HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017/05/15 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
MAY 15, 2017
5:30 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Item
1. 5:30 p.m. Options for Tobacco Sales
6:30 p.m.
RECONVENE 2017 LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL & EQUALIZATION – Council Chambers
7:20 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY -- Council Chambers
1.Call to Order
2.Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes May 1, 2017
4. Approval of Agenda
5.Reports -- None
6.Old Business -- None
7.New Business
7a. Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Recommended Action:
•Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the establishment of the Elmwood
Apartments Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a
redevelopment district).
•Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution authorizing an Interfund Loan for advance of certain
costs in connection with the administration of the Elmwood Apartments TIF District.
7b. Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the Redevelopment
Contract between the EDA and 36th Street LLC.
8.Communications -- None
9.Adjournment
Meeting of May 15, 2017
City Council Agenda
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers
1. Call to Order
1a. Pledge of Allegiance
1b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. Presentation Accepting Monetary Donation from the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park for the
Summer Concert Series
2b. Retirement Recognition for Bruce Berthiaume, Elwood Backlund and Tim Jones
2c. Recognition of Kevin Locke’s Service
2d. Recognition of Donations
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes March 27, 2017
3b. Special Study Session Minutes May 1, 2017
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no
discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a
member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The
items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda.
Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of
all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, or move items
from Consent Calendar to regular agenda for discussion.)
5. Boards and Commissions
5a. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions
Recommended Action: Motion to appoint citizen representatives to the Boards and
Commissions as listed in Exhibit A.
6. Public Hearings
6a. Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
approving the establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district).
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Inclusionary Housing Policy
Recommended Action: Motion to approve the amended Inclusionary Housing Policy which
would increase the required percentage of affordable housing units in new market rate
multiunit residential developments receiving financial assistance from the City and add a
requirement that developments covered by the policy must not discriminate against tenants
who pay their rent with government provided Housing Choice Vouchers or other local rent
subsidies.
Meeting of May 15, 2017
City Council Agenda
8b. SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit to
allow SNAP Fitness to operate 24 hours, seven days a week with conditions.
8c. 2017 International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Local #993 Labor Agreement
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a labor agreement between
the City and the IAFF Local #993, establishing terms and conditions of employment for one
year, from 1/1/17 – 12/31/17.
8d. 2016 - 2018 International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local #49 (Maintenance
Employees) Labor Agreement
Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a revised labor agreement
between the City and Local 49 Union, establishing terms and conditions of employment for
three years, from 1/1/16 – 12/31/18.
8e. Bid Tabulation: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Project (4014-4001)
Recommended Action: Motion to designate Peterson Companies, Inc. the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of
$1,753,460.49 for the 2017 Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Project -
Project No. 4014-4001.
9. Communications – None
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call
the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
Meeting of May 15, 2017
City Council Agenda
CONSENT CALENDAR
4a. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a monetary donation from the Rotary Club of St.
Louis Park in the amount of $1,500 for the Recreation Division’s Summer Concert Series.
4b. Designate G.L. Contracting, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a
contract with the firm in the amount of $389,882.00 for the 2017 Alley Reconstruction Project
No. 4017-1500.
4c. Approve second reading and Adopt Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Home Rule
Charter related to Municipal Primary Elections and Candidate Filing Requirements. (A
unanimous vote of all 7 councilmembers is required for approval.)
4d. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance amending Chapter 36 to add Section 36-268-
PUD 10, amending the Zoning Map from C-2 General Commercial to PUD 10, and approve
the Summary Ordinance for publication.
4e. Adopt Resolutions to recognize Utilities Field Supervisor Bruce Berthiaume for 35 years of
service, Streets Public Service Worker Elwood Backlund for 28 years of service, and Utilities
Public Service Worker Tim Jones for 22 years of service.
4f. Adopt Resolution rescinding Resolution removing parking restrictions on the west side of
Wooddale Avenue between Vernon Avenue and Toledo Avenue.
4g. Adopt Resolution providing for the Sale of $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds 2017A.
(Requires 6 affirmative votes of the Council.)
4h. Adopt Resolution authorizing Boy Scout Troop 282’s request for placing temporary signs in
the public right-of-way.
4i. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a monetary donation from Community Charities
of Minnesota, on behalf of the St. Louis Park American Legion Post 282, in the amount of
$2,500 for Float & Flick special events to be held at the Rec Center Aquatic Park.
4j. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,200 donation from Zachary Strouts for the
purchase and installation of a memorial bench in Dakota Park honoring Steven Strouts.
4k. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,200 donation from Sara Schonwald for the
purchase and installation of a memorial bench in Wolfe Park honoring Javi Moran.
4l. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $300 donation from The Mulligan Family for
the purchase and installation of a memorial tree in Oak Hill Park honoring Richard “Dick”
Solseth.
4m. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $300 donation from David and Ruth Bowman
for the purchase and installation of a memorial tree in Wolfe Park honoring Parker Dionne.
4n. Adopt Resolution establishing a special assessment for the installation of a fire suppression
sprinkler system at 6509 Walker Street, St. Louis Park, MN.
4o. Approve for filing Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of March 23, 2017
4p. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 5, 2017
4q. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2017
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV cable channel 17 and
replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and
saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of City Hall and on
the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website.
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Options for Licensing Tobacco Sales
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Based on previous direction from the Council, staff and the city
attorney desire to review options for amending the city’s tobacco licensing requirements and
receive direction on any further action staff should take.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to amend the Tobacco Licensing program
to reduce the availability of some or all tobacco products.
SUMMARY: At the March 6, 2017 Study Session the Council discussed possible changes to the
City’s tobacco licensing requirements. The discussion included survey results, information from
Hennepin County Public Health and possible licensing options for Council to consider - limiting
sales of flavored tobacco to tobacco shops only.
Creating a new license category for tobacco shops only, which could sell any type of allowable
tobacco product, and removing all flavored tobacco products from retail stores is possible with
ordinance amendments. This option would remove flavored tobacco products from view and
spontaneous purchases at gas and grocery stores. Buying flavored tobacco would require travel to
an intended destination, either a smoke shop or another city without licensing restrictions.
With an adjoining city recently raising the sales age for all tobacco products to 21, this alternative
is also provided.
The Police Department recently completed tobacco license compliance checks. Five of the twenty
three licensed establishments in the city were cited for selling tobacco products to a minor. As part
of any possible ordinance changes, Council may wish to consider reviewing the violation penalty
for sale of tobacco, tobacco-related device or electronic delivery device to underage persons as a
method to reduce underage smoking.
City Attorney Soren Mattick will be in attendance at the Study Session.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: NA
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Ann Boettcher, Inspections Services Manager
Soren Mattick, City Attorney
Reviewed by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Special Study Session Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Options for Licensing Tobacco Sales
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: City Council inquired about its ability to regulate tobacco products to limit
their exposure to younger members of the community. Staff was requested by Council to research
limiting sales of flavored tobacco to tobacco only shops. The City does not have any tobacco only
shops. If this were something the City Council is interested in implementing, it should probably
specifically provide for this type of use in its zoning regulations.
Other options the Council may want to consider is raising the minimum age for purchasing tobacco
products to 21 and review violation penalties for selling tobacco to minors.
Analysis
Restrict the Sale of Flavored Tobacco Products to Smoke Shops
Although federal law prohibits flavored cigarettes, tobacco companies offer items such as cigars,
chew, blunt wraps, e-cigarettes and the tobacco used in hookahs in flavors like candy, chocolate,
bubble gum, and fruit. Research in this area indicates that flavored tobacco use is more common
in youths than adults.1 Of those middle and high school students who reported using tobacco
products, an estimated 70% had used flavored tobacco products in the last month.
The City does not currently distinguish flavored tobacco from regular tobacco in its ordinance. St.
Paul 2 and Minneapolis 3 have both passed ordinances which limited the sale of flavored tobacco
products to adult-only tobacco stores. These ordinances limit the sale of any tobacco product with
a flavor other than tobacco, menthol, wintergreen, or mint to stores which derive at least 90% of
their revenue from the sale of tobacco products and which limit entry to customers over the age of
18.
The City currently does not have any tobacco only shops. If the Council is interested in this option,
a new license category with requirements for tobacco only sales would need to be adopted. The
number of licensed establishments could be regulated with a minimum of two. Establishing
permitted land use classifications for tobacco only sales would require amending the Zoning Code
and could include minimum distances from sensitive uses.
If tobacco shop licensing was established and a business opened, product sales would realistically
include both regular and flavored tobacco products. With regular tobacco products being available
at regular licensed retail establishments to people 18 years and older, the city should not consider
a higher age of entry for tobacco shops. Setting a minimum age to purchase flavored products that
is different than other tobacco would create a situation difficult to regulate.
1 https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6438a2.htm?s_cid=mm6438a2_w;
https://oup.silverchair-
cdn.com/oup/backfile/Content_public/Journal/ntr/15/2/10.1093/ntr/nts178/2/nts178.pdf?Expires=1489874220&Signature=WsP6Igib33cuad
WcXye35S8UpOo8T3QroKUvWWv8Sp0HtDZsJz7hcvib6Wv~0abVQkhUjK~UsmohahYRE1YItSYPssI61qmqe62Ru7WZeuNAUWf-
iBWyuBkuDBmDgtBpYZ1FVt~CcpqExYOKM7bMeTbGly6EM4MxKTcw-
y4qIN2jwtfyYOdkWWVVqmd1LRKFuCzjmT10CiEh3s3Axly2SONF6V8LkUMwyIEd~qjNRTXxLZEDJHXpGSnQeMjOiqAtWOh9BFnSu5h6SzaCsRjgo1Ir
Fez~fM9pn39woe1uFsKnocxrIOTaipSTCzSHMhfzdKmfGfjQ0PFKYNE89JVp1w__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAIUCZBIA4LVPAVW3Q
2https://www.municode.com/library/mn/st._paul/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=PTIILECO_TITXXIXLI_CH324TO_S324.07SAPR
3https://www.municode.com/library/mn/minneapolis/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=COOR_TIT13LIBURE_CH281TODE
Special Study Session Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Options for Licensing Tobacco Sales
Raising the Minimum Age
There is no federal legal requirement setting the minimum age for purchase, sale, and use of
tobacco products. While most states have set the minimum age at 18, several states have minimum
ages of 19 and 21. Additionally, where not preempted by state law, some cities have unilaterally
raised the minimum age within their jurisdiction.
The minimum age for purchase, sale, and use of tobacco products under Minnesota Statutes
Section 609.685 is 18. However, that statute explicitly states that nothing shall preclude the
adoption of a local ordinance which provides for more stringent regulation of the purchase, sale,
and use of tobacco products. Presently, Sections 8-377 & 8-378 of the City Code prohibits
possession, use, or procurement of tobacco products by minors, and the sale of tobacco products
to people under age 18. The City could raise the minimum age for purchase, sale, and use of some
or all tobacco products to anything above 18, so long as there was a governmental purpose
justifying it. The research cities are currently relying on suggests that raising the minimum age to
21 for all tobacco products would have a marked impact on youth smoking.4
Recently, the Edina City Council approved raising the minimum age for purchase of all tobacco
products to 21 taking effect July 1, 2017. State Senator Carla Nelson (Rochester) presented
legislation that would decrease youth smoking by raising the sales age for tobacco products to 21.
This bill is not likely to be considered this year.
The ordinance amendment and city program changes to raise the minimum age for purchase of
any tobacco product would be minimal.
Violation Penalties
As mentioned in the Summary of this report, five establishments failed their 2017 compliance
check as administered by the Police Department and were assessed a violation penalty per the city
code. The compliance check took place in March and notices to the five establishments that failed
were sent out April 6, 2017. Each establishment owner was contacted by phone as well to discuss
the compliance failure and violation penalty.
Four of the five establishments that failed the compliance check were first time offenders. Their
violation penalty was $250. The other establishment failed the compliance check for the second
time within 36 months. The violation penalty for this establishment was $750 and one day
suspension of sales. At this time all but two of the establishments have paid their fines. The
establishment that received the one day suspension of sales has completed that as well. The
establishment owner decided to shut down the entire store for one day.
The violation penalty table is included in this report for your review and to discuss possible
changes to the table that can be included with any other amendments to the Tobacco Licensing
section of the code to help deter the sale of tobacco to minors.
4http://www.nationalacademies.org/hmd/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2015/TobaccoMinAge/tobacco_minimum_age_report_brief.pdf ;
http://www.mnmed.org/MMA/media/Minnesota-Medicine-Magazine/Clinical-BOYLE.pdf
Special Study Session Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: Options for Licensing Tobacco Sales
Type of Violation 1st Violation 2nd
Violation
within
36 months
3rd
Violation
within
36 months
4th
Violation
within
36 months
1. Commission of a felony related to the
licensed activity.
Revocation N/A N/A N/A
2. Sale of tobacco, tobacco-related device
or electronic delivery device while
license is under suspension.
Revocation N/A N/A N/A
3. Sale of tobacco, tobacco-related device
or electronic delivery device to underage
person.
$250 $750
and 1 day
$2,000
and 3 days
Revocation
4. Refusal to allow government inspectors
or police admission to inspect premises.
5 days 15 days Revocation N/A
5. Illegal gambling on premises.
3 days 6 days 18 days Revocation
6. Failure to attend mandatory education
training.
$250 $750 and
1 day
$2,000 and
3 days
Revocation
Next Steps
If the Council decides to pursue amending the Tobacco Licensing Ordinance, staff will work with
the City Attorney on a draft ordinance and return to a study session for Council review and
direction. As part of this process, staff will need to meet with the licensed business owners prior
to first reading to review the proposed changes to the Tobacco Licensing Ordinance.
St. Louis Park
MINNESOTA
2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Reconvene - May 15, 2017
City Council Chambers
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 (Mavity, Lindberg & Brausen)
4.Acknowledgement of Assessing Staff Members in Attendance
5.Review of Prope1iies in Appeal
a.Board Action -Where Petitioner & Assessing Staff are Not in Agreement
b.Board Action -Where Petitioner & Assessing Staff are in Mutual Agreement
c.Board Action -Where Petitioner has withdrawn, denied access or presented no case
Each valuation and/or classification resolution must be individually read into the record.
Where mutual agreement has been reached, the group may be approved by the Board in
one action per DOR direction (April 2016).
6.Instruct Assessor to Complete Record of Changes for Submittal
7.Instruct Assessor to Inform Petitioners of Board Action via Mail
8.Complete the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Certification Form
9.Adjourn if Board business is completed
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017 Page2
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
BACKGROUND for the 2017 St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal aud 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 open book meeting or transfer the Board to the County.
The focus of the board is on: the property classification which is dete1mined by the property's
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, 2017). Minnesota statute requires that all
properties are assessed at full market value. The two 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 dete1mined 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 te1ms, for which the specified property
rights shou ld 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 May 1, 2017 at which meeting a total of thirteen ( 13) parcels were
recognized to be under appeal. The Board set the process and chose to reconvene May 15 to
hear 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 (Mavity, Lindberg or Brausen) must be present
at each meeting the Board is in session.
•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.
•The time window for the board to conclude business is 20 days after convening ( deadline
for completion is May 20, 2017).
•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 Ce1iification Form must be signed at each Board
meeting by all Board members present.
Background to Valuation Methodologies: The statistical 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 inforn1ation available. The Local Board process differs from mass valuation
modeling in that the assessing staff refines the analysis by direct comparison of the prope1iy
under appeal to the market indications. As part of the informal review process, staff frequently
re-inspects properties to review the accuracy of our data. Adjustments and valuation change
orders have been made where necessary.
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017 Page 3 Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
In cases where the revaluation does not result in a reduction, the appeal process has been
outlined. 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 supporting their opinion of value and/or classification. The assessing
staff in tum re-inspects the property and/or visits with the owner in order to verify the physical
characteristics forming the analysis basis followed by a re-appraisal of the subject property.
Staff also engages the owner in discussion to review the appeal question(s) and to reach
agreement where possible before the board reconvenes.
Focal Points for the Board -Agenda as Indicated on Cover Sheet, decisions on:
1.Board Action -Two (2) appellants comprising five parcels have not been resolved to a
mntual agreement between the property owner and assessing staff. It is requested that
the Board hear and decide the merits of each case. We have informed each property
owner that the Board commonly 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 -Seven (7) appeals have been reviewed with the result that the
property owner and assessing staff have reached a mutually acceptable valuation (no
classifications were appealed). It is requested that the resolution for each parcel be read
into the record after which the Board take action to affom the mutually agreed upon
valuations for this group.
3.Board Action -for cases where the petitioner has withdrawn, denied access or declined to
present a case. One (1) appellant has stated definitively they intend to bypass the St.
Louis Park Board and instead will move to the Hennepin County Board.
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 12, 2017. An application is required no later than
May 17th which is quite close to our Board date and so all applicants have been informed to keep
the timeline in mind. 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
Cory Bultema, City Assessor
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017 Page4
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Tab Summary
Cover Sheet & Proposed Agenda
(This page will be printed and supplied to the Board Chair for the meeting)
Background & Focal Points for the Board
Tab 1: Overview of All Appeals for Board Action
(This page and the agenda will be handed out to the Board for the meeting)
Tab 2: Fou1Te Appeal-Staff Report
( owner did not supply materials for the Board report)
Tab 3: Bell Appeal -Staff Report
( owner did not supply materials for the Board report)
ROSTER -City of St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization -Reconvene May 15, 2017
Reference 2017 Appealed Assessing Owner Board
Name Property Address Property ID # 2016 Value Classification 2017 Value Revaluation Indicated Action
Fourre, Diane 3049 Louisiana Ave S 17-l l7-21-l2-0084 164,500 R -Residential 186,600 178,000 ?
Bell, Martin 2220 Florida Ave S 08-117-21-14-0018 1,274,000 I -Industrial 1,320,000 Sustain ?
Martin Bell Properties 2211 Florida (Land) 08-117-21-11-0093 194,200 LI -Ind. Land 194,200 Sustain ?
Martin Bell Properties 2221 Florida (Land) 08-117-21-14-0050 87,600 LI -Ind. Land 87,600 Sustain ?
Martin Bell Properties 6560 23rd St W 08-117-21-14-0049 73,800 LI -Ind. Land 73,800 Sustain ?
