Single Family - H $373,200 $345,000 Mutually Agreed Dominic Ackerman 4124 Wooddale Ave 07-028-24-32-0089 $433,900 R -Single Family - H $478,200 $365,000 Mutually Agreed Shannon O'Kane 4316 Brook Ave 07-028-24-33-0118 $486,600 R -Single Family - H $537,700 $512,000 Mutually Agreed Bridget O'Keefe 8113 Virginia Cir N 07-117-21-14-0030 $308,300 R -Single Family - H $347,600 $325,100 Mutually Agreed Roster - City of St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal & Equalization - Reconvene April 25th, 2022 Reference 2022 Appealed Assessing Owner Board Name Property Address Property ID #2021 Value Classification 2022 Value Revaluation Indicated Action Joshua & Stephanie Schreiner 2805 Quebec Ave S 08-117-21-33-0041 $309,600 R -Single Family - H $378,600 $360,500 Mutually Agreed Nicole Stahl 2844 Sumter Ave S 08-117-21-33-0100 $323,300 R -Single Family - H $461,000 $454,000 Mutually Agreed Joy & Louis Peterson 2737 Hampshire Ave S 08-117-21-41-0049 $444,700 R -Single Family - H $531,400 $461,700 Mutually Agreed Scott Johnson 2805 Edgewood Ave S 08-117-21-44-0135 $338,200 R -Single Family - NH $344,300 $283,000 Mutually Agreed Morla Baker 2642 Yosemite Ave S 09-117-21-31-0164 $287,100 R -Single Family - H $334,300 Sustain Mutually Agreed Jennifer Dalquist 2830 Webster Ave S 09-117-21-34-0043 $372,600 R -Single Family - H $434,800 $413,100 Mutually Agreed David Burke & Amanda Maenner 3101 Colorado Ave S 16-117-21-22-0012 $336,900 R -Single Family - H $372,300 $361,800 Mutually Agreed W Tepley & L Anderson Tepley 3253 Webster Ave S 16-117-21-24-0021 $305,500 R -Single Family - H $352,000 $334,400 Mutually Agreed Janine & Brian Sparby 3056 Idaho Ave S 17-117-21-12-0034 $512,100 R -Single Family - H $612,800 Sustain Mutually Agreed Anya Gage & Kyle Gage 3007 Aquila Ave S 18-117-21-12-0007 $406,700 R -Single Family - H $468,900 $443,600 Mutually Agreed Richard Myers 3340 Aquila Ave S 18-117-21-13-0080 $313,100 R -Single Family - H $360,900 $245,000 Mutually Agreed Minh Nguyen & Xuan Vu 3213 Cavell La 18-117-21-24-0012 $384,000 R -Single Family - H $442,700 $422,000 Mutually Agreed Dana Nemer 8918 Minnehaha Cir N 18-117-21-31-0007 $352,800 R -Single Family - H $396,300 $378,000 Mutually Agreed Douglas Zinter & Sheryl Zinter 9020 Minnehaha Cir S 18-117-21-32-0009 $357,300 R -Single Family - H $418,600 $409,000 Mutually Agreed Daniel Gilles & Emily Gilles 3533 Zinran Ave S 18-117-21-42-0111 $355,200 R -Single Family - H $417,600 Sustain Mutually Agreed Michelle Schmidt 3932 Brunswick Ave S 21-117-21-23-0025 $332,900 R -Single Family - H $376,400 $359,500 Mutually Agreed Linda Hatfield 4181 Zarthan Ave S 21-117-21-31-0104 $208,700 R -Single Family - H $238,100 $222,000 Mutually Agreed Sandra Lehamn & Alexandrine Harris 4086 Colorado Ave S 21-117-21-32-0149 $617,900 R -Single Family - H $728,500 $670,000 Mutually Agreed Zachary Bonewell 4215 Yosemite Ave S 21-117-21-34-0045 $363,900 R -Single Family - H $412,000 $381,000 Mutually Agreed William Bodner & Caitlin Klukas 4319 Cedar Lake Rd 31-029-24-12-0055 $571,000 R -Single Family - H $599,500 $557,000 Mutually Agreed Matilde & Joseph Israel 2520 Kipling Ave S 31-029-24-13-0022 $448,700 R -Single Family - H $512,100 $486,500 Mutually Agreed Elizabeth Tracy & Daniel O'Brien 2518 France Ave S 31-029-24-14-0086 $742,600 R -Single Family - NH $838,900 $751,000 Mutually Agreed Renee Klemetsen 2559 Vernon Ave S 31-029-24-23-0017 $470,700 R -Single Family - H $526,100 $516,100 Mutually Agreed Melanie Martz 4812 Ottawa Pl 31-029-24-31-0116 $351,200 R -Single Family - H $380,100 $357,000 Mutually Agreed David Bahn & Vivien Bacaner 5024 29th St W 31-029-24-34-0053 $374,600 R -Single Family - H $416,000 $377,000 Mutually Agreed Joshua Rose & Sara Rose 2816 Princeton Ave S 31-029-24-34-0113 $309,000 R -Single Family - H $349,200 $321,000 Mutually Agreed Roster - City of St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal & Equalization - Reconvene April 25th, 2022 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Joleen G. Cotter Patrick S. Cotter 3706 France Ave S 06-028-24-44-0006 2022 Assessed Value: $505,300 Recommendation: $479,000 This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Patrick S. CotterProperty Owner(s): Joleen G. Cotter 3706 France Ave S Property Address: 06-028-24-44-0006PID #: Market Value $505,300Assessment Year 2022 $454,500Assessment Year 2021 $454,500Assessment Year 2020 Sale:December 1, 2005 - 430,000 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: $479,000 Appraiser: LC April 11, 2022 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject property is located at 3706 France Ave S in the Minikada Vista neighborhood . The home is a single family one-story dwelling that is currently classified as homestead. The home is in good condition and adequately maintained throughout. In 2002 a major kitchen remodel and reconfiguration was completed. The kitchen remodel features custom cherry cabinetry, limestone tile flooring, Cambria counter tops and built in sound speakers. A main level bedroom was converted to a family room adjacent to the kitchen and features a fireplace with custom built in entertainment center. During this remodel the roof, electrical and copper plumbing were updated. The basement bathroom was remodeled in 2004 adding a shower. The home features 3 fireplaces, a deck and 2 car detached garage. There are three (3) comparable sales selected as the best indicator of value for the 2022 assessment. Comparable sales are located within the subject's competitive market area. Adjustments have been applied based on differences in amenities and physical characteristics . These adjustments are market extracted based on paired sales analysis. All three comparable sales utilized are considered to be excellent indicators of market value. All three sales share similar characteristics to the subject in terms of style, quality/ condition and size. Adjustments to the sales were minimal due to their similarities to the subject property. An appraisal was completed in late 2020 which has not been shared with assessing staff . Based on the market data, the appraiser's recommendation is to reduce the 2022 assessed value to $479,000 from $505,300. 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Subject Data Summary PID #:06-028-24-44-0006 Property Address:3706 France Ave S St. Louis Park, MN 55416 Multiple Address:No Lot/Block:000/000 Addition:Unplatted 06 028 24 Legal(120):S 60 FT OF N 160 FT OF W 135 12&100 FT O F E 165 12&100 FT OF SE 1&4 OF SE 1/4 OF SE 1/4 EX ALLEY Owner(s):Patrick S Cotter Joleen G Cotter Property Classification:Residential - Homestead 2022 EMV:505,300 2021 EMV:454,500 2020 EMV:454,500 Last Sale:12/1/2005 - 430,000 - Warranty Deed - 01 Lot Size:7,744 Sq.Ft. / .19 Acres Zoning:R2 Dwelling Type:Single Family Style:One Level/Rambler Bedrooms:3 Baths:2 Actual Year Built:1951 Gross Building Area:1,290 Basement Area:1,182 Bsmt Finished %:70 Total Finished Sq Ft:2,117 Garage #1:2 Car Detached Garage #2:None 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Front View Rear View 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3Item 0602824440006 0602824140062 0702824110107 0702824120102 3706 France Ave S 3301 Huntington Ave S 3930 France Ave S 3900 Lynn Ave S 0027 0026 0027 0027 13 13 13 13 $430,000 $461,000 $505,000 $478,200 12/01/2005 04/12/2021 08/02/2021 08/06/2021 2022 / 1 2022 / 1 2022 / 1 2022 / 1 $333.33 $377.87 $365.68 $423.19 Single Family Single Family Single Family Single Family One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler 7,744 8,863 9,018 5,762 1951 1961 1955 1939 1990 1991 1955 1990 B07 B07 B07 B07 1,290 1,220 1,381 1,130 1,290 1,220 1,381 1,130 2,117 2,135 2,486 1,842 1,182 1,220 1,381 890 70%75%80%80% 3 3 4 3 2 2 3 2 420 529 308 216 2 2 1 1 Detached