M & M Industries 3101 Louisiana Ave S 17-117-21-12-0126 150,100 R -Residential 182,000 164,000 Agreement
Almlie, Sonja 3924 Webster Ave S 21-117-21-21-001 l 235,500 R -Residential 249,700 240,000 Agreement
Engstrom, James 3305 Huntington Ave S 06-028-24-14-006 l 319,000 R -Residential 366,800 325,000 Agreement
Engstrom, James 3300 Huntington Ave S 06-028-24-14-0025 234,100 R -Residential 26�,100 240,000 Agreement
W eirens, Donald 3401 Huntington Ave S 06-028-24-4 l-0062 336,800 R -Residential 385,200 372,000 Agreement
Petersson, R & D 4525 Park Commons Dr. #104 06-028-24-43-0194 333,000 X -Condominium 318,}00 274,000 Agreement
Chan, Adrian 2120 Ridge Dr. # 34 09-l 17-21-21-0321 127,500 X -Condominium 167,100 135,000 Agreement
Millenium at West End 5245 Wayzata Blvd 30-029-24-32-0019 32,390,000 A -Apartment 34,760,000 Sustain County Board
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 5
A(ffi.CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Diane Fourre
-Diane M. Fou1Te
3049 Louisiana Ave S
17-117-21-12-0084
2017 Assessed Value: $186,600
Recommendation: 178,000 to 182,000
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.
ft is a report of public records using a mass appraisal technique.
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 6
ff/ City of St. Louis Park Assessing Department
2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
StaffRe ort ff/
Diane Foun-e
Assessment Year 2017
Assessment Year 2016
Assessment Year 2015
August I, 1996 -93,000 (01 -Warranty Deed)
Appfaiser: ···.
MH April 10, 2017
(;oqn11ents:
$186,600
$164,500
$157,300
The subject is a rambler style home constructed in 1956. The at grade area is I, 144 square feet
which is generally larger than typical for a rambler in St. Louis Park. Additional attributes are
described as three bedrooms, one bath and detached two stall garage. The subject has been well
maintained although cunent finishing level is dated on the main level and the full basement is
unfinished.
Discussion with the owner indicated concern over valuation trends for smaller scale homes with
this neighborhood heavily dominated by I 1/2 story and rambler style homes. Staff provided a list
of forty-two ( 42) rambler homes that sold in the past sale study for the Bronx Park and Lenox
neighborhoods. The median size of these homes was 908 square feet above grade and the median
sale price was $227,250 which equates to $250 per square foot vs the subject at $163 per square
foot versus the original assessed value of $186,600.
Discussion with the owner also indicated concern over finishing level of the home versus ( often)
refreshed properties that are selling. Staff agrees and has reviewed sales bracketing the subject
condition rank which is average with minimal updating. In many ways this adjustment can be
speculative to an extent as there is a distinct difference between cosmetic updating and significant
renovations affecting size and utility.
The subject, having been relatively well maintained, is a very good candidate for cosmetic
renovation which normally includes hardwood floor refinishing and/or carpeting, fresh paint,
woodwork refinishing, lighting, basement finishing upgrade and (non-real estate) appliances. The
subject in terms of "as is" condition would be desirable from the perspective of flippers as well as
move-in owners as cosmetic updating is generally achievable by a wide spectrum of buyers.
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization Diane Fourre
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 7
Given the location, this home is not thought to be a likely candidate for major renovation and/or
addition.
Discussion with owner also indicated concern over busy traffic and the value influence related to
Louisiana A venue. Staff agrees that this can be a significant factor although mitigated to an extent
as the garage is located off of the alley. Owner also indicated concern with garage placement and
accessibility. Staff agrees and had downgraded the two-stall garage value influence in prior
appeals.
During discussion the street influence seemed to be of paramount concern. Staff reviewed the 169
sales occuring in the most recent sale study with external influences including freeways, adjacent
to com mercial-industrial uses and busy thrn streets such as the subject. The sales are not
significantly different in statistical terms than other sales in the city which means that the
adjustments in our mass appraisal system are accomodating this issue. As this area of concern
continued to be significant we have selected comparables which are all located on Louisiana for
primary analysis.
The comparables, prior to adjustment, indicate a median unit value of $191.47 per square foot.
Adjustments include:
-time trends to the Januaiy assessment date at the ciy-wide rate of 4.9% (the subject price bracket
is moving at a higher pace);
-nominal land size adjustments to comparables #6 and #7;
-nominal consideration to ai·ea above grade associated with style as 1 1/2 story versus rambler;
-nominal structural size adjustments for floor area above grade for comprables #4, #5, #6 and #7;
-significant downward adjustment for fit/finishing to all comparables except sale #2 as the subject
match pair;
-nominal adjustment for basement size, finishing and room counts; and
-nominal adjustment for garage stall count, usage utility and other features such as fireplaces.
After adjustment the comparables indicate a median unit value of$157.50 per square foot which
equates to $180,200.
We conclude in a range of $178,000 to $182,000 with all factors viewed as benefit of doubt to the
appellant.
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization Diane Fourre
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 8
PIO#:
Property Address:
Multiple Address:
Lot/Block:
Addition:
Legal(120):
Owner(s):
Property Classification:
2017EMV:
2016 EMV:
2015EMV:
Last Sale:
Lot Size:
Zoning:
Dwelling Type:
Style:
Bedrooms:
Baths:
Actual Year Built:
Gross Building Area:
Basement Area:
Bsmt Finished 0/o:
Garage #1:
Garage #2:
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization
Subject Data Summary
17-117-21-12-0084
3049 Louisiana Ave S
St. Louis Park, MN 55426
No
016/008
Lenox
S 36FT
Diane M Foun-e
Residential -Homestead
186,600
164,500
157,300
8/1/1996 -93,000 -Wananty Deed -01
4,608 Sq.Ft. I Acres
R2
Single Family
One Level/Rambler
3
1
1956
1,144
1,144
2 Car Detached
None
Diane Fourre
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 9
Additional Subject Photos
Front View
Rear View
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization Diane Fourre
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 10
Additional Subject Photos
Garage
Garage
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization Diane FmnTe
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 11
Display Pld HOuse Street Name Nbhd Sale Date Sale Price Style Sq.Ft. Bedroom Bath
08-117-21-14-0010 6712 26th StW 0018 4115/2016 272.500 One Level/Rambler 1.064 3 2
09-117-21-33-0071 2845 Brunswick Ave S 0018 612712016 215.000 One Level/Rambler 796 2
09-117-21-33-0157 2941 Brunswick Ave S 0018 8/3112016 225,000 one Level/Rambler 1,002 3 2
16-117 ·21-22-0032 3025 Colorado Ave S 0019 12/2112015 202,500 One Level/Rambler 769 3 2
16-117-21-23-0116 3312 Colorado Ave S 0019 3/30/2016 200,000 One Level/Rambler 1,012 2 2
08-117-21-41-0190 2612 Dakota Ave S 0018 4/15/2016 181,000 One Level/Rambler 780 2 2
09-117-21-32-0120 2713 Dakota Ave S 0018 211812016 184,900 One Level/Rambler 877 2
OB-117-2144-0147 2940 Dakota Aves 0018 8/4/2016 269,900 One Level/Rambler 1,008 3 2
16-117-21-23-0121 3313 Dakota Ave S 0010 2/1/2016 192,245 One Level/Rambler 672 2 2
16-117-21-22·0095 3037 Dakota Ave S 0019 5/31/2016 259,000 One Level/Rambler 1,077 3 2
18-117-21-22-0100 3011 Dakota Ave S 0019 6/2212016 190,500 One Level/Rambler 1,077 3
08-117-21-44-0163 2905 Edgewood Ave S 0018 12/9/2015 220,500 One Level/Rambler 729 3 2
08-117 ·21-41-0094 2650 Edgewood Ave S 0018 9123/2016 231,750 One Level/Rambler 1,038 4
17-117-21-11-0192 3121 Edgewood Ave S 0010 5/31/2016 240,000 One Level/Rambler 1,176 3 1
OB-117-21-41-0079 2601 Florida Ave S 0016 1015/2015 306,000 One Level/Rambler 1,000 3 2
08-117-21-41-0067 2652 Florida Ave S 0018 1/15/2016 247,400 One Level/Rambler 1,132 3 1
08-117-21-44-0206 2937 Georgia Ave S 0018 8/26/2016 185,000 One Level/Rambler 624 2
08-117-21.-41-0077 2609 Georgia Ave S 0018 11/23/2015 240,000 One Level/Rambler 1,142 4 2
17-117-21-11·0085 3048 Georgia Ave S 0019 12/9/2015 223,500 One Level/Rambler 720 3 2
17-117-21-14-0091 3224 Georgia Ave S 0019 9/13/2016 223,300 One Level/Rambler 736 2 1
17 -117-21-11-0083 3056 Georgia Ave S OD19 9/14/2016 213,000 One Level/Rambler 864 2 2
17-117-21-11-0083 3056 Georgia Ave S 0019 9/14/2016 260,000 One Level/Rambler 864 2 2
17-117-21-11-0059 3017 Georgia Ave S 0019 5/10/2016 382,500 One Level/Rambler 1,008 3 3
08·117�21-41-0047 2745 Hampshire Ave S 0018 8/1812016 189,000 One Level/Rambler 664 2 2
08-117-21-43-0175 2941 Idaho Ave S 0018 7/25/2016 178,000 One Level/Rambler 768 3 1
08-117-21-42-0030 2606 Idaho Ave S 0018 9/23/2016 225,000 One Level/Rambler 774 2
17-117-21-13-0026 3201 Idaho Ave S 0019 8/5/2016 246,000 One Level/Rambler 694 4 2
17-117-21-13..0033 3216 Idaho Aves 0019 211/2016 250,550 One Level/Rambler 798 3 2
17-117-21-13.0032 3212 Idaho Ave S 0019 5/10/2016 260,000 One Level/Rambler 904 3 2
08-117-21-42-0162 2620 Jersey Ave S 0018 6/17/2016 225,500 One Level/Rambler 888 3 2
08-117-21-42-0068 2708 Jersey Ave S 0018 10/9/2015 255,000 One Level/Rambler 912 3 2
08-117-21-43--0058 2824 Jersey Ave S 0018 12/7/2015 206,500 One Level/Rambler 1,168 3 2
OB-117-21-43-0058 2824 Jersey Ave S 0018 6/2212016 386,925 One Level/Rambler 1,168 3 2
08-1 17-2143-0133 2920 Jersey Ave S 0018 9/30/2016 240,000 One Level/Rambler 1,180 3 2
08-117-21-42-0165 2634 Jersey Ave S 0018 8/12/2016 229,000 One Level/Rambler 1,224 4
17-117-21-13-0046 3241 Jersey Ave S 0019 3/30/2016 250,000 One Level/Rambler 981 3 1
06-117-21-43·0069 2845 Kentucky Ave S 0018 10/1/2015 252,000 One Level/Rambler 960 3 3
OB-117-21-42-0047 2728 Kentucky Ave S 0018 8/2/2016 272,500 One Level/Rambler 1,026 4 2
08-117-21-43.0128 2905 Louisiana Ave S 0018 4/15/2016 190,000 One Level/Rambler 736 2 1
08-117-21-44-0040 6700 Minnetonka Blvd 0018 5/3112016 232,000 One Level/Rambler 1,100 2 2
17-117�21-12-0072 7101 Minnetonka Blvd 0019 12/28/2015 127,000 One Level/Rambler 672 2 2
17-117-21-12-0072 7101 Minnetonka Blvd 0019 8/17/2016 224,000 One Level/Rambler 672 2 2
227,250 Median 908
225,500 Average 916
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 12
"' Sale# 1 V"�T.Y�
Sale# 2 --.-,1..-,..,-•f'J""'T" �x...:. Subject
PID I 7-l 17-21-12-0084 17-117-21-12-0112 17-117-21-12-0120
Address 3049 Louisiana Ave S 3157 Louisiana Ave S 3125 Louisiana Ave S
Neighborhood 0019 19 19
Sale Price $93,000 $218,000 $195,000
Sale Date 08/01/1996 4/17/2017 10/12/2015
Cash Equivalent $211,460 $195,000
Price Per Sq. Ft. $81.29 $180.74 $166.67
Time Adjusted Price/SF $178.54 $176.82
Dwelling Type Single Family Single Family Single Family
Style One Level/Rambler 1 1/2 Story 1 1/2 Story
Property Area 4,608 5,331 5,263
Actual Age 1956 1951 1951
Effective Age 1956 1976 1951
Quality Class BOS BOS BOS
1st Floor Area 1,144 780 780
Area Above Grade 1,144 1,170 1,170
Finished Above Grade 1,144 1,170 1,482
Basement Area 1,144 780 780
Basement Finished (%) 40%
Total Bedrooms 3 3 3
Total Bathrooms 1 2 1
Garage I Floor Area 360 572 320
Garage l # of Cars 2 2 1
Garage 1 Placement Detached Detached Detached
Total# of Cars
Walkout Type
Air Conditioning Central Central Central
Pool Area-Total
Fireplaces
Influences Thru Street Thru Street Thru Street
Prior to Adjustment Median Average
Comps 1 - 7 $191.47 $201.73
Sale# 3 Sale# 4
08-117-21-43-0101 08-117-21-43-0099
2833 Louisiana Ave S 2841 Louisiana Ave S
18 18
$220,000 $180,500
12/9/2016 1217/2016
$220,000 $175,085
$182.57 $202.64
$183.31 $203.46
Single Family Single Family
1 1/2 Story I 1/2 Story
5,113 5,113
1951 1947
1971 1967
B07 C09
820 576
1,205 864
1,943 1,066
820 576
90% 35%
3 2
2 1
280 440
I 2
Detached Detached
Central Central
Thru Street Thru Street
Sale# 5
-�·-...... ���
08-117-21-43-0128
2905 Louisiana Ave S
18
$190,000
4/15/2016
$184,300
$250.41
$259.56
Single Family
One Level/Rambler
5,112
1950
1980
BOS
736
736
1,472
736
100%
2
1
720
3
Detached
Central
Thru Street
05-117-21-42-0127
1455 Louisiana Ave S
8
$189,500
2/10/2016
$183,815
$191.47
$200.02
Single Family
One Level/Rambler
13,981
1939
1959
B08
960
960
960
960
2
1
380
2
Attached
Central
Thru Street
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 13
PIO
Address
Neighborhood
Sale Price
Sale Date
Cash Equivalent
Price Per Sq. Ft.
Time AdJusted Price/SF
Dwelling Type
Style
Property Area
Actual Age
Effective Age
Quality Class
1st Floor Area
Area Above Grade
Finished Above Grade
Basement Area
Basement Finished (%)
Total Bedrooms
Total Bathrooms
Garage I Floor Area
Garage 1 # of Cars
Garage 1 Placement
Total# of Cars
Walkout Type
Air Conditioning
Pool Area-Total
Fireplaces
Influences
Prior to Adjustment
Comps I - 7
Subject
,1�,..��' J·. � = p �:.""
--2. . I
. _--� -
17-117-21-12-0084
3049 Louisiana Ave S
0019
$93,000
08/01/1996
$81.29
Single Family
One Level/Rambler
4,608
1956
1956
B08
1,144
1,144
1,144
1,144
3
1
360
2
Detached
Central
Thru Street
Median Average
191.47 201.73
08-117-2112-0127
2207 Louisiana Ave S
8
$187,500
8/24/2016
$182,500
$237.63
$242.45
Single Family
One Level/Rambler
7,362
1950
1980
B08
768
768
1,075
768
40%
2
1
352
1
Detached
Central
Thru Street
Reference # 1 ;,�;. ·.:� ,�-�-� •:,;;t<'.'ll� :, . .:c•, '' ,t,.:f��-:--' �� f
,ftt' .,.,If!"" ' .. ".; . : ..
. ' -;..,..,-
08-117-21-43-0120
2941 Louisiana Ave S
18
$239.900 Pending
7/14/2017
$239.900
$197.45
$192.64
Single Family
1 1/2 Story
5,750
1951
1981
B07
822
1,215
1,790
822
70%
3
l
560
2
Detached
Central
Thru Street
Reference # 2
17-117-21-12-0079
3025 Louisiana Ave S
19
$225.000 Pending
5/5/2017 --$225,000
$166.67
$163.96
Single Family
I 1/2 Story
5,122
1953
1965
B07
900
1,350
1,800
900
50%
3
2
308
I
Detached
Central
Thru Street
Reference # 4
J
17-117-21-21-0004 08-117-21-44-0040
7221 Minnetonka Blvd 6700 Minnetonka Blvd
16 18
$198,500 $232,000
9/27/2016 5/31/2016
$192,905 $232,000
$156.45 $210.91
$158.99 $217.76
Single Family Single Family
1 1/2 Story One Level/Rambler
5,212 6,096
1951 1940
1966 1980
B08 B08
822 1,100
1,233 1,100
1,644 1,906
822 1,008
50% 80%
3 2
2 2
480 484
2 2
Detached Attached
Central Central
Thru Street Thru Street
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 14
Comparables for
3049 Louisiana Ave S
Subject
Comparable
Reference Comparable
Average Daily Traffic (2013)
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 15
(fJ s?1lo?:s11JPARK
2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Martin A Bell
2220 Florida Ave S, 2211 Florida Ave S, 2221 Florida Ave S,
& 6560 23rd St W
08-117-21-14-0018, 08-117-21-11-0093, 08-117-21-14-0050
& 08-117-21-14-0049
2017 Assessed Value: $1,675,600
Recommendation: No Change
This report is not 011 appraisal as defined in M.S. § 82B.02 (subd.3) nor does it comply with the Uniform Sta11dards of
Professional Appraisal Practice. [/ is ill/ended to be used as a reference only and any use other than its intended use is
prohibited and 11nlm1f11l. The alllhor 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.
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 16
ff/
Pronfrty.Q.vn�t(s):
•Pt�p�rtf�iidri�s;
City of St. Louis Park
Assessing Department
2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
StaffRe ort
Martin A Bell
ff/
2220 Florida Ave S, 221 1 Florida Ave S, 2221 Florida Ave S, & 6560 23rd St W.
08-117-21-14-0018, 08-117-21-11-0093, 08-117-21-14-0050, & 08-117-21-14-0049
Assessment Year
Assessment Year
Assessment Year
2017
2016
2015
$1,675,600
$1,629,600
$1,629,600
�al�: ·· No cnrrent sales exist
No Change
BN April 12, 2017
Comfu\,nts:
The subject consists of four parcels. The primary parcel is improved with an industrial
office/warehouse building with a gross building area (OBA) of 27,111 square feet which includes
1,086 square feet of storage mezzanine space. The total OBA is broken out into 8,611 square feet
of office space and 18,500 square feet of warehouse. Across the street from the primary parcel
there are an additional three parcels with a total land area of 68,413 square feet. Based on
discussions with the property owner and city staff, a p01tion of the unimproved land parcels could
be developed with a building. The property ow ner cmTently occupies the warehouse space in the
building and has the office space available for lease as well as having the entire building available
for sale. Restric tions on outside storage were noted by the property owner and the listing broker
as a deterrent of getting any tenants to lease the office space or a potential buyer to make an offer.
Of the com parables chosen, all but one are in St. Louis Park. Comparable I was chosen due to the
fact that it brackets the subject in size and shares the attribute that no outside storage is allowed on
the site. This property has a OBA of 30,418 square feet of which 19,397 square feet is office and
the remainder is warehouse. Comparable! has some deferred maintenance items which would
require an addition al expense estimated at between $24,000 to $25,000 within six months of the
purchase according to the buyer. Comparable 2 has a OBA of21,216 square feet of which 10,296
square feet is located paitially below grade. The building has 1,390 square feet of finished office
space. This comparable was chosen due to the fact that it's zoning ofR4-multi-family prohibits
outside storage and is cmTently operating as a legal non-conforming use. The configuration of this
building and the significant elevation change of the site make this comparable inferior to the
subject. Comparable 3 has a OBA of 11,175 square feet of which 2,037 is finished office space.
This prope1ty is zoned JG which would allow for outside storage. Comparable 4 has a OBA of
6,456 square feet with 3,256 square feet of office space. This property is zoned JG allowing for
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 17
outside storage. The median sale price for the com parables is $61.17 per square foot and the
average is $64.76 per square foot. None of the comparables have excess land for development.
The property is currently listed.for sale with an asking price of $2,500,000. While we feel the list
price is at the high end, we feel our assessed value for all four parcels at $1,675,600 is well within
the norm for this market locale. Given the sales, excess land and asking price, we do not feel a
reduction is value is warranted.
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 18
Properties Under Appeal --2220, 2211, 2221 Florida Ave S & 6560 23rd St. W.
Prope1ty ID#s 08-117-21-14-0018 08-117-21-14-0050 Age & Condition 1976 -Average
2016 Mkt Value
2017 Mkt Value
08-117-21-11-0093 08-117-21-14-0049 GBA 27,111
$1,629,600 Total Value vs. GBA $61.81
$1,675,600 Land Size I 07,409
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 19
1 Address 6975-6989 Washington Ave S., Edina Sale Date 2/12/2016
Property ID# 06-116-21-33-0016 Age & Condition 1970 -Average
Sale Price $1,685,000 GBA 30,418
Buyer Capital Building Investment, LLC Sale Price per GBA $55.39
Seller Hine Properties, LLC Land Size 87,194
2 Address 3260 Gorham Ave, St. Louis Park Sale Date 7/1/2016
Property ID# 17-117-21-13-0139 Age & Condition 1962 -Average
Sale Price $1,200,000 GBA 21,216
Buyer SOS Properties, LLC Sale Price per GBA $56.56
Seller Georgeann & Donald Bell Land Size 31,418
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 20
3 Address
Property ID#
Sale Price
Buyer
Seller
------
6408 Cambridge St, St. Louis Park Sale Date
20-l 17-21-11-0034 Age & Condition
$735,000 GBA
Corner Park Properties, LLC Sale Price per GBA
Leroy Lind Family Lmtd Partnership Land Size
. ---
4 Address 7460 Oxford St, St. Louis Park Sale Date
Property ID# 20-l 17-21-24-0006 Age & Condition
Sale Price $525,000 GBA
Buyer Swansuda, LLC Sale Price per GBA
Seller Piexal, LLC Land Size
3/1/2016
1951 -Average
11,175
$65.77
25,432
4/14/2016
1974 -Average
6,456
$81.32
16,657
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 21
Comparables for 2220, 2211,2221
Florida Ave S &
6560 23rd St W
D Subject D Comaprable
Subjects
2220, 2211, 2221 Florida Ave S
6560 23rd St W
0.5
Miles
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 22
Additional Subject Photos
East Elevation
South Elevation
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 23
Additional Subject Photos
North Elevation
West Elevation
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 24
Additional Subject Photos
Warehouse
2017 Board of Appeal and Equalization
Reconvene Meeting of May 15, 2017
Title: 2017 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 25
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 1, 2017
1. Call to Order
President Mavity called the meeting to order at 7:15 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Anne Mavity, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Thom Miller, Susan
Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Commissioners absent: Gregg Lindberg.
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Economic
Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Assistant Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Senior
Planner (Mr. Walther), Transportation Coordinator (Mr. Sullivan), Community Development
Director (Mr. Locke), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes April 3, 2017
It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to approve the
EDA minutes as presented.
The motion passed 6-0 (Lindberg absent).
3b. Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes April 17, 2017
It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Spano, to approve the
EDA minutes as presented.
The motion passed 6-0 (Lindberg absent).
4. Approval of Agenda
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Hallfin, to approve
the EDA agenda as presented.
The motion passed 6-0 (Lindberg absent).
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA Disbursements
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 1, 2017
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to approve
the EDA Disbursements.
The motion passed 6-0 (Lindberg absent).
6. Old Business - None
7. New Business
7a. Establishment of the Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District.
Resolution No. 17-11, Resolution No. 17-12, and Resolution No. 17-13
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and application from PLACE for Tax Increment
Financing (TIF) assistance in connection with its proposed redevelopment at the southeast
quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and the northeast corner of W 36th Street
and Wooddale Avenue. He noted this project has been extensively reviewed at multiple
study sessions, EDA and city council meetings over the past four years. He stated the
redeveloper’s application for tax increment assistance was reviewed at the February 13
Study Session, as well as the April 3 Special Study Session, where it received consensus
support. Additionally, he stated that construction of the PLACE project is not financially
feasible without the use of tax increment assistance. At the March 20 city council meeting,
a public hearing date of May 1 was set for consideration of the proposed Wooddale Station
Redevelopment TIF District. This evening will be the final step in the TIF process and will
formally authorize the creation of the TIF district. Such authorization enables the EDA to
designate tax increment generated from the completed PLACE redevelopment as partial
reimbursement of certain qualified redevelopment costs incurred in connection with the
construction of the project.
Commissioner Sanger stated she will not support the motion, adding she has spoken at
great length at other meetings about the PLACE project. She added that she is not in support
of the TIF district, but if it were a different project, she would support establishment of the
TIF district. She will discuss her view on the PLACE project later this evening.
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to waive the
reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-11, approving the elimination of a parcel from
the Elmwood Redevelopment Tax Increment Financing District (Hennepin County TIF
District No. 1312), within Redevelopment Project No. 1, in the City of St. Louis Park).
The motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Lindberg absent, Commissioner Sanger opposed).
It was moved by Commissioner Spano, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to waive the
reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-12, approving the establishment of the
Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1
(a redevelopment district).
The motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Lindberg absent, Commissioner Sanger opposed).
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Hallfin, to waive the
reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-13, authorizing an Interfund Loan for advance
of certain costs in connection with the administration of the Wooddale Station TIF District.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 1, 2017
The motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Lindberg absent, Commissioner Sanger opposed).
7b. Public Hearing – Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with PLACE E-
Generation One, LLC. Resolution No. 17-14
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and PLACE E-Generation One, LLC’s proposal to
purchase 9 properties from the EDA and to construct a major mixed-use redevelopment at
the southeast quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Avenue and the northeast corner of W
36th Street and Wooddale Avenue. He stated PLACE agrees to purchase the assembled
redevelopment site from the EDA for $6,245,000; to construct the project as proposed in
the Final PUD; and then to be reimbursed for qualified site preparation costs up to
$5,660,000 in pay-as-you-go tax increment generated by the project over a maximum term
of 15 years.
Mr. Hunt noted that Kim Anderson, 3248 Yosemite Ave. S., submitted an email to staff
regarding EDA agenda item 7b for the purchase and redevelopment contract with PLACE
E-Generation One, LLC, and requested it be entered into the public record. This email and
attached documents are Clerk’s File No. 57 and are on file in the City Clerk’s Office.
Commissioner Brausen asked Mr. Hunt if this is a standard finance mechanism the city
uses to assist development projects. Mr. Hunt said yes. Commissioner Brausen also asked
for clarification from Mr. Hunt, regarding if the city will take the additional tax revenue
generated and utilize it as a loan for the developer under these extraordinary circumstances.
Mr. Hunt stated it is technically a reimbursement of a portion of their property taxes to pay
for certain extraordinary costs incurred during construction of the project. Commissioner
Brausen also inquired if the amount generated during the term will be approximately $13
million in additional tax increment and if the proposal is to lend the developer $5.6 million.
Mr. Hunt confirmed the amount of financial assistance recommended by the EDA’s
consultant is $5,660,000. That represents 15 years’ worth of tax increment generated by
the 26-year district.
Commissioner Sanger asked if there will be time for the public to comment on the
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW). President Mavity deferred to
Commissioner Spano on this question, as the item is not a public hearing item on the city
council agenda. Commissioner Spano stated that the council will take comments from the
public and not turn them away.
President Mavity opened the public hearing.
Kim Anderson, 3248 Yosemite Ave. S., stated she is from the Sorenson Neighborhood.
She stated she spoke to the director of the art school during a visit to the artist community
at the PLACE project in California. She noted that this project does not run in the black
and typically runs on reserves. She added there are concerns about the sustainability of the
project. She stated it will be important for the city to establish mutual expectations with the
developer on the front end of the project. She added that it is critical for the community to
know what they want and how to hold this non-profit accountable, adding artists are not
the only ones who need affordable housing. There are people from all areas that need
affordable housing.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 1, 2017
James McDonaugh, 2840 Cavell Ave. S., stated he has been a homeowner in St. Louis Park
for 42 years, and this week marks that anniversary. He is a building owner and has also
served on many boards and commissions in the city. He has seen a tremendous amount of
development. He stated he is fully supportive of this development and pointed out an article
in the Star Tribune which draws attention to St. Louis Park for seniors and others. He added
that he intends to be active in the arts in St. Louis Park.
Jamie Marshall, 2305 Aldrich Ave. S., #3, Minneapolis, stated he is the director of the St.
Louis Park Friends of the Arts group. He noted that he encourages citizen engagement and
connections and has been pleased with the whole process so far related to PLACE. He
stated the project sets a great tone and expectation and has created healthy discourse. He
added that the developer has received community feedback and acted on it. Local artists
have also been invited into the conversation and have helped shape this project. He stated
the affordable housing and studio component, along with retail display space for artists to
show their local artwork, are wonderful, as is the performance space black box theater,
which has now been added to the plans. The coffee shop adds to the casual event space,
and he sees PLACE as committed to the arts and a partner and resource to the city and to
Friends of the Arts.
Mr. Velasco, PLACE developer, entered letters he had received about the development into
the record. These letters are also are Clerk’s File No. 57 and are on file in the City Clerk’s
Office.
John Smith Koppes, 3640 Woodale Ave. S., stated he lives adjacent to the proposed
development and is very encouraged by its sustainability and openness to other individuals,
noting that he has submitted a letter of support to staff, also.
Bob Ash, Minnetonka resident, stated he supports the project and has been involved in
marketing for PLACE for over 5 years. He stated this is truly a design for the people and
by the people. He stated that he plans to move into the development and at that time will
reduce to one car or to no car.
John Standal, 9955 Spring Road, Eden Prairie, stated he owns two buildings on West 36th
Street and has owned one of them for 40 years. He stated that over the years, he has leased
to many businesses but not any cafés. He stated this makes him think the whole thing is
based on a fantasy, and he does not understand why the council does not see it. He stated
he has a big investment on that street and has had a good relationship with the city these
many years. If the project goes through, he will work with Mr. Valasco, although he is
nervous about it.
Sonja Almi, 3524 Webster Ave. S., stated she was involved in development and site clean-
up for the Park Nicollet in St. Louis Park. At that time, reassurance was given that the
development would never do anything that would that would harm the residents of St.
Louis Park. Today she sees the intersection of Excelsior and Highway 100 out her window,
and has seen five car accidents in one day. She asked how the PLACE development
neighborhood can sustain 110 hotel units and 299 residential units, with no light rail (at
this time), limited bus service, and a terrible interchange with Highway 7. She stated there
was a coffee shop in Hoigaard Village which closed. Multiple businesses have closed along
36th Street, and are not sustainable. She stated if the city is brokering tax payer money,
then it needs to be done differently.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 1, 2017
Russell Griesmer, 3700 Wooddale Ave S., stated he is very excited for this development.
He is in the children’s books publishing business. If the project could add a free library as
well, that would be awesome.
Joanne Mesera, 6304 35th St. W., stated if this project is approved, she and her husband are
considering moving due to the traffic and the intersection. She stated they love St. Louis
Park and have been here four years; however, this is not the place to add that amount of
traffic.
Danielle Griesmer, 3700 Wooddale Ave. S., stated she is excited about the development
and as a public health nurse, is happy to be here to voice her support for the project.
Jeff Persigel, 3000 Hwy. 100 S., stated he applauds these efforts and is in favor of the
development. He likes the idea of mixed use but is concerned about how light rail and
parking will work. He asked if there will be additional parking or a park and ride structure.
He stated that these concerns have not been adequately addressed. Additionally, he noted
that PLACE is selling the council this idea but falling short on the details. That is
concerning to neighbors, adding it is a bit of smoke and mirrors and a bait and switch. He
would like the council to look at all the details before the vote.
Kristine Viard stated she was here for the February 23 meeting, also. She asked why
citizen’s rights get subjugated on development after development, especially when this is
not what residents want. She stated she is tired of the lack of planning, adding that the
Cedar Lake Development was another project that was forced on residents. She stated there
is no one on Texas who rides a bike, and this project will be an inconvenience to those who
live there. She asked if St. Louis Park is going to become a sanctuary city like cities out
west, noting that the council has not listened to the city’s residents. She stated she wants to
talk to the Governor about this, adding the council only agrees with the Metro Transit group
and does what they want.
President Mavity closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Brausen stated he appreciated all the people who shared during the public
comments. He assured the group that the council has been studying this project for a long
time and has heard many opinions - both pro and con. He added that the council takes all
comments seriously and won’t be able to make a decision that everyone agrees with. He
said that for those who have concerns about accountability on this development, the plan
has performance guarantees and cost reimbursements in place. He stated that city staff has
worked on complicated projects in the past like the West End and Excelsior & Grand and
has made the plans work. He noted there will be 447 parking spaces but added that the idea
is that this will be a transit-oriented development that encourages people to ride the light
rail and to use the bike path. He noted the project was developed on the assumption that
light rail would be in place. Commissioner Brausen added the development will have
significant cost; however, it will create more than 100 new jobs. He stated the project is in
an area of market demand; has affordable options; and includes environmental initiatives,
with clean source energy on site. He stated that the development will be a community,
which will hopefully be a model project. More traditional development is not necessarily
meeting the needs of our evolving city. He added that he will vote in favor of the motion.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 6
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 1, 2017
Commissioner Miller stated he has voiced a great deal of support for this development over
several months, adding that he wants to talk about the TIF. He stated that the financing
seems to denote debt, but it is simply reimbursing the developer for a portion of the
property taxes they pay from the redevelopment. Over the course of 15 years, the developer
will receive back $5.6 million in reimbursed property taxes. At that point, the city and
others start collecting $1 million per year in property taxes, which goes to city roads, water,
parks and recreation, etc. He stated that he fully supports this development.
Commissioner Sanger stated that she has spoken at length about this project and
appreciated the earlier comments from Ms. Anderson. She stated it is important for the
entire community to hear what Ms. Anderson found out. She pointed out four themes that
are of concern, including the huge parking issue and the assumption that many people
would like to live without a car, or take mass transit. She stated that this assumption did
not prove to be true in Venture, California, as there are significant parking problems, which
have affected the vacancy rates in businesses there. Commissioner Sanger added that
people want to drive, and many of the residents in the California development have 2-3
cars per unit, which is problematic. Commissioner Sanger also pointed out there was
marketing hype for the development in California, adding that PLACE over promised and
under delivered. Finally, she noted that the PLACE financial sustainability plan did not
work, and there are serious financial challenges. She believes these are problems that will
be seen at the PLACE project in St. Louis Park, as well, and she is distressed that city staff
did not discover this information earlier when they did their due diligence work.
Commissioner Sanger added there may be some good ideas in the project, but the city must
pay attention to the details and how this project will negatively impact the wider
community related to traffic and parking. She stated she will vote against it.
Commissioner Spano stated he will support this project and noted that Commissioner
Hallfin states quite often, “We look at these projects individually,” and he is glad for that.
He also thanked Ms. Anderson for the details she provided; however, he noted that the
location and timing of the Ventura project is very different than the location and timing of
the project in St. Louis Park. He added that the economy was different at the time the
Ventura project was developed. He stated that he drives in the area four times per day. Over
the last two to three weeks, he has timed how long it takes to get through the light, noting
it is about 45 seconds. He added that the Excelsior & Grand project also had its concerns,
and these were addressed, as were those at the West End. Commissioner Spano stated that
when challenges come up, we adapt. He added that he understands many are not in favor
of the project and recognizes the concerns. However, this is a project that is will build more
incentive for people to walk, noting he would like to live in a place like this. He is in favor
of the development.
President Mavity stated she is ward council member in this area and has been engaging
with community members regarding this development for the last 3-4 years. She stated it
all began with the McGarvey site redevelopment and potential of light rail coming in. The
city wanted to be smarter about envisioning a new community in this area. She stated she
understands concerns raised but added that this developer has been one of the most
responsive the city has ever worked with. Today it does not look like the same project that
was introduced 3 years ago. She stated it is different because of input from the community.