Attached Attached Detached 2 2 1 1 Egress Central No Central Central 3 2 1 1 301 224 384 180 Thru Street Thru Street PID Address Weight Neighborhood District Sale Price Sale Date Cash Equivalent Year / Version Price Per Sq. Ft. Dwelling Type Style Property Area Actual Age Effective Age Quality Class 1st Floor Area Total GBA Finished Area Basement Area Basement Finished (%) 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Garage 1 Floor Area Garage 1 # of Cars Garage 1 Placement Total # of Cars Walkout Type Air Conditioning Pool Area-Total Fireplaces Deck Area-Total Porches Dormer Length River Lake Influences 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Subject 3706 France Ave S Comparable 2 3930 France Ave SComparable 3 3900 Lynn Ave S Comparable 1 3301 Huntington Ave S LYNN AVE SLYNN AVE SBB EE LL TT LL II N N EE BB LL VVDDEXCELSIOR BLVDEXCELSIOR BLVDM O NTEREY DR M O NTEREY DR NATCHEZ AVE SNATCHEZ AVE SKIPLING AVE SKIPLING AVE SMMIINNIIKKAAHHDDAACCTTHUNTINGTON AVE SHUNTINGTON AVE SEEXXCCEELLSSIIOORRBBLLVVDDFRANCE AVE SFRANCE AVE SGLENHURST AVE SGLENHURST AVE SJOPPA AVE SJOPPA AVE SPA RK G LEN RD PA RK G LEN RD GLENHURST AVE SGLENHURST AVE SVALLACHER AVEVALLACHER AVEPARK CO M M O NS DRPARK CO M M O NS DRR A N D A LL A V ERANDALL A V E 36TH ST W36TH ST W 34TH ST W34TH ST W 3377TTHH SSTT WW 39TH ST W39TH ST W 38TH ST W38TH ST W 36 1/2 ST W36 1/2 ST WLYNN AVE SLYNN AVE S39TH ST W39TH ST W INGLEWOOD AVE SINGLEWOOD AVE SMONTEREY AVE SMONTEREY AVE SWW OO LLFF EEPPKKWWYYHUNTINGTON AVE SHUNTINGTON AVE SComparables for3706 France Ave S Subject Comparable 450 Feet 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Pushpa M. Leadholm 2235 Quebec Ave S 08-117-21-22-0034 2022 Assessed Value: $625,200 Recommendation: Sustain This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Pushpa M. LeadholmProperty Owner(s): 2235 Quebec Ave S Property Address: 08-117-21-22-0034PID #: Market Value $625,200Assessment Year 2022 $535,100Assessment Year 2021 $509,700Assessment Year 2020 Sale:May 1, 2000 - 209,000 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: Sustain Appraiser: LC March 16, 2022 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The Subject property is located at 2235 Quebec Ave S in the Willow Park neighborhood. The home is a single family two-story dwelling that is currently classified as homestead. The home is in very good condition and well maintained throughout. In 2004 the kitchen was remodeled featuring custom cabinetry, tile flooring, recessed lighting and solid surface counter tops. In 2008-2009, the subject property underwent significant remodeling/ renovation and a second story addition. Improvements include but are not limited to; six panel wood doors, tile baths, solid surface vanity tops, baths feature dual sinks and a main suite with private deluxe bathroom featuring whirlpool bath with separate shower. Bedrooms up feature walk in closets. In 2021 remodeling in the basement added an additional bathroom and bedroom with egress. The finished basement also features a full kitchen and family room with private entrance to exterior. There are four (4) comparable sales selected as the best indicator of value for the 2022 assessment. Comparable sales are located in similar and competing market areas of St. Louis Park. Adjustments have been applied based on differences in amenities and /or physical characteristics. These adjustments are market extracted based on matched pairs analysis. Comparable sales 1 and 4 are considered the best indicators of market value as they share similar characteristics to the subject in terms of size and condition. Comparable 1 and 4 had the least overall net/gross adjustments for differences. Comparable 2 and 3 were added as additional support and bracket the many features of the subject property. Based on the market data in this report, the appraisers recommendation is to sustain the 2022 assessed value of $625,200. 