We will partner with the community and address things that come along the way. President
Mavity added that traffic studies have been conducted, and while we acknowledge that the
bridge over Highway 7 at Wooddale is not working well, the city is working to make it
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 7
Title: Economic Development Authority Meeting Minutes of May 1, 2017
safer, with better traffic patterns and bike trails that will go under the street. We are
listening and making adjustments along the way. She stated the city is currently in the midst
of Vision 3.0. The topic of the PLACE development has arisen in the visioning processes.
She noted that participating in visioning is a great way for residents to impact the future of
the city. She added that she is excited about this project. While it is extraordinarily
complex, the city does not have as much financial risk as the developer has. She stated with
light rail coming, PLACE will be a gem to show other communities what is possible.
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to waive the
reading and adopt EDA Resolution No. 17-14, approving the Purchase and
Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and PLACE E-Generation One, LLC.
The motion passed 5-1 (Commissioner Sanger opposed, Commissioner Lindberg absent).
8. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, Secretary President
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Action Agenda Item: 7a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
•Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the establishment of the Elmwood Apartments
Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment
district).
•Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution authorizing an Interfund Loan for advance of certain costs
in connection with the administration of the Elmwood Apartments TIF District.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support the establishment of the Elmwood
Apartments TIF District to facilitate the construction of a mixed use redevelopment at 5605 W 36th
Street?
SUMMARY: 36th Street LLC’s application for Tax Increment Financing assistance in connection
with its proposed redevelopment at 5605 W 36th Street was reviewed at the March 27th Study
Session where it received consensus support. Constructing The Elmwood project is not financially
feasible but for the use of the proposed tax increment assistance. At its April 3rd meeting, the City
Council set a public hearing date of May 15th for consideration of the proposed Elmwood
Apartments Redevelopment TIF District. It is now time to take the final step in the TIF process
which is to formally authorize the creation of the Redevelopment TIF district. Such authorization
enables the EDA to designate tax increment generated from the completed Elmwood apartments
redevelopment as partial reimbursement for certain qualified redevelopment costs incurred in
connection with the construction of the project so as to make it financially feasible.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Creating the TIF district provides the
funding vehicle to reimburse 36th Street LLC for a portion of its qualified project costs. The terms
and amount of TIF assistance are specified within the Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street
LLC which is also scheduled for consideration May 15th. Authorizing an Interfund Loan allows
the EDA to recoup certain costs in connection with the administration of the new TIF District.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolutions
TIF Plan Overview
Elmwood Apartments TIF Plan (available upon request from staff)
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: 36th Street LLC (“Redeveloper”) owns the property located at 5605 W 36th
Street. This one-acre parcel is situated at the southeast corner of Xenwood Avenue and 36th Street
West. The subject property is currently occupied by a two-story multi-tenant commercial building
known as 36th Street Business Center which was recently determined structurally substandard.
Proposed Redevelopment Site: 5605 W 36th Street
REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: The Redeveloper proposes to raze the existing building and
construct a six-story, mixed-use senior housing building called The Elmwood. The project will
consist of two levels of underground parking, 85 residential units restricted to residents age 55+,
of which 17 (or 20%) will be affordable at 60% of the area median income (AMI), and 188 parking
stalls. Additionally, the west wing of the building will contain 4,920 gross square feet of
commercial space, with space for outdoor seating. Active uses fronting 36th Street include a fitness
studio, leasing office and main entrance. The Redeveloper’s applications for an Alley Vacation,
Final Plat and PUD to allow construction of the proposed project on the subject site were approved
by the City Council on March 20, 2017.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Rendering of proposed building – The Elmwood
Redeveloper’s Request for Public Financing Assistance
The Total Development Cost to construct The Elmwood project is approximately $19 million.
There are significant extraordinary costs associated with redeveloping the subject site. These
include: asbestos abatement, building demolition, soil correction, site preparation, shoring,
underground stormwater retention, and structured underground parking. Altogether, these costs
exceed $3.6 million and prevent the proposed project from achieving financial feasibility.
Consequently the Redeveloper applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance
to offset a portion of these costs so as to enable the project to proceed. Tax increment financing
uses the increased future property taxes generated by a new development to finance certain
qualified extraordinary costs incurred during construction of that development for a limited period
of time.
TIF Application Review
The EDA/City Council reviewed the Redeveloper’s TIF Application for the proposed project at
the March 27th Study Session. At that meeting there was consensus support for favorably
considering the recommended level of tax increment assistance - $950,000. As a result, Staff was
directed to call for a public hearing on the proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF District and prepare
business terms for a formal redevelopment contract with 36th Street LLC.
TIF District Approvals
At its April 3rd meeting, the City Council set a public hearing date of May 15, 2017 for
consideration of the proposed Redevelopment TIF District. The EDA will consider the approval
of the redevelopment contract that same evening.
The Planning Commission reviewed the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing Plan on May
3rd, as required by the MN TIF Act, and determined it was in conformance with the City’s general
redevelopment plans.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Synopsis of the Proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF District
The subject site is located within the boundaries of the City’s Redevelopment Project Area which
is the portion of the city where TIF districts are statutorily authorized to be established. Inclusion
of the proposed project within a designated Redevelopment Project Area allows the EDA/City
Council to establish a TIF district so as to enable the EDA to provide the proposed financial
assistance to The Elmwood project. As shown in the attached TIF District maps, the proposed
Elmwood Apartments TIF District encompasses one parcel: 5605 36th St West along with adjacent
rights of way and abutting roadways.
Attached is an Overview which summarizes the basic elements of the proposed Elmwood
Apartments TIF District. Additional details of the proposed TIF District may be found in the
Elmwood Apartments TIF District Plan (available upon request from Staff). Both the Overview
and TIF Plan were prepared by the EDA’s TIF consultant, Ehlers. In a general sense, TIF Plans
may be viewed as enabling legislation. They establish the proposed TIF district’s classification,
geographic boundaries, maximum duration, maximum budget authority for tax increment revenues
and expenditures, fiscal disparities election as well as estimated impact on various taxing
jurisdictions along with findings which statutorily qualify the district. The specific mutual
obligations between the EDA and the Redeveloper as well as the precise terms of the financial
assistance are contained in the separate Redevelopment Contract between the parties. Both the TIF
Plan and the Redevelopment Contract need to be approved in order for redevelopment projects
involving tax increment to proceed.
Qualifications of the Proposed TIF District
Consulting firm LHB was retained to conduct a TIF district feasibility analysis to determine if the
subject site qualified as a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174,
Subdivision 10. After inspecting and evaluating the subject property and applying current statutory
criteria, LHB made the following findings in its report entitled: Report of Inspection Procedures
and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a
Redevelopment District: 5605 36th Street West Redevelopment TIF District dated February 1,
2017:
• The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 100 percent which exceeds the 70
percent requirement.
• 100 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which exceeds the 50 percent
requirement.
• The substandard building is reasonably distributed throughout the area of the proposed TIF
District.
Thus the proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF District met both the “Coverage Test” and the
“Condition of Buildings Test” and thereby qualifies under Minnesota Statutes Section 479.174,
Subdivision 10 as a redevelopment TIF district. Other findings for the qualification of the proposed
TIF District are contained in Appendix G of the TIF Plan.
Duration of the Proposed TIF District
Under the TIF Act, the duration of redevelopment districts is up to 25 years after receipt of the
first increment by the City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The date of receipt by the City
of the first tax increment is expected to be 2019. Thus, the full term of the district is estimated to
terminate after 2044. The EDA and City have the right to decertify the District prior to the legally
required date. The City’s expressed obligations to the Redeveloper, as per the terms of the
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Redevelopment Contract, are estimated to be satisfied in approximately 6 years. Once those
obligations are satisfied, the City may terminate the District.
TIF District Budget
The TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment generated by the District to pay for certain
qualifying project expenses and capital improvements associated with the District should they be
necessary. It should be noted that the financing uses and project costs reflected within Subsection
2-10 (Uses of Funds) of the TIF Plan is a not-to-exceed budget and not the actual expected project
budget.
Fiscal Disparities Election within the Proposed TIF District
The proposed redevelopment will contain commercial property therefore the proposed TIF District
is subject to the fiscal disparities calculation. Consistent with the city’s TIF Policy and past
practice, the Elmwood Apartments TIF District will contribute to fiscal disparities (as opposed to
the tax base of the City making the contribution).
Recommendation
The EDA’s financial consultant, Ehlers, prepared the proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF Plan in
consultation with the EDA’s legal counsel, Kennedy & Graven, and staff; all of whom recommend
approval of the establishment the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District and
authorization of an Interfund Loan in connection with the administration of the new TIF District.
NEXT STEPS: The Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC which specifies the terms and
amount of TIF assistance related to the PLACE project is also scheduled for consideration by the
EDA May 15th.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 6
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1,
ESTABLISHING THE ELMWOOD APARTMENTS TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT THEREIN AND ADOPTING A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
WHEREAS, it has been proposed by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board") of the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "EDA") and the City of St. Louis Park (the
"City") that the EDA and City adopt a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan (the
"Redevelopment Plan Modification") for Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project Area"),
establish the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District (the "District") therein and
adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Redevelopment Plan
Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plans"), all pursuant to
and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to
469.1082 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, inclusive, as amended (the "Act"), all as reflected in
the Plans and presented for the Board's consideration; and
WHEREAS, the EDA has investigated the facts relating to the Plans and has caused the
Plans to be prepared; and
WHEREAS, the EDA has performed all actions required by law to be performed prior to
the adoption of the Plans, and has requested that City Planning Commission provide for review of
and written comment on the Plans and that the Council schedule a public hearing on the Plans
upon published notice as required by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board as follows:
1.The EDA hereby finds that the District is in the public interest and is a "redevelopment district"
under Section 469.174, Subd. 10 (a)(1) of the Act, and finds that the adoption of the proposed
TIF Plan conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act and will help fulfill a need to
redevelop an area of the State of Minnesota which is already built up and that the adoption of
the proposed TIF Plan will help provide diversified housing opportunities in the State, assist
in the preservation and enhancement of the tax base of the City and the State and provide
employment opportunities, through the construction of quality affordable and market rate
housing and commercial space, thereby serving a public purpose.
2.The EDA further finds that the TIF Plan will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the
sound needs for the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of the Project Area
by private enterprise in that the intent is to provide only that public assistance necessary to
make the private development financially feasible.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 7
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
3.The EDA elects to calculate fiscal disparities for the District in accordance with Section
469.177, Subd. 3, clause b of the Act, which means the fiscal disparities contribution will be
taken from inside the District.
4.Conditioned upon the approval thereof by the City Council following its public hearing
thereon, the Plans (including the TIF Plan), as presented to the EDA on this date, are hereby
approved, established and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the Executive
Director of the EDA.
5.Upon approval of the Plans by the City Council, City staff and the EDA's advisors and legal
counsel are authorized and directed to proceed with the implementation of the Plans and to
negotiate, draft, prepare and present to this Board for its consideration all further plans,
resolutions, documents and contracts necessary for this purpose. Approval of the Plans does
not constitute approval of any project or development agreement with any developer.
6.Upon approval of the Plans by the City Council, the Executive Director of the EDA is
authorized and directed to forward a copy of the Plans to the Minnesota Department of
Revenue and the Office of the State Auditor pursuant to Section 469.175, Subd. 4a of the Act.
7.The Executive Director of the EDA is authorized and directed to forward a copy of the Plans
to the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County (the “Manager”) and request
that the Manager certify the original tax capacity of the District as described in the Plans, all
in accordance with Section 469.177 of the Act.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President
Attest
Melissa Kennedy, Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 8
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AN INTERFUND LOAN FOR ADVANCE
OF CERTAIN COSTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE ELMWOOD
APARTMENTS TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "City"), intends
to establish the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF District") within
Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Project"), and will adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the
"TIF Plan") for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project.
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “EDA”) has
determined to use tax increments from the TIF District to pay for certain costs identified in the TIF
Plan, which may include land/building acquisition, site improvements/preparation, utilities, other
qualifying improvements, interest and administrative costs (collectively, the "Qualified Costs"),
which costs may be financed on a temporary basis from EDA funds available for such purposes.
WHEREAS, under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, the EDA is authorized
to advance or loan money from the EDA's general fund or any other fund from which such
advances may be legally authorized, in order to finance the Qualified Costs.
WHEREAS, the EDA intends to reimburse itself for the Qualified Costs from tax
increments derived from the TIF District in accordance with the terms of this resolution (which
terms are referred to collectively as the "Interfund Loan").
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners (the "Board")
of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority as follows:
1. The EDA hereby authorizes the advance of up to $10,000, or so much thereof as may be paid
as Qualified Costs, from any legally authorized EDA fund. The EDA shall reimburse itself for
such advances together with interest at the rate stated below. Interest accrues on the principal
amount from the date of each advance. The maximum rate of interest permitted to be charged
is limited to the greater of the rates specified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or
Section 549.09 as of the date the loan or advance is authorized, unless the written agreement
states that the maximum interest rate will fluctuate as the interest rates specified under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 270C.40 or Section 549.09 are from time to time adjusted. The
interest rate shall be 4% and will not fluctuate.
2. Principal and interest ("Payments") on the Interfund Loan shall be paid semi-annually on each
August 1 and February 1 (each a "Payment Date"), commencing on the first Payment Date on
which the EDA has Available Tax Increment (defined below), or on any other dates determined
by the Executive Director of the EDA, through the date of last receipt of tax increment from
the TIF District.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a) Page 9
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
3.Payments on this Interfund Loan are payable solely from "Available Tax Increment," which
shall mean, on each Payment Date, tax increment available after other obligations have been
paid, or as determined by the Executive Director of the EDA, generated in the preceding six
(6) months with respect to the property within the TIF District and remitted to the EDA by
Hennepin County, all in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794,
all inclusive, as amended. Payments on this Interfund Loan may be subordinated to any
outstanding or future bonds, notes or contracts secured in whole or in part with Available Tax
Increment, and are on parity with any other outstanding or future interfund loans secured in
whole or in part with Available Tax Increment.
4.The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Interfund Loan are pre-payable
in whole or in part at any time by the EDA without premium or penalty. No partial prepayment
shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular payment otherwise required to be made
under this Interfund Loan.
5.This Interfund Loan is evidence of an internal borrowing by the EDA in accordance with
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, Subd. 7, and is a limited obligation payable solely from
Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under this resolution. This Interfund
Loan and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State
of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the EDA.
Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay
the principal of or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto except out of
Available Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State
of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of
or interest on this Interfund Loan or other costs incident hereto. The EDA shall have no
obligation to pay any principal amount of the Interfund Loan or accrued interest thereon, which
may remain unpaid after the final Payment Date.
6. The EDA may amend the terms of this Interfund Loan at any time by resolution of the Board,
including a determination to forgive the outstanding principal amount and accrued interest to
the extent permissible under law.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President
Attest
Melissa Kennedy, Secretary
Tax Increment Financing District Overview
City of St. Louis Park
Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
The following summary contains an overview of the basic elements of the Tax Increment Financing Plan
for the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District. More detailed information on each of
these topics can be found in the complete Tax Increment Financing Plan.
Proposed action: Ø Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing
District (District) and the adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (TIF
Plan).
Ø Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1
which includes the establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax
Increment Financing District, which represents a continuation of the goals
and objectives set forth in the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment
Project No. 1.
Ø Adopting an Interfund Loan in conjunction with the District.
Type of TIF District: A redevelopment district
Parcel Number: 16-117-21-34-0073
Proposed
Development:
The District is being created to facilitate the construction of 85 apartments
and approximately 4,920 square feet of commercial space in the City. Please
see Appendix A of the TIF Plan for a more detailed project description.
Maximum duration: The duration of the District will be 25 years from the date of receipt of the
first increment (26 years of increment). The City elects to receive the first tax
increment in 2019. It is estimated that the District, including any
modifications of the TIF Plan for subsequent phases or other changes, would
terminate after December 31, 2044, or when the TIF Plan is satisfied.
Estimated annual tax
increment:
Up to $496,297
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District Page 10
Page 2
Authorized uses:The TIF Plan contains a budget that authorizes the maximum amount that
may be expended:
Land/Building Acquisition ..................................................... $536,000
Site Improvements/Preparation .............................................. $450,000
Public Utilities ....................................................................... $315,000
Other Qualifying Improvements ......................................... $3,463,886
Administrative Costs (up to 10%) .......................................... $880,958
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ................................................ $5,645,844
Interest ................................................................................ $4,044,694
PROJECT COSTS TOTAL ............................................. $9,690,538
See Subsection 2-10, on page 2-6 of the TIF Plan for the full budget
authorization.
Form of financing: The project is proposed to be financed by a pay-as-you-go note and/or
interfund loan.
Administrative fee: Up to 10% of annual increment, if costs are justified.
Interfund Loan
Requirement:
If the City wants to pay for administrative or capital expenditures from a tax
increment fund, it is recommended that a resolution authorizing a loan from
another fund be passed PRIOR to the issuance of the check.
4 Year Activity Rule
(§ 469.176 Subd. 6)
After four years from the date of certification of the District one of the
following activities must have been commenced on each parcel in the District:
•Demolition
•Rehabilitation
•Renovation
•Other site preparation (not including utility services such as sewer and
water)
If the activity has not been started by approximately May 2021, no additional
tax increment may be taken from that parcel until the commencement of a
qualifying activity.
5 Year Rule
(§ 469.1763 Subd. 3)
Within 5 years of certification revenues derived from tax increments must be
expended or obligated to be expended.
Any obligations in the District made after approximately May 2022, will not
be eligible for repayment from tax increments.
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the TIF Plan for the District, as required
pursuant to M.S., Section 469.175, Subd. 3, are included in Exhibit A of the City resolution.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District Page 11
Page 3
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District Page 12
Page 4
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District Page 13
Meeting: Economic Development Authority
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Action Agenda Item: 7b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt EDA Resolution approving the Redevelopment
Contract between the EDA and 36th Street LLC.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA approve the proposed Redevelopment Contract
between the EDA and 36th Street LLC so as to facilitate The Elmwood redevelopment at 5605 W
36th Street?
SUMMARY: 36th Street LLC (“Redeveloper”) owns the property and building located at 5605
W 36th Street known as the 36th Street Business Center. The Redeveloper proposes to demolish the
structurally substandard building and construct a 6-story, mixed-use, senior housing building
called The Elmwood. The project will consist of 85 residential units restricted to residents age 55+,
of which 17 (or 20%) will be affordable at 60% of the area median income (AMI), as well as
approximately 4,920 square feet of commercial space. There are significant extraordinary costs
associated with redeveloping the subject site which render the project financially unfeasible.
Consequently the Redeveloper applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance
to offset a portion of these costs so as to enable the project to proceed. The Redeveloper’s TIF
application was reviewed at the March 27th Study Session where it received favorable support.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Total Development Cost to construct
the proposed Elmwood project is approximately $19 million. According to the analysis of the
project’s proforma conducted by the EDA’s financial consultant The Elmwood is not financially
feasible but/for the provision of $950,000 in tax increment assistance. Such assistance is necessary
to offset a portion of the project’s extraordinary site preparation costs. It is proposed that the EDA
enter into a Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC under which the Redeveloper agrees to
construct the project as proposed under the recently approved PUD and the EDA agrees to
reimburse the Redeveloper for qualified costs up to $950,000 in tax increment generated by the
project. The financial assistance would be provided on a pay-as-you-go basis over a maximum
term of 6 years. Once the TIF Note is retired the additional property taxes generated by the project
would accrue to the local taxing jurisdictions. The EDA’s financial participation in the proposed
project would leverage $19 million in new investment, create 85 senior residential units (17
affordable and 68 market rate), and approximately 10 new jobs.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Redevelopment Contract
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 2
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: 36th Street LLC (“Redeveloper”) owns the property located at 5605 W 36th
Street. This one-acre parcel is situated at the southeast corner of Xenwood Avenue and 36th Street
West. The subject property is currently occupied by a two-story multi-tenant commercial building
known as 36th Street Business Center which was recently determined structurally substandard.
Proposed Redevelopment Site: 5605 W 36th Street
REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: The Redeveloper proposes to raze the existing building and
construct a six-story, mixed-use senior housing building called The Elmwood. The project will
consist of two levels of underground parking, 85 residential units restricted to residents age 55+,
of which 17 (or 20%) will be affordable at 60% of the area median income (AMI), and 188 parking
stalls. Additionally, the west wing of the building will contain 4,920 gross square feet of ground
level commercial space, with space for outdoor seating. Active uses fronting 36th Street include a
fitness studio, leasing office and main entrance. The Redeveloper’s applications for an Alley
Vacation, Final Plat and PUD to allow construction of the proposed project on the subject site were
approved by the City Council on March 20, 2017.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 3
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
Rendering of proposed building – The Elmwood
Job Creation
The proposed project is expected to create three (3) FTE jobs related to the building and residences
and an estimated seven (7) FTE jobs related to the commercial portion of the project for a total of
ten (10) FTE new jobs. The number of jobs created by the 4,920 SF of commercial space could
be higher depending upon the business that leases the space.
Project Schedule
The Redeveloper hopes to conduct its asbestos abatement, building demolition, site shoring this
summer and commence construction by fall. Under the proposed Redevelopment Contract, the
Redeveloper is required to commence construction by October 1, 2017 and substantially complete
the project by February 1, 2019 which provides the Redeveloper flexibility in the event of any
unexpected delays.
Redeveloper’s Request for Public Financing Assistance
The Total Development Cost (TDC) to construct the proposed Elmwood redevelopment is
approximately $19 million. There are significant extraordinary costs* associated with
redeveloping the subject site. These include the following.
Extraordinary Cost Estimates AMOUNT ($)
Soil correction 50,000
Asbestos Abatement and Building Removal 100,000
Earthwork, excavation & shoring 300,000
Utilities 97,000
2-Levels of Underground Parking 3,100,000
TOTAL Extraordinary Costs $3,647,000
*Extraordinary costs are expenses encountered over and above those which a developer would typically expect to
incur in a suburban development in order to correct blighted conditions causing the need for redevelopment (e.g.
asbestos removal, building demolition, contaminated soil removal and disposal, storage tank removal and disposal,
shoring, utility replacement, specialized stormwater management, street improvements, structured parking, etc.) These
types of expenses are eligible for reimbursement through Redevelopment TIF districts under the MN TIF Act.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 4
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
The above costs prevent the project from achieving financial feasibility. Consequently 36th Street
LLC applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance to offset a portion of these
expenses. Tax increment financing uses the increased future property taxes generated by a new
development to finance certain qualified extraordinary costs incurred during construction of that
development for a limited period of time.
Pro Forma Analysis and Recommended Level & Type of Financial Assistance
36th Street LLC’s sources and uses statements, cash flow projections, and investor rate of return
(ROR) related to each component of The Elmwood project were reviewed by staff and Ehlers (the
EDA’s financial consultant). Based upon its analysis of the project’s proforma, Ehlers determined
that The Elmwood is not financially feasible but/for the provision of $950,000 in tax increment
financing. The assistance would be provided in the form of a TIF Note which is consistent with
the EDA’s past practice.
As a reminder, the proposed tax increment would be generated by the project itself and would only
be provided once construction was completed and the Redeveloper supplied statements verifying
it had incurred the specified qualified costs. Statutorily, the proposed tax increment assistance
would be made available to exclusively reimburse the Redeveloper for a portion of the
extraordinary site preparation costs cited above. The EDA would be obligated to provide assistance
to the project only to the extent that the project generates sufficient tax increment to make the
semi-annual payments. The City, County and School District would continue to receive the
property taxes collected on the subject site’s base value.
It will take approximately 18 months to construct The Elmwood. Upon project completion, 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 estimated the first increment would be paid in 2019 and that the project would
generate the proposed tax increment in 6 years or less. Once the TIF Note is fully paid, the
additional property taxes generated by the project would accrue to the local taxing jurisdictions.
The Note is currently estimated to bear interest at 5%, but is subject to change based upon the
Redeveloper’s actual financing rate. The size of the TIF Note is based upon no inflationary value
in the project (as with all projects). This is more conservative estimating and thus it is anticipated
that the pay-as-you-go note will be paid off earlier than estimated. As with most of the EDA’s
redevelopment contracts, the Redeveloper will be required to execute a Minimum Assessment
Agreement for the value utilized for projecting the amount of TIF assistance available.
Property Value and Taxes
The total taxable market value of the current property is approximately $1.1 million and generates
just over $43,000 in total property taxes. The total taxable market value of The Elmwood upon
construction completion (for TIF estimation purposes) is projected to be approximately $16.2
million at a minimum and could be higher. Most of the new value would be captured as tax
increment and used to make payments on the TIF Note until it is paid off and the TIF district is
terminated. The City, County and School District would continue to receive the property taxes
collected on the subject site’s base value. The project is estimated to initially generate
approximately $299,000 in annual property taxes. Once the TIF Note is retired, the additional
property taxes generated by the project would accrue to the local taxing jurisdictions.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 5
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
Business Subsidy
The proposed TIF assistance provided to 36th Street LLC would be exempt from state business
subsidy requirements as it relates to redevelopment (Section 116J.993, Subdivision 3). Therefore,
no public subsidy hearing is required; however, the EDA would still be subject to modified
reporting requirements.
TIF Application Review
The EDA/City Council reviewed the Redeveloper’s TIF Application for the proposed project at
the March 27th Study Session. At that meeting there was consensus support for favorably
considering the recommended level of tax increment assistance - $950,000. As a result, Staff was
directed to call for a public hearing on the proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF District and prepare
business terms for a formal redevelopment contract with 36th Street LLC.
Proposed Purchase and Redevelopment Contract
A list of specific business terms for the provision of the proposed financial assistance was provided
as a report for the May 8th Study Session. Those terms served as the basis for the proposed
Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC (“Contract”) (attached). The proposed Contract
specifies the mutual obligations between 36th Street LLC and the EDA and as well as the precise
terms of the financial assistance to be provided. The Contract is consistent with EDA Policy, past
practices and previous discussions with the EDA/City Council. The following are key terms of the
proposed Contract.
1. The Redeveloper acknowledges that the EDA makes no representations or warranties as to
the condition of the soils on the Redevelopment Property or the fitness of the Redevelopment
Property for construction of the Minimum Improvements or any other purpose for which the
Redeveloper may make use of such property, and that the assistance provided to the
Redeveloper neither implies any responsibility by the EDA or the City for any contamination
of the Redevelopment Property nor imposes any obligation on such parties to participate in
any cleanup of the Redevelopment Property.
2. The Redeveloper further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the EDA,
the City, and their governing body members, officers, and employees, from any claims or
actions arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants existing on the
Redevelopment Property on or after closing.
3. The EDA has determined that, in order to make development of the Minimum Improvements
financially feasible, it is necessary to reimburse Redeveloper for a portion of the cost of:
asbestos abatement, building demolition, soil correction, environmental remediation, site
preparation, and underground structured parking (collectively referred to as “Public
Redevelopment Costs”). The tax increment generated from the Elmwood Apartments TIF
District will be payable to Redeveloper in the form of a tax increment revenue note (the
“Note”), which would be structured on the following basis:
Ø Issue total: Maximum $950,000
Ø Type: Pay-as-you-go
Ø Term: Not to exceed 6 years
Ø Interest Rate: 5% (subject to Redeveloper’s actual financing)
Ø Admin Fee: 5%
Ø Fiscal Disparities: Paid from within the district
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 6
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
The EDA shall issue and deliver the Note upon Redeveloper having:
(a) delivered to the EDA written evidence satisfactory to the EDA that
Redeveloper has incurred Public Redevelopment Costs in an amount at least
equal to the principal amount of the Note, which evidence must include
copies of the paid invoices or other comparable evidence for costs of
allowable Public Redevelopment Costs;
(b) submitted and obtained EDA approval of finance; and
(c) delivered to the EDA an investment letter in a form reasonably satisfactory to
the EDA.
(d) The EDA acknowledges that the Redeveloper may assign the Note to a third
party. The EDA consents to such an assignment, conditioned upon receipt of
an investment letter from such third party in a form reasonably acceptable to
the EDA.
(e) The Redeveloper understands and acknowledges that all Public
Redevelopment Costs must be paid by the Redeveloper and will be
reimbursed from Available Tax Increment pursuant to the terms of the Note.
The Redeveloper understands and acknowledges that the EDA makes no
representations or warranties regarding the amount of Tax Increment, or that
revenues pledged to the Note will be sufficient to pay the principal and interest
on the Note. Any estimates of Tax Increment prepared by the EDA or its
financial advisors in connection with the TIF District or this Contract are for
the benefit of the EDA, and are not intended as representations on which the
Redeveloper may rely. Public Redevelopment Costs exceeding the principal
amount of the Note are the sole responsibility of Redeveloper.
4. The EDA will perform a “lookback” calculation upon lease-up of 93% of the apartments to
verify the requested amount of TIF assistance was justified similar to those conducted on other
projects that received TIF assistance.
5. Both parties agree that any assistance provided to the Redeveloper under the Redevelopment
Contract is not expected to constitute a “business subsidy” under Minnesota Statutes because
the assistance is for redevelopment.
6. Redeveloper agrees that it will pay the reasonable costs of consultants and attorneys retained
by the EDA in connection with the preparation of the TIF Plan, the establishment of the TIF
District, the negotiation and preparation of the Redevelopment Contract and other incidental
agreements and documents. Upon termination of the Redevelopment Contract the
Redeveloper remains obligated for costs incurred through the effective date of termination.
7. Redeveloper agrees to undertake the Minimum Improvements and Redeveloper Public
Improvements as shown in the PUD and Planning Development Contract and operate and
maintain the Minimum Improvements in good repair and condition. In summary, the
Redeveloper agrees to construct the Redeveloper Public Improvements, and construct the
Minimum Improvements which together consist of approximately 85 units of rental
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 7
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
housing restricted to residents aged 55+, approximately 4,920 square feet of commercial
space, and associated surface and structured underground parking comprising 188 parking
stalls, along with all associated infrastructure, sidewalks, landscaping and designed
outdoor recreation area.
8. Before commencing construction of the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper must
submit Construction Plans regarding the Minimum Improvements for approval by the
EDA. All work on the Minimum Improvements shall be in accordance with the approved
Construction Plans and shall comply with all City requirements regarding such
improvements.
9. If the Redeveloper desires to make any material change in the Construction Plans after their
approval by the EDA, the Redeveloper shall submit the proposed change to the EDA for its
approval. The term “material” means changes that increase or decrease construction costs by
$500,000 or more.
10. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, Redeveloper agrees to commence construction of the
Minimum Improvements by October 1, 2017 and substantially complete them by February
1, 2019. If the Redeveloper anticipates that the above timetable will not be met, Redeveloper
shall provide a written and oral presentation to the City Council at a regular City Council
meeting at least 45 days prior to the Required Commencement Date or Completion Date. The
report must describe the reasons for the expected failure to meet the schedule, evidence of
Redeveloper’s due diligence in working toward construction of the Minimum Improvements,
and a detailed revised construction schedule. Approval of a modified schedule for
construction by the EDA shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. Failure
to timely provide such written and oral report is an Event of Default.
11. The Redeveloper shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy, adopted by the City
Council on February 16, 2010 and as such policy may be amended as of the date of issuance
of a building permit for the Minimum Improvements, and shall use commercially reasonable
efforts to obtain a “green certification” for the Minimum Improvements. As a condition to
issuance of a Certificate of Completion for the Minimum Improvements, Redeveloper shall
submit to the EDA either (a) evidence of certification from Leadership in Energy and
Environmental Design (“LEED”) or similar certification or (b) in absence of actual
certification, evidence in a form satisfactory to the EDA of Redeveloper’s best efforts to
obtain such certification and an explanation of why certification was not feasible. to
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (“LEED”) or standards.
12. Promptly after completion of each Component of the Minimum Improvements in accordance
with those provisions of the Contract relating solely to the obligations of the Redeveloper to
construct the Minimum Improvements, the EDA Representative shall deliver to the
Redeveloper a Certificate of Completion in recordable form and executed by the EDA.
13. The Redeveloper shall at all times engage a property management company with
substantial experience in operating mixed use developments, subject to approval by the
EDA, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld. The Redeveloper will submit
evidence of such management upon request by the EDA. The Redeveloper has notified the
EDA of, and the EDA has approved, the engagement of Main Street Companies as property
management company.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 8
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
14. The Redeveloper agrees to comply with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy, as adopted
June 1, 2015, including without limitation the following:
(a) The Redeveloper agrees to reserve at least 20% of the apartment units within the
Minimum Improvements for households earning sixty percent (60%) of Area Median
Income (“AMI”) (collectively, the “Affordable Apartments”) for at least twenty-five
(25) years following building occupancy.
(b) The monthly rental price for Affordable Apartments shall include rent and utility costs
and shall be based on sixty percent (60%) of AMI for the metropolitan area that
includes the City adjusted for bedroom size and calculated annually by Minnesota
Housing in connection with establishing rent limits for the Housing Tax Credit
Program.
(c) The size and design of the Affordable Apartments shall be consistent and comparable
with the market rate units in the Minimum Improvements and is subject to the
approval of the City. The Affordable Apartments shall be distributed throughout the
North Apartments Component and the South Apartments Component.
(d) The Affordable Apartments shall have a number of bedrooms in the approximate
proportion as the market rate units.
(e) The Redeveloper agrees to prepare an affordable housing plan as defined in the City’s
Inclusionary Housing Policy (the “Affordable Housing Plan”). The Affordable
Housing Plan shall describe how the Redeveloper complies with each of the
applicable requirements of the Inclusionary Housing Policy. The Affordable Housing
Plan shall be prepared by the Redeveloper and must be approved by the City prior to
or in conjunction with delivery of the Certificate of Completion for the North
Apartments Component or the South Apartments Component, whichever is earlier.
15. The Redeveloper shall install dedicated wired connections for the Minimum Improvements
in conformity with the terms and specifications provided in the City Planning Development
Contract.
16. The Redeveloper shall construct a designed outdoor recreation area and other public amenities
including public art on the Redevelopment Property as required under the City Planning
Development Contract and as depicted in the approved Site Plan. The parties agree and
understand that the Redeveloper shall be responsible for the cost of any maintenance and
repair of the amenities and Public Art.
17. The Redeveloper agrees to file any petition or other document required to participate in the
City’s Special Service District No. 6 and to become subject to special service charges levied
on all commercial properties in the Special Service District with regard to the South
Components. The Redeveloper further waives all rights to veto, appeal or otherwise object to
imposition of a service charge levied in accordance with this paragraph, provided that the
Redeveloper shall be entitled to raise any objections, appeals or challenges to special district
changes upon the termination of the Contract.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 9
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
18. The Redeveloper agrees to comply with the terms of the Maintenance Plan for the
Redevelopment Property as specified in the City Planning Development Contract.
19. If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Maintenance in accordance with the Maintenance Plan,
the City, at its option and following thirty (30) days written notice from the EDA to the
Redeveloper (or such longer period of time as is reasonably necessary if Maintenance cannot
be reasonably be completed within the 30 day period), may enter the Redevelopment property
and perform the Maintenance. The Redeveloper agrees to permit the City to specially assess
any costs of the Maintenance proportionately against the Minimum Improvements.
20. The Redeveloper shall, with the EDA, execute an Assessment Agreement specifying an
assessor’s minimum market value for the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum
Improvements constructed thereon.
21. Before issuance of the TIF Note, the Redeveloper shall submit to the EDA, consultants and
agents, evidence reasonably satisfactory to the EDA that Redeveloper has available funds, or
commitments to obtain funds, whether in the nature of mortgage financing, equity, grants,
loans, or other sources sufficient for paying the cost of the developing the Minimum
Improvements.
22. The EDA agrees to subordinate its rights under the Contract to the Holder of any Mortgage
securing construction or permanent financing, in accordance with the terms of a mutually-
approved subordination agreement.
23. Redeveloper agrees not to transfer the Redevelopment Contract or the Redevelopment
Property (except to an affiliate) prior to receiving a Certificate of Completion without the
prior written consent of the EDA, except for construction mortgage financing and/or
permanent financing. The EDA's consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned
or delayed.