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Subject Data Summary PID #:08-117-21-22-0034 Property Address:2235 Quebec Ave S St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Multiple Address:No Lot/Block:021/003 Addition:Westwood Hills First Addition Legal(120): Owner(s):Pushpa M Leadholm Property Classification:Residential - Homestead 2022 EMV:625,200 2021 EMV:535,100 2020 EMV:509,700 Last Sale:5/1/2000 - 209,000 - Warranty Deed - 01 Lot Size:10,667 Sq.Ft. / .24 Acres Zoning:R1 Dwelling Type:Single Family Style:Two Story Bedrooms:6 Baths:5 Actual Year Built:1957 Gross Building Area:2,668 Basement Area:1,344 Bsmt Finished %:80 Total Finished Sq Ft:3,743 Garage #1:2 Car Attached Garage #2:None 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Front View Dining Living 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Kitchen Bath1View1 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Bath1View2 Bath2 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Bath3 Bath4 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Bath4View2 Bath5 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Bath5View2 Basement kitchen and FamRm 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Street View 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Subject Sketch Field Card Sketch 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3Item 0811721220034 0711721430085 1611721230122 2235 Quebec Ave S 8610 Minnetonka Blvd 3309 Dakota Ave S 0006 0012 0019 03 05 09 $209,000 $575,000 $543,000 05/01/2000 03/09/2021 12/15/2021 2022 / 1 2021 / 1 2022 / 1 $78.34 $260.42 $227.01 Single Family Single Family Single Family Two Story Two Story Two Story 10,667 13,806 6,931 1957 2009 2007 2000 2009 2007 B06 B06 B06 1,604 1,104 1,020 2,668 2,208 2,392 3,743 3,036 2,392 1,344 1,104 1,020 80%75% 6 3 4 5 4 3 420 624 440 2 2 2 Attached Attached Built-In 2 2 2 Standard Walkout Standard Walkout Central Central Central 2 1 1 252 240 345 368 96 Thru Street Thru Street PID Address Weight Neighborhood District Sale Price Sale Date Cash Equivalent Year / Version Price Per Sq. Ft. Dwelling Type Style Property Area Actual Age Effective Age Quality Class 1st Floor Area Total GBA Finished Area Basement Area Basement Finished (%) 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Garage 1 Floor Area Garage 1 # of Cars Garage 1 Placement Total # of Cars Walkout Type Air Conditioning Pool Area-Total Fireplaces Deck Area-Total Porches Dormer Length River Lake Influences 0711721110055 1808 Westwood Hills Dr 62 0004 04 $657,000 07/27/2021 2022 / 1 $256.44 Single Family Two Story 13,868 1964 1979 B07 1,279 2,562 3,074 1,279 40% 4 4 529 2 Attached 2 Central 3 345 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Item Comparable 4Subject 0811721220034 1711721330043 2235 Quebec Ave S 3620 Quebec Ave S 70 0006 0016 03 08 $209,000 $655,000 05/01/2000 06/15/2021 2022 / 1 2022 / 1 $78.34 $254.86 Single Family Single Family Two Story Two Story 10,667 9,754 1957 2007 2000 2007 B06 B06 1,604 1,290 2,668 2,570 3,743 3,538 1,344 1,290 80%75% 6 4 5 4 420 720 2 3 Attached Detached 2 3 Standard Walkout Central Central 2 2 252 112 102 PID Address Weight Neighborhood District Sale Price Sale Date Cash Equivalent Year / Version Price Per Sq. Ft. Dwelling Type Style Property Area Actual Age Effective Age Quality Class 1st Floor Area Total GBA Finished Area Basement Area Basement Finished (%) 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Garage 1 Floor Area Garage 1 # of Cars Garage 1 Placement Total # of Cars Walkout Type Air Conditioning Pool Area-Total Fireplaces Deck Area-Total Porches Dormer Length River Lake Influences 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Comparable 4 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Subject 2235 Quebec Ave S Comparable 4 3620 Quebec Ave S Comparable 3 3309 Dakota Ave S Comparable 2 8610 Minnetonka Blvd Comparable 1 1808 Westwood Hills Dr 7 5LOUISIANA AVE SLOUISIANA AVE SMIN NE TO NK A BLVDMINNETONKA BLVD TEXAS AVE STEXAS AVE SFFRRAANN KKLLII NNAAVVEEWW TEXAS AVE STEXAS AVE SCCEEDDAARRLLAAKKEERRDDQQ UU EE BB EE CC AA VV EE SS 36TH ST W36TH ST W QUEBEC AVE SQUEBEC AVE SComparables for2235 Quebec Ave S Subject Comparable 1,100 Feet 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Jacqueline Holmbeck 2541 Quebec Ave S 08-117-21-23-0007 2022 Assessed Value: $393,400 Recommendation: Sustain This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report Jacqueline HolmbeckProperty Owner(s): 2541 Quebec Ave S Property Address: 08-117-21-23-0007PID #: Market Value $393,400Assessment Year 2022 $329,600Assessment Year 2021 $301,800Assessment Year 2020 Sale:October 16, 2020 - 366,500 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: Sustain Appraiser: JO April 7, 2022 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject property is located at 2541 Quebec Ave South in the Willow Park neighborhood. The home is a single-family rambler style that is currently classified as homestead.The subject property sold in October 2020 for $366,500 ... notable as being within the timeline for the sales period used in setting the 2022 assessment. The time trended sale price fully supports the assessed market value of record. . The home is in good condition. The basement bath was remodeled in 2005 and the main floor bath was remodeled in 2017 with new vanity, tiling and shower. The kitchen is in good shape but features older cabinetry along with tiled flooring. There are four (4) comparable sales reviewed for revaluation consideration for the 2022 assessment appeal. Comparable sales are located within the subject’s competitive market area. Adjustments have been applied based on differences in amenities and/or physical characteristics. These adjustments are market extracted based on paired sales analysis. The comparables are considered to be credible indicators of market value as they have similar characteristics relative to the subject in terms of quality, size and overall market appeal. The adjustments were made to account for the predominant differences in bath count and condition ranking. The subject is in close proximity to rail lines with comparables 1, 2, 3, located on a high traffic artery and comparable 4 is directly adjacent to rail tracks. We view the traffic influence for comparables 1, 2, and 3 to be similar to the subject rail influence with comparable #4 specifically chosen as the matched pair adjustment extraction (comp #4 is directly abutting a rail line). Based on the market information reviewed, the recommendation is to sustain the 2022 Assessed value at $393,400. 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Subject Data Summary PID #:08-117-21-23-0007 Property Address:2541 Quebec Ave S St. Louis Park, MN 55426 Multiple Address:No Lot/Block:007/001 Addition:South Westwood Hills Legal(120): Owner(s):Jacqueline Holmbeck Property Classification:Residential - Homestead 2022 EMV:393,400 2021 EMV:329,600 2020 EMV:301,800 Last Sale:10/16/2020 - 366,500 - Warranty Deed - 01 Lot Size:10,628 Sq.Ft. / .24 Acres Zoning:R1 Dwelling Type:Single Family Style:One Level/Rambler Bedrooms:3 Baths:2 Actual Year Built:1959 Gross Building Area:1,152 Basement Area:1,104 Bsmt Finished %:75 Total Finished Sq Ft:1,980 Garage #1:2 Car Attached Garage #2:None 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos Front View 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Subject Sketch Sketch 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Subject Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3Item 0811721230007 0811721230022 0811721230030 0811721230062 2541 Quebec Ave S 2420 Sumter Ave S 7931 Cedar Lake Rd 2417 Rhode Island Ave S 95 85 90 0006 0006 0006 0006 03 03 03 03 $366,500 $390,000 $374,000 $470,000 10/16/2020 01/21/2021 