24. Redeveloper agrees that any proposed transferee, shall, for itself and its successors and
assigns, and expressly for the benefit of the EDA, expressly assume all of the obligations
of the Redeveloper under the Contract as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property to
be transferred and agrees to be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the
Redeveloper is subject.
25. Redeveloper shall undertake all work related to the Minimum Improvements and Redeveloper
Public Improvements in compliance with all applicable federal and state laws, including
without limitation all applicable state and federal Occupational Safety and Health Act
regulations. Any subcontractors retained by Redeveloper shall be subject to the same
requirements. All Redeveloper Public Improvements shall be constructed in accordance with
the City Ordinance.
26. Redeveloper agrees that the EDA and the City will not be held liable for any loss or damage
to property or any injury to or death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from
any defect in the Redevelopment Property or the Minimum Improvements.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 10
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
27. The Redeveloper, for itself and its successors and assigns, agrees that during the construction
of the Minimum Improvements provided for in the Contract it will comply with all applicable
federal, state, and local equal employment and non-discrimination laws and regulations.
28. The Redeveloper agrees until the Contract Termination Date not to discriminate upon the
basis of race, color, creed, sex or national origin in the sale, lease, or rental or in the use or
occupancy of the Redevelopment Property or any improvements erected thereon.
29. Redeveloper agrees that no portion of the Redevelopment Property will be used for a
sexually-oriented business, a pawnshop, a check-cashing business, payday loan agency, a
tattoo business, or a gun business, and that such restrictions may be placed in the
Redevelopment Deed.
The above terms are subject to further definition, revision and/or refinement provided they do not
alter the substance of the transaction.
Summary
The EDA’s financial participation in the proposed Elmwood project would remove a structurally
substandard building, leverage $19 million in new investment, provide 85 senior residential units
(17 affordable and 68 market rate), and create approximately 10 new jobs. The ratio of private to
public investment in the project would be $20 to $1. Finally, The Elmwood project will bring
additional economic vibrancy to the 36th Street commercial corridor and the Elmwood
neighborhood.
Recommendation
36th Street LLC’s proposed redevelopment meets the City’s objectives for the provision of Tax
Increment Financing as specified in the City’s TIF Policy. The project meets nearly all the
Minimum and Desired Qualifications for providing TIF assistance and received a final grade of
“C” according to the Project Report Card within the TIF Policy. Given these findings, staff
supports reimbursing 36th Street LLC up to $950,000 in qualified development costs in the form
of pay-as-you-go tax increment generated by the project so as to advance the redevelopment. The
EDA’s legal counsel in consultation with staff prepared the proposed Redevelopment Contract
with 36th Street LLC and recommends its approval. The attached resolution of approval allows for
modifications to the Contract that do not alter the substance of the transaction without bringing the
Contract back to the EDA for amendment.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 11
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
EDA RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT FOR
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT WITH 36TH STREET, LLC
AND AWARDING THE SALE OF, AND PROVIDING THE
FORM, TERMS, COVENANTS AND DIRECTIONS FOR
THE ISSUANCE OF ITS TAX INCREMENT REVENUE
NOTE, SERIES 2017 (ELMWOOD APARTMENTS) TO
36TH STREET, LLC.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners (“Board”) of the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority, St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “Authority”) as follows:
Section 1. Authorization; Award of Sale.
1.01. Authorization. The Authority and the City of St. Louis Park have approved the
establishment of its Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”)
within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (“Project”), and have adopted a tax increment financing plan
for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, the Authority is authorized to issue and
sell its bonds for the purpose of financing a portion of the public development costs of the Project.
Such bonds are payable from all or any portion of revenues derived from the TIF District and
pledged to the payment of the bonds. The Authority hereby finds and determines that it is in the
best interests of the Authority that it issue and sell its Tax Increment Revenue Note, Series 2017
(Elmwood Apartments) (the “Note”) for the purpose of financing certain public redevelopment
costs of the Project.
1.02. Approval of Agreement; Issuance, Sale, and Terms of the Note. (a) The
Contract for Private Redevelopment between the Authority and 36th Street, LLC (the “Owner”),
as presented to the Board, is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter
the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President and Executive Director,
provided that execution of the Agreement by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval.
Authority staff and officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to perform the Authority’s
obligations under the Agreement as a whole, including without limitation execution of any documents
to which the Authority is a party referenced in or attached to the Agreement, all as described in the
Agreement.
(b) The Authority hereby authorizes the President and Executive Director to issue the Note
in accordance with the Agreement. All capitalized terms in this resolution have the meaning
provided in the Agreement unless the context requires otherwise.
(c) The Note shall be issued in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $950,000 to
the Owner in consideration of certain eligible costs incurred by the Owner under the Agreement,
shall be dated the date of delivery thereof, and shall bear interest at the lesser of 5.0% or the actual
rate of financing obtained by the Owner, from the date of issue per annum to the earlier of maturity
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 12
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
or prepayment. The Note will be issued in the principal amount of Public Redevelopment Costs
submitted and approved in accordance with Section 3.3 of the Agreement. The Note is secured by
Available Tax Increment, as further described in the form of the Note herein. The Authority hereby
delegates to the Executive Director the determination of the date on which the Note is to be
delivered, in accordance with the Agreement.
Section 2. Form of Note. The Note shall be in substantially the following form, with
the blanks to be properly filled in and the principal and interest rate amounts adjusted as of the
date of issue:
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 13
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
UNITED STATE OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
No. R-1 $_____________
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE
SERIES 2017
(ELMWOOD APARTMENTS)
Date
Rate of Original Issue
__% ___________, 20__
The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) for value received,
certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to 36th Street, LLC or registered assigns
(the “Owner”), the principal sum of $__________ and to pay interest thereon at the rate of ______
percent (__%) per annum, solely from the sources and to the extent set forth herein. Capitalized
terms shall have the meanings provided in the Contract for Private Redevelopment between the
Authority and the Owner, dated as of ____________, 2017 (the “Agreement”), unless the context
requires otherwise.
1. Payments. Principal and interest (“Payments”) shall be paid on August 1, 2019 and
each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including February 1, 2045 (“Payment Dates”) in
the amounts and from the sources set forth in Section 3 herein. Payments shall be applied first to
accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal. Interest accruing from the date of issue through and
including February 1, 2019 shall be compounded semiannually on February 1 and August 1 of
each year and added to principal.
Payments are payable by mail to the address of the Owner or such other address as the
Owner may designate upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Authority. Payments on this Note
are payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, on the Payment Date,
is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts.
2. Interest. Interest at the rate stated herein shall accrue on the unpaid principal,
commencing on the date of original issue. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a year of 360
days and charged for actual days principal is unpaid.
3. Available Tax Increment. (a) Payments on this Note are payable on each Payment
Date solely from and in the amount of Available Tax Increment, which shall mean, on each
Payment Date, Ninety-five percent (95%) of the Tax Increment attributable to the Minimum
Improvements and Redevelopment Property that is paid to the Authority by Hennepin County in
the six months preceding the Payment Date.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 14
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
(b) The Authority shall have no obligation to pay principal of and interest on this Note
on each Payment Date from any source other than Available Tax Increment and the failure of the
Authority to pay the entire amount of principal or interest on this Note on any Payment Date shall
not constitute a default hereunder as long as the Authority pays principal and interest hereon to the
extent of Available Tax Increment. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay any unpaid
balance of principal or accrued interest that may remain after the final Payment on February 1,
2045.
4. Default. If on any Payment Date there has occurred and is continuing any Event of
Default under the Agreement, the Authority may withhold from payments hereunder under all
Available Tax Increment. If the Event of Default is thereafter cured in accordance with the
Agreement, the Available Tax Increment withheld under this Section shall be deferred and paid,
without interest thereon, within thirty (30) days after the Event of Default is cured. If the Event
of Default is not cured in a timely manner, the Authority may terminate this Note by written notice
to the Owner in accordance with the Agreement.
5. Prepayment. (a) The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Note
is prepayable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty. No
partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular Payment otherwise
required to be made under this Note.
(b) Upon receipt by Redeveloper of the Authority’s written statement of the
Participation Amount as described in Section 3.4 of the Agreement, fifty percent (50%) of such
Participation Amount will be deemed to constitute, and will be applied to, prepayment of the
principal amount of this Note. Such deemed prepayment is effective as of the date of delivery of
such statement to the Owner, and will be recorded by the Registrar in its records for the Note.
Upon request of the Owner, the Authority will deliver to the Owner a statement of the outstanding
principal balance of the Note after application of the deemed prepayment under this paragraph.
6. Nature of Obligation. This Note is one of an issue in the total principal amount of
$_________, issued to aid in financing certain public redevelopment costs and administrative costs
of a Project undertaken by the Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 through
469.047, and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the “Resolution”) duly adopted by
the Authority on May 15, 2017, and pursuant to and in full conformity with the Constitution and
laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as
amended. This Note is a limited obligation of the Authority which is payable solely from Available
Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under the Resolution. This Note and the interest
hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of Minnesota or any
political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the Authority. Neither the State of
Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the principal of or interest
on this Note or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax Increment, and neither the
full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision
thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident
hereto.
7. Registration and Transfer. This Note is issuable only as a fully registered note
without coupons. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein,
this Note is transferable upon the books of the Authority kept for that purpose at the principal
office of the City Finance Director, by the Owner hereof in person or by such Owner’s attorney
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 15
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Note together with a written instrument of
transfer satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed by the Owner. Upon such transfer or exchange
and the payment by the Owner of any tax, fee, or governmental charge required to be paid by the
Authority with respect to such transfer or exchange, there will be issued in the name of the
transferee a new Note of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate
and maturing on the same dates.
Except as otherwise provided in Section 3.3(d) of the Agreement, this Note shall not be
transferred to any person or entity, unless the Authority has provided written consent to such
transfer.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things required
by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen, and to be
performed in order to make this Note a valid and binding limited obligation of the Authority
according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been performed in due
form, time and manner as so required.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority have caused this Note to be executed with the manual signatures of its
President and Executive Director, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 16
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
REGISTRATION PROVISIONS
The ownership of the unpaid balance of the within Note is registered in the bond register
of the Chief Financial Officer of the City, in the name of the person last listed below.
Date of
Registration
Registered Owner
Signature of
Chief Financial Officer
_________, 20__ 36th Street, LLC
Federal Tax I.D
No_____________
Section 3. Terms, Execution and Delivery.
3.01. Denomination, Payment. The Note shall be issued as a single typewritten note
numbered R-1.
The Note shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Principal of and interest on the
Note shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein.
3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be
payable by mail to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of
the month preceding the Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day.
3.03. Registration. The Authority hereby appoints the Chief Financial Officer of the City
to perform the functions of registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect
of registration and the rights and duties of the Authority and the Registrar with respect thereto shall
be as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its office a bond register in which the Registrar
shall provide for the registration of ownership of the Note and the registration of transfers and
exchanges of the Note.
(b) Transfer of Note. Upon surrender for transfer of the Note duly endorsed by the
registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form reasonably
satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly
authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the
name of the designated transferee or transferees, a new Note of a like aggregate principal amount
and maturity, as requested by the transferor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Note shall not be
transferred to any person other than an affiliate, or other related entity, of the Owner unless the
Authority has been provided with an opinion of counsel or a certificate of the transferor, in a form
satisfactory to the Authority, that such transfer is exempt from registration and prospectus delivery
requirements of federal and applicable state securities laws. The Registrar may close the books
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 17
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each Payment Date
and until such Payment Date.
(c) Cancellation. The Note surrendered upon any transfer shall be promptly cancelled
by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the Authority.
(d) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When the Note is presented to the Registrar
for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement
on such Note or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no
liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper
or unauthorized.
(e) Persons Deemed Owners. The Authority and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name the Note is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the
Note, whether the Note shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on
account of, the principal of and interest on such Note and for all other purposes, and all such
payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner’s order shall be valid and
effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the Authority upon such Note to the extent of the
sum or sums so paid.
(f) Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of the Note, the Registrar
may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee,
or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange.
(g) Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Note. In case any Note shall become
mutilated or be lost, stolen, or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Note of like amount,
Termination Dates and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of such
mutilated Note or in lieu of and in substitution for such Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon the
payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in
the case the Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory
to it that such Note was lost, stolen, or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing
to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance, and amount satisfactory
to it, in which both the Authority and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. The Note so
surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be
given to the Authority. If the mutilated, lost, stolen, or destroyed Note has already matured or
been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new
Note prior to payment.
3.04. Preparation and Delivery. The Note shall be prepared under the direction of the
Executive Director and shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the signatures of its
President and Executive Director. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Note
shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Note, such signature shall nevertheless be
valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until
delivery. When the Note has been so executed, it shall be delivered by the Executive Director to
the Owner thereof in accordance with the Agreement.
Section 4. Security Provisions.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b) Page 18
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC
4.01. Pledge. The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Note all Available Tax Increment as defined in the Note.
Available Tax Increment shall be applied to payment of the principal of and interest on the Note
in accordance with the terms of the form of Note set forth in Section 2 of this resolution.
4.02. Bond Fund. Until the date the Note is no longer outstanding and no principal
thereof or interest thereon (to the extent required to be paid pursuant to this resolution) remains
unpaid, the Authority shall maintain a separate and special “Bond Fund” to be used for no purpose
other than the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note. The Authority irrevocably
agrees to appropriate to the Bond Fund on or before each Payment Date the Available Tax
Increment in an amount equal to the Payment then due, or the actual Available Tax Increment,
whichever is less. Any Available Tax Increment remaining in the Bond Fund shall be transferred
to the Authority’s account for the TIF District upon the termination of the Note in accordance with
its terms.
4.03. Additional Obligations. The Authority will issue no other obligations secured in
whole or in part by Available Tax Increment unless such pledge is on a subordinate basis to the
pledge on the Note.
Section 5. Certification of Proceedings.
5.01. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized
and directed to prepare and furnish to the Owner of the Note certified copies of all proceedings
and records of the Authority, and such other affidavits, certificates, and information as may be
required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Note as the same appear
from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and
all such certified copies, certificates, and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be
deemed representations of the Authority as to the facts recited therein.
Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective upon approval.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Anne Mavity, President
Attest
Melissa Kennedy, Secretary
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
Third Draft, May 10, 2017
CONTRACT
FOR
PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
By and Between
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
and
36TH STREET, LLC
Dated as of: _____________________, 2017
This document was drafted by:
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, Chartered (MNI)
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
(612) 337-9300
http://www.kennedy-graven.com
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 19
498863v3 MNI SA285-110 i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREAMBLE ...................................................................................................................................1
ARTICLE I
Definitions
Section 1.1. Definitions................................................................................................................2
ARTICLE II
Representations and Warranties
Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority.............................................................................6
Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper ...............................................6
ARTICLE III
Property Acquisition; Public Redevelopment Costs
Section 3.1. Status of Redevelopment Property ...........................................................................8
Section 3.2. Environmental Conditions .......................................................................................8
Section 3.3 Issuance of Note .......................................................................................................8
Section 3.4. TIF Lookback.........................................................................................................11
Section 3.5. Business Subsidy ...................................................................................................12
Section 3.6. Payment of Authority Costs ...................................................................................12
ARTICLE IV
Construction of Minimum Improvements
Section 4.1. Construction of Improvements ..............................................................................14
Section 4.2. Construction Plans .................................................................................................14
Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction .................................................15
Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion ......................................................................................15
Section 4.5. Management ...........................................................................................................16
Section 4.6. Records and Reports ..............................................................................................16
Section 4.7. Inclusionary Housing .............................................................................................16
Section 4.8. Connectivity ...........................................................................................................17
Section 4.9. DORA ....................................................................................................................16
Section 4.10. Special Service District; Maintenance ...................................................................17
ARTICLE V
Insurance
Section 5.1. Insurance ................................................................................................................18
Section 5.2. Subordination .........................................................................................................19
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 20
498863v3 MNI SA285-110 ii
ARTICLE VI
Tax Increment; Taxes
Section 6.1. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes .........................................................................20
Section 6.2. Review of Taxes ....................................................................................................20
Section 6.3. Assessment Agreement ..........................................................................................20
ARTICLE VII
Other Financing
Section 7.1. Generally ................................................................................................................21
Section 7.2. Authority’s Option to Cure Default on Mortgage ..................................................21
Section 7.3. Modification; Subordination ..................................................................................21
ARTICLE VIII
Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer; Indemnification
Section 8.1. Representation as to Development.........................................................................22
Section 8.2. Prohibition Against Redeveloper’s Transfer of Property and
Assignment of Agreement .....................................................................................22
Section 8.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants ................................................................23
ARTICLE IX
Events of Default
Section 9.1. Events of Default Defined .....................................................................................25
Section 9.2. Remedies on Default ..............................................................................................25
Section 9.3. No Remedy Exclusive............................................................................................26
Section 9.4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver ....................................................26
Section 9.5. Attorney Fees .........................................................................................................26
ARTICLE X
Additional Provisions
Section 10.1. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable .............................27
Section 10.2. Equal Employment Opportunity ............................................................................27
Section 10.3. Restrictions on Use ................................................................................................27
Section 10.4. Provisions Not Merged With Deed ........................................................................27
Section 10.5. Titles of Articles and Sections ...............................................................................27
Section 10.6. Notices and Demands ............................................................................................27
Section 10.7. Counterparts ...........................................................................................................28
Section 10.8. Recording ...............................................................................................................28
Section 10.9. Amendment ............................................................................................................28
Section 10.10. Authority Approvals ..............................................................................................28
TESTIMONIUM ...........................................................................................................................29
SIGNATURES ..............................................................................................................................29
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 21
498863v3 MNI SA285-110 iii
SCHEDULE A Redevelopment Property
SCHEDULE B Authorizing Resolution
SCHEDULE C Certificate of Completion
SCHEDULE D Subordination Agreement
SCHEDULE E Pro Forma
SCHEDULE F Site Plan
SCHEDULE G Assessment Agreement
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 22
1
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
CONTRACT FOR PRIVATE REDEVELOPMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the __ day of ______________, 2017, by and between
the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic under
the laws of Minnesota (the “Authority”), and 36th Street, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability
company (the “Redeveloper”).