09/23/2021 06/15/2021 2022 / 1 2021 / 1 2022 / 1 2022 / 1 $318.14 $320.46 $318.03 $392.98 Single Family Single Family Single Family Single Family One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler 10,628 11,745 11,700 11,310 1959 1951 1952 1956 1984 1981 1972 1976 B08 B08 B08 B08 1,152 1,217 1,176 1,196 1,152 1,217 1,176 1,196 1,980 2,130 1,529 2,272 1,104 1,217 1,176 1,196 75%75%30%90% 3 4 2 5 2 2 2 3 440 440 400 280 2 2 2 1 Attached Attached Attached Attached 2 2 2 1 Central Central Central Central 2 2 2 2 220 24 140 120 126 Thru Street Thru Street Thru Street PID Address Weight Neighborhood District Sale Price Sale Date Cash Equivalent Year / Version Price Per Sq. Ft. Dwelling Type Style Property Area Actual Age Effective Age Quality Class 1st Floor Area Total GBA Finished Area Basement Area Basement Finished (%) 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Garage 1 Floor Area Garage 1 # of Cars Garage 1 Placement Total # of Cars Walkout Type Air Conditioning Pool Area-Total Fireplaces Deck Area-Total Porches Dormer Length River Lake Influences 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Comparable 4 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Item Comparable 4Subject 0811721230007 0711721410020 2541 Quebec Ave S 2661 Burd Pl 0006 0005 03 03 $366,500 $407,000 10/16/2020 10/08/2021 2022 / 1 2022 / 1 $318.14 $424.84 Single Family Single Family One Level/Rambler One Level/Rambler 10,628 10,577 1959 1964 1984 1999 B08 B08 1,152 958 1,152 958 1,980 1,800 1,104 936 75%90% 3 4 2 2 440 288 2 1 Attached Attached 2 1 Egress Central Central 2 2 168 24 Railroad PID Address Weight Neighborhood District Sale Price Sale Date Cash Equivalent Year / Version Price Per Sq. Ft. Dwelling Type Style Property Area Actual Age Effective Age Quality Class 1st Floor Area Total GBA Finished Area Basement Area Basement Finished (%) 1st Floor Clear Ht Total Bedrooms Total Bathrooms Garage 1 Floor Area Garage 1 # of Cars Garage 1 Placement Total # of Cars Walkout Type Air Conditioning Pool Area-Total Fireplaces Deck Area-Total Porches Dormer Length River Lake Influences 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Subject 2541 Quebec Ave S Comparable 3 2417 Rhode Island Ave S Sale Price: $470,000 Comparable 32249 Quebec Ave SSale Price: $405,000 Comparable 1 2420 Sumter Ave S Sale Price: $390,000 Comparable 2 7931 Cedar Lake Rd Sale Price: $374,000 Comparable 4 2661 Burd Pl Sale Price: $407,000 C E D A R L A K E R DCEDAR L A K E R DTEXAS AVE STEXAS AVE SV IC T O R IA C U R VVICTORIA C U R V 28TH ST W28TH ST W QQUUEEBBEECCAAVVEESSTEXAS AVE STEXAS AVE SVIRGINIA AVE SVIRGINIA AVE S22 99 TT HH SSTT WW VIRGINIA AVE S VIRGINIA AVE S VVIICCTTOORRIIAACC II RR V I C T OR I A L NV I C T OR I A L NB U R D P LBURD P L 22 55 TT HH SS TT WW V ICTO RIA W A YV ICTO RIA W A YSSUUMMTTEERR AAVV EE SS QQ UU EE BB EE CC A A V V EE SS 22 33RRDD SSTTWW RRHHOODDEEIISSLLAANNDDAAVV EE SSRRHHOODDEEIISSLLAANNDDAAVVEESS26TH S T W26TH S T W SUMTER AVE SSUMTER AVE SRHODE ISLAND AVE SRHODE ISLAND AVE SQUEBEC AVE SQUEBEC AVE SPENNSYLVANIA AVE SPENNSYLVANIA AVE S24TH ST W24TH ST WWWEESSTTWWOOOODDHHIILLLLSS DDRR PPEENNNNSSYYLLVVAANNIIAAAAVVEESSRRHHOODDEEIISSLLAANNDDAAVVEESSVVIIRRGGIINNIIAACCIIRRNN SUMTER AVE SSUMTER AVE SComparables for2541 Quebec Ave S Subject Comparable 300 Feet 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization David Hansen 6114 Excelsior Blvd 21-117-21-23-0131 2022 Assessed Value: $1,265,000 Recommendation: Value range of $1,265,000 to $1,375,000 This report is not an appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. It is intended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is prohibited and unlawful. The author does not represent this to be an appraisal and is not responsible for any inappropriate use. It is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique. City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department 