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090
to 469.1081 (the “Act”) and was authorized to transact business and exercise its powers by a
resolution of the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”); and
WHEREAS, the Authority has undertaken a program to promote the development and
redevelopment of land which is underutilized within the City, and in this connection created the
Redevelopment Project No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Project”) in an area (hereinafter
referred to as the “Project Area”) located in the City pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.001 to 469.047 (the “HRA Act”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act, the Authority is authorized to undertake certain
activities to prepare such real property for development and redevelopment by private enterprise;
and
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper has acquired certain property (the “Redevelopment
Property”) in the Project Area to develop on that property a mixed-use facility consisting of
senior rental housing and commercial space, further described herein (the “Minimum
Improvements”); and
WHEREAS, the Authority has established the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment
Financing District (the “TIF District”) pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to
469.1794, as amended (the “TIF Act”), made up of property in the Project Area including the
Redevelopment Property; and
WHEREAS, the Authority believes that the development of the Redevelopment Property
pursuant to and in general fulfillment of this Agreement, is in the vital and best interests of the
City, will promote the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its residents, and will be in accord
with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable State and local laws and requirements
under which the Project has been undertaken and is being assisted.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the
parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 23
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE I
Definitions
Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a different meaning clearly appears
from the context:
“Act” means Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090 to 469.1081, as amended.
“Affiliate” means with respect to any entity (a) any corporation, partnership, limited
liability company or other business entity or person controlling, controlled by or under common
control with the entity, and (b) any successor to such party by merger, acquisition, reorganization
or similar transaction involving all or substantially all of the assets of such party (or such
Affiliate). For the purpose hereof the words “controlling”, “controlled by” and “under common
control with” shall mean, with respect to any corporation, partnership, limited liability company
or other business entity, the ownership of fifty percent or more of the voting interests in such
entity or possession, directly or indirectly, of the power to direct or cause the direction of
management policies of such entity, whether through ownership of voting securities or by
contract or otherwise.
“Agreement” means this Agreement, as the same may be from time to time modified,
amended, or supplemented.
“Authority” means the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority.
“Authority Representative” means the Executive Director of the Authority, or any person
designated by the Executive Director to act as the Authority Representative for the purposes of
this Agreement.
“Authorizing Resolution” means the resolution of the Authority, substantially in the form
of attached Schedule B to be adopted by the Authority to authorize the issuance of the Note.
“Available Tax Increment” has the meaning provided in the Authorizing Resolution.
“Business Day” means any day except a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, a day on which
the City is closed for business, or a day on which banking institutions in the City are authorized
by law or executive order to close.
“Business Subsidy Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995, as
amended.
“City” means the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota.
“Certificate of Completion” means the certification provided to the Redeveloper pursuant
to Section 4.4 of this Agreement.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 24
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
“Construction Plans” means the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents on
the construction work to be performed by the Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property
which (a) shall be as detailed as the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents which
are submitted to the appropriate building officials of the City, and (b) shall include at least the
following for each building: (1) site plan; (2) foundation plan; (3) underground parking plans;
(4)floor plan for each floor; (5) cross sections of each (length and width); (6) elevations (all
sides); (7) landscape plan; and (8) such other plans or supplements to the foregoing plans as the
Authority may reasonably request to allow it to ascertain the nature and quality of the proposed
construction work.
“County” means the County of Hennepin, Minnesota.
“Development Pro Forma” means the financial pro forma for the Minimum
Improvements attached hereto as Schedule E.
“Event of Default” means an action by the Redeveloper listed in Article IX of this
Agreement.
“Holder” means the owner of a Mortgage.
“HRA Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, as amended.
“Minimum Improvements” means construction on the Redevelopment Property of a six-
story mixed use building consisting of approximately 85 units of rental housing restricted to
residents aged 55+, approximately 4,920 square feet of commercial space, and associated surface
and structured underground parking comprising 188 parking stalls, along with all associated
infrastructure, sidewalks, landscaping and designed outdoor recreation area.
“Mortgage” means any mortgage made by the Redeveloper that is secured, in whole or in
part, with the Redevelopment Property and that is a permitted encumbrance pursuant to the
provisions of Article VIII of this Agreement.
“Note” means a Tax Increment Revenue Note, substantially in the form contained in the
Authorizing Resolution, to be delivered by the Authority to the Redeveloper in accordance with
Section 3.4 hereof to reimburse the Redeveloper for Public Redevelopment Costs.
“Parcel” means any parcel of the Redevelopment Property.
“Project” means the Authority’s Redevelopment Project No. 1.
“Public Redevelopment Costs” has the meaning provided in Section 3.3(a) hereof.
“Project Area” means the geographic area within the boundaries of the Project.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 25
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
“Redeveloper” means 36th Street, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, or its
permitted successors and assigns.
“Redevelopment Plan” means the Redevelopment Plan for the Project.
“Redevelopment Property” means the real property described in Schedule A of this
Agreement.
“State” means the state of Minnesota.
“Tax Increment” means that portion of the real property taxes that is paid with respect to
the Redevelopment Property and that is remitted to the Authority as tax increment pursuant to
the Tax Increment Act.
“Tax Increment Act” or “TIF Act” means the Tax Increment Financing Act, Minnesota
Statutes Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended.
“Tax Increment District” or “TIF District” means the Elmwood Apartments Tax
Increment Financing District created by the City and the Authority and approved by the City on
May 1, 2017.
“Tax Increment Plan” or “TIF Plan” means the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the
TIF District approved by the City Council on May 1, 2017, and as it may be amended.
“Tax Official” means any County assessor, County auditor, County or State board of
equalization, the commissioner of revenue of the State, or any State or federal district court, the
tax court of the State, or the State Supreme Court.
“Termination Date” means the earlier of the following: (a) the date of receipt by the
Authority of the final payment from Hennepin County of Tax Increments from the Elmwood
Apartments Tax Increment Financing District, (b) the date when the Note has been fully paid,
defeased or terminated in accordance with its terms; or (c) the date of termination of the Note
and this Agreement by the Authority due to an Event of Default as set forth in Section 9.2 hereof.
“Transfer” has the meaning set forth in Section 8.2(a) hereof.
“Unavoidable Delays” means delays beyond the reasonable control of the party seeking
to be excused as a result thereof which are the direct result of strikes, other labor troubles,
prolonged adverse weather or acts of God, fire or other casualty to the Minimum Improvements,
litigation commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other similar judicial action,
directly results in delays, or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit (other than the
Authority or City in exercising their rights under this Agreement), including without limitation
condemnation or threat of condemnation of any portion of the Redevelopment Property, which
directly result in delays. Unavoidable Delays shall not include delays experienced by the
Redeveloper in obtaining permits or governmental approvals necessary to enable construction of
the Minimum Improvements by the dates such construction is required under Section 4.3 of this
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 26
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
Agreement, so long as the Construction Plans have been approved in accordance with
Section 4.2 hereof.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 27
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE II
Representations and Warranties
Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority. (a) The Authority is an economic
development authority duly organized and existing under the laws of the State. Under the
provisions of the Act and the HRA Act, the Authority has the power to enter into this Agreement
and carry out its obligations hereunder.
(b) The Authority will use its best efforts to facilitate development of the Minimum
Improvements, including but not limited to cooperating with the Redeveloper in obtaining
necessary administrative and land use approvals and construction financing pursuant to
Section 7.1 hereof.
(c) The Authority will issue the Note, subject to all the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
(d) The activities of the Authority are undertaken for the purpose of fostering the
redevelopment of certain real property that is occupied by substandard and obsolete buildings,
which will revitalize this portion of the Project Area, increase tax base, and increase diverse
housing opportunities.
Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper
represents and warrants that:
(a) The Redeveloper is a limited liability company, duly organized and in good
standing under the laws of the State of Minnesota, is not in violation of any provisions of its
articles of organization or bylaws, is duly qualified as a domestic limited liability company and
authorized to transact business within the State, has power to enter into this Agreement and has
duly authorized the execution, delivery, and performance of this Agreement by proper action of
its members.
(b) If the conditions precedent to construction occur, the Redeveloper will construct
the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Redevelopment
Plan and all local, state and federal laws and regulations (including, but not limited to,
environmental, zoning, building code and public health laws and regulations).
(c) The Redeveloper will use reasonable efforts to secure all permits, licenses and
approvals necessary for construction of the Minimum Improvements.
(d) The Redeveloper has received no written notice or other written communication
from any local, state or federal official that the activities of the Redeveloper or the Authority in
the Project Area may be or will be in violation of any environmental law or regulation (other
than those notices or communications of which the Authority is aware). The Redeveloper is
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 28
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
aware of no facts the existence of which would cause it to be in violation of or give any person a
valid claim under any local, state or federal environmental law, regulation or review procedure.
(e)Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the
transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by or conflicts with or results in a breach of,
the terms, conditions or provisions of any corporate restriction or any evidences of indebtedness,
agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Redeveloper is now a party or by which
it is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing.
(f)The proposed development by the Redeveloper hereunder would not occur but for
the tax increment financing assistance being provided by the Authority hereunder.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 29
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE III
Property Acquisition; Public Redevelopment Costs
Section 3.1. Status of Redevelopment Property. (a) The Redevelopment Property
consists of the Parcel described in Schedule A. As of the date of this Agreement the
Redeveloper has acquired the Redevelopment Property. The Authority has no obligation to
acquire the Redevelopment Property.
(b)On March 20, 2017, the Redeveloper obtained final City approval of a Planned
Unit Development (“PUD”) for the Redevelopment Property and has entered into a Planning
Development Contract with the City, which PUD and Planning Development Contract are
incorporated into this Agreement by reference.
Section 3.2. Environmental Conditions. (a) The Redeveloper acknowledges that the
Authority makes no representations or warranties as to the condition of the soils on the
Redevelopment Property or the fitness of the Redevelopment Property for construction of the
Minimum Improvements or any other purpose for which the Redeveloper may make use of such
property, and that the assistance provided to the Redeveloper under this Agreement neither
implies any responsibility by the Authority or the City for any contamination of the
Redevelopment Property nor imposes any obligation on such parties to participate in any cleanup
of the Redevelopment Property.
(b)Without limiting its obligations under Section 8.3 of this Agreement the
Redeveloper further agrees that it will indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Authority, the
City, and their governing body members, officers, and employees, from any claims or actions
arising out of the presence, if any, of hazardous wastes or pollutants existing on or in the
Redevelopment Property (including without limitation any asbestos in any existing building),
unless and to the extent that such hazardous wastes or pollutants are present as a result of the
actions or omissions of the indemnitees. Nothing in this section will be construed to limit or
affect any limitations on liability of the City or Authority under State or federal law, including
without limitation Minnesota Statutes Sections 466.04 and 604.02.
Section 3.3. Issuance of Note. (a) Generally. The Authority has determined that, in
order to make development of the Minimum Improvements financially feasible, it is necessary to
reimburse Redeveloper for a portion of the cost of demolition, soil correction, environmental
remediation (including asbestos abatement), site preparation, and underground structured parking
(collectively referred to as “Public Redevelopment Costs”), related to the Redevelopment
Property, subject to the terms of this Section.
(b)Terms. To reimburse the Public Redevelopment Costs incurred by Redeveloper,
the Authority shall issue and the Redeveloper shall purchase the Note in the maximum principal
amount of $950,000. The Authority shall issue and deliver the Note upon Redeveloper having:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 30
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
(i) delivered to the Authority written evidence satisfactory to the Authority
that Redeveloper has incurred Public Redevelopment Costs in an amount least equal to
the principal amount of the Note, which evidence must include copies of the paid
invoices or other comparable evidence for costs of allowable Public Redevelopment
Costs;
(ii) submitted and obtained Authority approval of financing in accordance
with Section 7.1; and
(iii) delivered to the Authority an investment letter in a form reasonably
satisfactory to the Authority.
The terms of the Note will be substantially those set forth in the form of the Note shown
in Schedule B, and the Note will be subject to all terms of the Authorizing Resolution, which is
incorporated herein by reference.
(c) Termination of right to Note. All conditions for delivery of the Note must be met
by no later than the date which is less than five (5) years after the date of certification of the TIF
District by the County and complies with the so-called five-year rule under Section 469.1763,
subd. 3(c) of the TIF Act. If the conditions for delivery of the Note are not satisfied by the date
described in this paragraph, the City has no further obligations under this Section 3.3.
(d) Assignment of Note. The Authority acknowledges that the Redeveloper may
assign the Note to a third party. The Authority consents to such an assignment, conditioned upon
receipt of an investment letter from such third party in a form reasonably acceptable to the
Authority.
(e) Qualifications. The Redeveloper understands and acknowledges that all Public
Redevelopment Costs must be paid by the Redeveloper and will be reimbursed from Available
Tax Increment pursuant to the terms of the Note. The Authority makes no representations or
warranties regarding the amount of Tax Increment, or that revenues pledged to the Note will be
sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the Note. Any estimates of Tax Increment prepared
by the Authority or its financial advisors in connection with the TIF District or this Agreement
are for the benefit of the Authority, and are not intended as representations on which the
Redeveloper may rely. Public Redevelopment Costs exceeding the principal amount of the Note
are the sole responsibility of Redeveloper.
Section 3.4. TIF Lookback. (a) Generally. The financial assistance to the Redeveloper
under this Agreement is based on certain assumptions regarding likely costs and expenses
associated with constructing the Minimum Improvements. The Authority and the Redeveloper
agree that those assumptions will be reviewed at the times described in this Section, and that the
amount of Tax Increment assistance provided under Section 3.3 will be adjusted accordingly.
(b) Definitions. For the purposes of this Section, the following terms have the following
definitions:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 31
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
“Calculation Date” means 60 days after the earliest of (i) the date of Stabilization
for the residential rental units (“Apartments”); (ii) the date of any Transfer in whole or in
part of the Apartments; or (iii) three years after the date of issuance of the Certificate of
Completion for the Apartments.
“Net Operating Income” means all net rental income from the Apartments
received in the last fiscal year prior to the Calculation Date, subject to the following
adjustments: (i) if the Apartments have not reached Stabilization as of the Calculation
Date, income will be calculated as the sum of actual rent, parking and miscellaneous
income plus assumed rent, parking and miscellaneous income for the space needed to
reach 93% lease-up at rates equal to the average rent and parking income from actual
leases and miscellaneous income as of the Calculation Date; (ii) from that total will be
deducted actual fees, operating and management expenses as outlined in the lookback pro
forma (the “Pro Forma”) attached hereto as Schedule E (if Stabilization has occurred) or
estimated fees, operating and management expenses as if the Apartments were 93%
leased (if Stabilization has not occurred).
“Stabilization” means 93% of the Apartments are leased.
(c) Lookback Calculation. On the applicable Calculation Date, the Redeveloper shall
deliver to the Authority reasonable evidence of its actual annualized cumulative internal rate of
return (the “IRR”) from the Apartments, calculated as of the applicable Calculation Date, along
with the estimated annualized cumulative IRR from the Apartments assuming a sale in the tenth
year after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Completion for the Apartments. The IRR
shall be calculated based on equity, revenues and expenses in substantially in the format of the
Pro Forma. The Redeveloper agrees to provide to the Authority any background documentation
reasonably related to the financial data, upon written request from the Authority or the
Authority’s financial consultant. The Authority may, by written request, require Redeveloper to
deliver to the Authority a written certificate of a certified public accountant regarding total
redevelopment costs and revenues, to be provided at Redeveloper’s expense.
The amount by which the IRR exceeds _____________ percent (__%) shall be referred
to as the “Excess Percentage.” The Excess Percentage, multiplied by Redeveloper’s equity in the
Apartments (as calculated for purposes of determining the IRR), is the “Participation Amount.”
If the Authority determines that there is a Participation Amount, the Authority shall deliver
written notice to the Redeveloper stating the Participation Amount and applying one hundred
percent (100%) of the Participation Amount as prepayment of the outstanding principal amount
of the Note in accordance with Section 5(b) of the Note, effective upon delivery of such notice.
Section 3.5. Business Subsidy. The Redeveloper warrants and represents that the
Redeveloper’s investment in the purchase of the Redevelopment Property equals at least seventy
percent (70%) of the County assessor’s estimated market value of the Redevelopment Property
for the 2016 assessment year (which is the most current year for which values have been
finalized by the County), calculated as follows:
Aggregate cost of acquisition of Redeveloper Parcels ................$1,000,000
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 32
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
Assessor’s estimated market value of Redevelopment
Property (pay 2017) .....................................................................$1,000,000
The acquisition cost) is 100% of the assessor’s most recent estimated fair market value of
the Redevelopment Property.
Accordingly, the parties agree and understand that the financial assistance described in
this Agreement does not constitute a business subsidy within the meaning of the Business
Subsidy Act. The Redeveloper releases and waives any claim against the Authority and its
governing body members, officers, agents, servants and employees thereof arising from
application of the Business Subsidy Act to this Agreement, including without limitation any
claim that the Authority failed to comply with the Business Subsidy Act with respect to this
Agreement.
Section 3.6. Payment of Authority Costs. The Redeveloper agrees that it will pay, within
thirty (30) days after written notice from the Authority, the reasonable costs of consultants and
attorneys retained by the Authority in connection with the creation of the TIF District and the
negotiation in preparation of this Agreement and other incidental agreements and documents
related to the development contemplated hereunder. The Authority will provide written reports
describing the costs accrued under this Section upon request from the Redeveloper, but not more
often than intervals of forty-five (45) days. Any amount deposited by the Redeveloper upon
filling its application for tax increment financing with the Authority will be credited to the
Redeveloper’s obligation under this Section. Upon termination of this Agreement in accordance
with its terms, the Redeveloper remains obligated under this section for costs incurred through
the effective date of termination.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 33
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE IV
Construction of Minimum Improvements
Section 4.1. Construction of Improvements. The Redeveloper agrees that it will
construct or cause construction of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property
in accordance with the approved Construction Plans and that it will, during any period while the
Redeveloper retains ownership of any portion of the Minimum Improvements, operate and
maintain, preserve and keep the Minimum Improvements or cause the Minimum Improvements
to be maintained, preserved and kept with the appurtenances and every part and parcel thereof, in
good repair and condition.