2022 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Staff Report David HansenProperty Owner(s): 6114 Excelsior Blvd Property Address: 21-117-21-23-0131PID #: Market Value $1,265,000Assessment Year 2022 $1,100,000Assessment Year 2021 $1,100,000Assessment Year 2020 Sale:December 1, 2002 - 492,000 (01 - Warranty Deed) Assessor Recommendation: Value range of $1,265,000 to $1,375,000 Appraiser: BN April 18, 2022 Last Inspection Date: Comments: The subject is a Class C, 11 unit apartment building with a unit mix of six one-bedroom units and five two-bedroom units. The property was constructed in 1949 and is considered to be in average condition with minimal updates. Ownership has provided 2021 and 2022 rent rolls as well as the 2020 income and loss tax document for the property and has claimed below market rental rates due to long term tenants. A review of the documents provided confirms the rental rates are below market for similar properties. Adjusting the rents to market and allowing for market vacancy and collection losses as well as expenses confirms the subject's assessed valuation is warranted. Class C apartment buildings in surrounding jurisdictions were analyzed. Three Class C apartment buildings with minimal updating sold in St. Louis Park from 2019 to present. The sale price per unit of these properties are $124,000, $125,426, & $135,800 compared to the subject's assessed valuation of $115,000 per unit. Based on our direct market research and market reporting analytics, the average sale price per unit for Class C multi-family properties in the St. Louis Park/Hopkins submarket is $135,000. Vacancies in this submarket have dropped to 3.4% for this property class and effective rents are up 3.18% . Given the comparable sales of similar properties as well as the indicated market income analysis, a value range between $1,265,000 to $1,375,000 ($115,000 to $125,000 per unit) is indicated. We recommend sustaining the valuation at $1,265,000. 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Additional Subject Photos 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Sales Comparables Comparable 1 Comparable 2 Comparable 3 2022 Board of Appeal and Equalization Address 6114 Excelsior Blvd Age & Condition 1980-Avg Property ID # 21-117-21-23-0131 Unit Mix 6 - 1 bedroom & 5- 2 bedroom 2021 Mkt Value $1,100,000 Total Units 11 2022 Mkt Value $1,265,000 Total value vs. total unit count $115,000 1 Address 1345 Idaho Ave S Sale Date 9/30/2019 Property ID# 05-117-21-42-0032 Age & Condition 1961 - Avg C.E. Sale Price $1,491,600 Unit Mix 1 - Studio; 1 - 1 bedroom; 10 - 2 bedroom Buyer Artemis Living-1345 Idaho LLC Total Units 12 Seller 1345 Idaho LLC Sale Price per Unit $124,300 2 Address 8216 31st St W Sale Date 9/30/2021 Property ID# 18-117-21-11-0042 Age & Condition 1962 - Avg C.E. Sale Price $2,132,250 Unit Mix 5 - 1 bedroom; 12 - 2 bedroom Buyer Aquila Flats LLC Total Units 17 Seller Shree Investments LLC Sale Price per Unit $125,426 Property under Appeal -- 6114 Excelsior Boulevard -- 11 unit Apartment Comparable Sales 3 Address 3063 Virginia Ave S Sale Date 3/28/2022 Property ID# 18-117-21-11-0048 Age & Condition 1962 - Avg C.E. Sale Price $3,123,400 Unit Mix 10 - 1 bedroom; 13 - 2 bedroom Buyer Virginia Oaks LLC Total Units 23 Seller 3345 Colfax LLC Sale Price per Unit $135,800 Subject 6114 Excelsior Blvd Comparable 1 1345 Idaho Ave S Comparable 3 3063 Virginia Ave S Comparable 2 8216 31st St W 7 394 100 100 3 7 5 5 MMIINN NN EETTOO NN KKAA BBLLVVDD LOUISIANA AVE SLOUISIANA AVE S16TH ST W16TH ST W EEXXCCEELLSSIIOORR BBLLVVDD CCEEDDAARRLLAAKKEERRDD CC EE DD AA RR LLAAKKEERRDDLLOOUUIISSI I AANNAAAAVVEESSTEXAS AVE STEXAS AVE STEXAS AVE STEXAS AVE SPARK PLACE BLVDPARK PLACE BLVD14TH ST W14TH ST W FFRRAANNKKLLIINN AA VV EEWW16TH ST W16TH ST W16TH ST W16TH ST W Comparables for6114 Excelsior Blvd Subject Comparable 1,600 Feet