Section 4.2. Construction Plans. (a) Before commencing construction of the Minimum
Improvements, the Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority Construction Plans for the
Minimum Improvements. The Construction Plans shall provide for the construction of the
Minimum Improvements and shall be in conformity with this Agreement, the Redevelopment
Plan and all applicable State and local laws and regulations. The Authority will approve the
Construction Plans in writing if (i) the Construction Plans conform to all terms and conditions of
this Agreement; (ii) the Construction Plans conform to the goals and objectives of the
Redevelopment Plan; (iii) the Construction Plans conform to all applicable federal, state and
local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations; (iv) the Construction Plans are adequate to provide
for construction of the Minimum Improvements; (v) the Construction Plans do not provide for
expenditures in excess of the funds available to the Redeveloper for construction of the
Minimum Improvements; and (vi) no Event of Default has occurred. No approval by the
Authority shall relieve the Redeveloper of the obligation to comply with the terms of this
Agreement, applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and regulations, or to
construct the Minimum Improvements in accordance therewith. No approval by the Authority
shall constitute a waiver of an Event of Default. If approval of the Construction Plans is
requested by the Redeveloper in writing at the time of submission, such Construction Plans shall
be deemed approved unless rejected in writing by the Authority, in whole or in part. Such
rejections shall set forth in detail the reasons therefor based upon the criteria set forth in
(i) through (vi) above, and shall be made within twenty (20) days after the date of receipt of final
plans from the Redeveloper. If the Authority rejects any Construction Plans in whole or in part,
the Redeveloper shall submit new or corrected Construction Plans within twenty (20) days after
written notification to the Redeveloper of the rejection. The provisions of this Section relating to
approval, rejection and resubmission of corrected Construction Plans shall continue to apply
until the Construction Plans have been approved by the Authority. The Authority’s approval
shall not be unreasonably withheld. Said approval shall constitute a conclusive determination
that the Construction Plans (and the Minimum Improvements, constructed in accordance with
said plans) comply to the Authority’s satisfaction with the provisions of this Agreement relating
thereto.
The Redeveloper hereby waives any and all claims and causes of action whatsoever
resulting from the review of the Construction Plans by the Authority and/or any changes in the
Construction Plans requested by the Authority. Neither the Authority nor any employee or
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 34
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
official of the Authority shall be responsible in any manner whatsoever for any defect in the
Construction Plans or in any work done pursuant to the Construction Plans, including changes
requested by the Authority.
(b)If the Redeveloper desires to make any material change in the Construction Plans
or any component thereof after their approval by the Authority, the Redeveloper shall submit the
proposed change to the Authority for its approval. For the purpose of this section, the term
“material” means changes that increase or decrease construction costs by $500,000 or more. If
the Construction Plans, as modified by the proposed change, conform to the requirements of this
Section 4.2 of this Agreement with respect to such previously approved Construction Plans, the
Authority shall approve the proposed change and notify the Redeveloper in writing of its
approval. Such change in the Construction Plans shall, in any event, be deemed approved by the
Authority unless rejected, in whole or in part, by written notice by the Authority to the
Redeveloper, setting forth in detail the reasons therefor. Such rejection shall be made within
ten (10) days after receipt of the notice of such change. The Authority’s approval of any such
change in the Construction Plans will not be unreasonably withheld.
Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction. (a) Subject to
Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper shall commence construction of the Minimum
Improvements by October 1, 2017. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the Redeveloper shall
substantially complete the construction of the Minimum Improvements by February 1, 2019. All
work with respect to the Minimum Improvements to be constructed or provided by the
Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property shall be in conformity with the Construction Plans
as submitted by the Redeveloper and approved by the Authority.
(b)The Redeveloper agrees for itself, its successors, and assigns, and every successor in
interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, that the Redeveloper, and such
successors and assigns, shall promptly begin and diligently prosecute to completion the
development of the Redevelopment Property through the construction of the Minimum
Improvements thereon, and that such construction shall in any event be commenced and
completed within the period specified in this Section 4.3 of this Agreement. After the date of
this Agreement and until the Minimum Improvements have been fully leased, the Redeveloper
shall make reports, in such detail and at such times as may reasonably be requested by the
Authority, but no more than monthly, as to the actual progress of the Redeveloper with respect to
such construction and leasing.
(c)The Redeveloper shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy, adopted by the
City Council on February 16, 2010 and as such policy may be amended as of the date of issuance of
a building permit for the Minimum Improvements, and shall use commercially reasonable efforts to
obtain “green” certification for the Minimum Improvements. As a condition to issuance of a
Certificate of Completion for the Minimum Improvements, Redeveloper shall submit to the
Authority either (a) evidence of certification from Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(“LEED”) or similar certification or (b) in absence of actual certification, evidence in a form
satisfactory to the Authority of Redeveloper’s best efforts to obtain such certification and an
explanation of why certification was not feasible.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 35
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion. (a) Promptly after completion of the Minimum
Improvements in accordance with those provisions of the Agreement relating solely to the
obligations of the Redeveloper to construct the Minimum Improvements (including the dates for
beginning and completion thereof and the efforts regarding LEED certification described in this
Section), the Authority Representative shall deliver to the Redeveloper a Certificate in
substantially the form shown as Schedule C, in recordable form and executed by the Authority.
(b) If the Authority Representative shall refuse or fail to provide any certification in
accordance with the provisions of this Section 4.4 of this Agreement, the Authority
Representative shall, within thirty (30) days after written request by the Redeveloper, provide the
Redeveloper with a written statement, indicating in adequate detail in what respects the
Redeveloper has failed to complete the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the
provisions of the Agreement, or is otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be
necessary, in the opinion of the Authority, for the Redeveloper to take or perform in order for the
Authority to issue the Certificate of Completion.
(c) The construction of the Minimum Improvements shall be deemed to be
substantially complete upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Minimum
Improvements, and upon determination by the Authority Representative that all related site
improvements on the Redevelopment Property have been substantially completed in accordance
with approved Construction Plans, subject to landscaping and/or public art that cannot be
completed until seasonal conditions permit.
Section 4.5. Management. The Redeveloper shall at all times engage a property
management company with substantial experience in operating mixed use developments, subject to
approval by the Authority, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld. The Redeveloper
will submit evidence of such management upon request by the Authority. The Redeveloper has
notified the Authority of, and the Authority has approved, the engagement of Main Street
Companies as property management company.
Section 4.6. Records and Reports. (a) The Authority and the City, through any
authorized representatives, shall have the right at all reasonable times after reasonable written
notice to inspect, examine and copy all books and records of Redeveloper relating to the
Minimum Improvements. Such records shall be kept and maintained by Redeveloper through
the Termination Date.
(b) The Redeveloper also agrees to submit to the Authority written reports so as to allow
the Authority to remain in compliance with reporting requirements under state statutes. The
Authority will provide information to the Redeveloper regarding the required forms.
Section 4.7. Inclusionary Housing Policy. The Redeveloper agrees to comply with the City’s
Inclusionary Housing Policy, as adopted June 1, 2015, including without limitation the following:
(a) Redeveloper agrees to reserve at least 20% of the apartment units in the Minimum
Improvements (the “Affordable Dwelling Units”) for households earning 60% of Area Median
Income (“AMI”) for at least 25 years following building occupancy.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 36
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
(b)The monthly rental price for Affordable Dwelling Units shall include rent and
utility costs and shall be based on sixty percent (60%) of AMI for the metropolitan area that
includes St. Louis Park adjusted for bedroom size and calculated annually by Minnesota Housing
in connection with establishing rent limits for the Housing Tax Credit Program.
(c)The size and design of the Affordable Dwelling Units shall be consistent and
comparable with the market rate units in the Minimum Improvements and is subject to the
approval of the City. The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be distributed throughout the
Minimum Improvements.
(d)The Affordable Dwelling Units shall have a number of bedrooms in the
approximate proportion as the market rate units.
(e) Redeveloper agrees to prepare an affordable housing plan as defined in the City’s
Inclusionary Housing Policy (the “Affordable Housing Plan”). The Affordable Housing Plan shall
describe how the Redeveloper complies with each of the applicable requirements of the
Inclusionary Housing Policy. The Affordable Housing Plan shall be prepared by the Redeveloper
and must be approved by the City prior to or in conjunction with delivery of the Certificate of
Completion for the Minimum Improvements.
Section 4.8. Connectivity. The Redeveloper shall install dedicated wired connections for
the Minimum Improvements in conformity with the terms and specifications provided in the
Planning Development Contract.
Section 4.9. DORA. The Redeveloper shall construct a designed outdoor recreation
area (“DORA”) as depicted in the Site Plan attached hereto as Schedule F, for the use and
enjoyment of residents and invitees of the Minimum Improvements and members of the general
public. The DORA shall incorporate amenities to be mutually agreed upon by the Authority and
Redeveloper, and which shall include public art (the “Public Art”) and may include street
furnishings or landscaping, and/or decorative lighting elements. The parties agree and
understand that the Redeveloper shall be responsible for the cost of any maintenance and repair
of the Public Art (the “Art Maintenance”). If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Art
Maintenance after thirty (30) days written notice from the Authority of the Redeveloper’s
obligation to perform such maintenance (or such longer period of time as is reasonably necessary
if the Maintenance cannot reasonably be completed within said thirty-day period), then the
Authority or City may perform the Art Maintenance and forward evidence of the costs incurred
in such Art Maintenance to the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper shall pay the Authority the costs
of the Art Maintenance within sixty (60) days of receipt of such evidence.
Section 4.10. Special Service District; Maintenance. (a) The Redeveloper understands
that the Redevelopment Property currently lies within the City’s Special Service District No. 6
(the “Special Service District”) and is subject to existing special service charges. Upon written
request of the Authority or City, the Redeveloper will file any petition required under Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 428A in order to renew any levy of special service charges within the Special
Service District. The detailed special services and service charges to be assessed will be
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 37
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
determined by mutual agreement of the parties, provided that parties hereby agree on the
following general principles: (a) the special services will include maintenance of all
streetscaping, streelighting and sidewalks within the right of way, but will not include snow
removal; and (b) the special service charges will be allocated to properties within the special
service district based on front footage. In accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 428A,
special services will not include any service that is ordinarily provided throughout the City from
general fund revenues except to the extent an increased level of service is provided in the special
service district. Special service charges may be imposed only against that portion of the
Redevelopment Property classified for commercial use. The Redeveloper further waives all
rights to veto, appeal or otherwise object to imposition of a service charge levied in accordance
with this paragraph.
(b) By no later than December 31, 2018, the Redeveloper shall submit to the
Authority for review and approval a plan for maintenance and operation of all pedestrian and
landscaping improvements located within the Redevelopment Property (the “Maintenance
Plan”). The Maintenance Plan must address, at a minimum: snow removal from pedestrian
connections and sidewalks; maintenance and replacement of landscaping, irrigation and other
Streetscaping; snow removal and maintenance of any surface parking and parking lots; and
maintenance of the Plaza, but excluding maintenance covered by the Special Service District (the
“Maintenance”); a description of how the Maintenance costs will be assessed to tenants; and
enforcement mechanisms. Within sixty (60) days after receipt of the Maintenance Plan, the
Authority will approve or deny the Maintenance Plan in writing, which approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld, delayed or denied. If the Authority denies approval of the Maintenance
Plan, the denial shall set forth in detail the reasons therefor, and Redeveloper shall submit a new
or corrected Maintenance Plan within thirty (30) days after written notification to the
Redeveloper of the denial.
(c) If the Redeveloper fails to perform the Maintenance in accordance with the
Maintenance Plan, the Authority, at its option and following thirty (30) days written notice to the
Redeveloper (or such longer period of time as is reasonably necessary if the Maintenance cannot
reasonably be completed within said thirty-day period), may enter the Redevelopment property
and perform the Maintenance. The Redeveloper agrees to permit the City to specially assess any
costs of the Maintenance proportionately against the Minimum Improvements. The
Redeveloper, on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, acknowledges the benefit to the
lots within the Redevelopment Property of the Maintenance and consents to such assessment and
waives the right to a hearing, notice of hearing, or any appeal.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 38
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE V
Insurance
Section 5.1. Insurance. (a) The Redeveloper will provide and maintain at all times
during the process of constructing the Minimum Improvements an All Risk Broad Form Basis
Insurance Policy and, from time to time during that period, at the request of the Authority,
furnish the Authority with proof of payment of premiums on policies covering the following:
(i) Builder’s risk insurance, written on the so-called “Builder’s Risk --
Completed Value Basis,” in an amount equal to 100% of the principal amount of the
Note, and with coverage available in nonreporting form on the so-called “all risk” form
of policy. The interest of the Authority shall be protected in accordance with a clause in
form and content satisfactory to the Authority;
(ii) Comprehensive general liability insurance (including operations,
contingent liability, operations of subcontractors, completed operations, and contractual
liability insurance) together with an Owner’s Protective Liability Policy with limits
against bodily injury and property damage of not less than $1,000,000 for each
occurrence (to accomplish the above-required limits, an umbrella excess liability policy
may be used). The Authority shall be listed as an additional insured on the policy; and
(iii) Workers’ compensation insurance, with statutory coverage, provided that
the Redeveloper may be self-insured with respect to all or any part of its liability for
workers’ compensation.
(b) Upon completion of construction of the Minimum Improvements and prior to the
Termination Date, the Redeveloper shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, at its cost and
expense, and from time to time at the request of the Authority shall furnish proof of the payment
of premiums on, insurance as follows:
(i) Insurance against loss and/or damage to the Minimum Improvements
under a policy or policies covering such risks as are ordinarily insured against by similar
businesses.
(ii) Comprehensive general public liability insurance, including personal
injury liability (with employee exclusion deleted), against liability for injuries to persons
and/or property, in the minimum amount for each occurrence and for each year of
$1,000,000, and shall be endorsed to show the City and Authority as additional insureds.
(iii) Such other insurance, including workers’ compensation insurance
respecting all employees of the Redeveloper, in such amount as is customarily carried by
like organizations engaged in like activities of comparable size and liability exposure;
provided that the Redeveloper may be self-insured with respect to all or any part of its
liability for workers’ compensation.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 39
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
(c)All insurance required in Article V of this Agreement shall be taken out and
maintained in responsible insurance companies selected by the Redeveloper that are authorized
under the laws of the State to assume the risks covered thereby. Upon request, the Redeveloper
will deposit annually with the Authority policies evidencing all such insurance, or a certificate or
certificates or binders of the respective insurers stating that such insurance is in force and effect.
Unless otherwise provided in this Article V of this Agreement each policy shall contain a
provision that the insurer shall not cancel nor modify it in such a way as to reduce the coverage
provided below the amounts required herein without giving written notice to the Redeveloper
and the Authority at least thirty (30) days before the cancellation or modification becomes
effective. In lieu of separate policies, the Redeveloper may maintain a single policy, blanket or
umbrella policies, or a combination thereof, having the coverage required herein, in which event
the Redeveloper shall deposit with the Authority a certificate or certificates of the respective
insurers as to the amount of coverage in force upon the Minimum Improvements.
(d)The Redeveloper agrees to notify the Authority immediately in the case of
damage exceeding $100,000 in amount to, or destruction of, the Minimum Improvements or any
portion thereof resulting from fire or other casualty. In such event the Redeveloper will
forthwith repair, reconstruct, and restore the Minimum Improvements to substantially the same
or an improved condition or value as it existed prior to the event causing such damage and, to the
extent necessary to accomplish such repair, reconstruction, and restoration, the Redeveloper will
apply the net proceeds of any insurance relating to such damage received by the Redeveloper to
the payment or reimbursement of the costs thereof.
The Redeveloper shall complete the repair, reconstruction and restoration of the
Minimum Improvements, regardless of whether the net proceeds of insurance received by the
Redeveloper for such purposes are sufficient to pay for the same. Any net proceeds remaining
after completion of such repairs, construction, and restoration shall be the property of the
Redeveloper.
(e)In lieu of its obligation to reconstruct the Minimum Improvements as set forth in
this Section, the Redeveloper shall have the option of: (i) paying to the Authority an amount
that, in the opinion of the Authority and its fiscal consultant, is sufficient to pay or redeem the
outstanding principal and accrued interest on the Note, or (ii) so long as the Redeveloper is the
owner of the Note, waiving its right to receive subsequent payments under the Note.
(f)The Redeveloper and the Authority agree that all of the insurance provisions set
forth in this Article V shall terminate upon the termination of this Agreement.
Section 5.2. Subordination. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the rights
of the Authority with respect to the receipt and application of any insurance proceeds shall, in all
respects, be subordinate and subject to the rights of any Holder under a Mortgage allowed
pursuant to Article VII of this Agreement.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 40
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE VI
Tax Increment; Taxes
Section 6.1. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes. The Redeveloper acknowledges that the
Authority is providing substantial aid and assistance in furtherance of the development through
reimbursement of Public Redevelopment Costs. The Redeveloper understands that the Tax
Increments pledged to payment on the Note are derived from real estate taxes on the
Redevelopment Property, which taxes must be promptly and timely paid. To that end, the
Redeveloper agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, in addition to the obligation pursuant to
statute to pay real estate taxes, that it is also obligated by reason of this Agreement to pay before
delinquency all real estate taxes assessed against the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum
Improvements. The Redeveloper acknowledges that this obligation creates a contractual right on
behalf of the Authority to sue the Redeveloper or its successors and assigns to collect delinquent
real estate taxes and any penalty or interest thereon and to pay over the same as a tax payment to
the county auditor. In any such suit, the Authority shall also be entitled to recover its costs,
expenses and reasonable attorney fees.
Section 6.2. Review of Taxes. The Redeveloper agrees that prior to the Termination
Date it will not cause a reduction in the real property taxes paid in respect of the Redevelopment
Property through: (A) willful destruction of the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof; or
(B) willful refusal to reconstruct damaged or destroyed property pursuant to Section 5.1 of this
Agreement, except as provided in Section 5.1(e). The Redeveloper also agrees that it will not,
prior to the Termination Date, seek exemption from property tax for the Redevelopment Property
or any portion thereof or transfer or permit the transfer of the Redevelopment Property to any
entity that is exempt from real property taxes and state law (other than any portion thereof
dedicated or conveyed to the City in accordance with platting of the Redevelopment Property),
or apply for a deferral of property tax on the Redevelopment Property pursuant to any law.
Section 6.3. Assessment Agreement. (a) Upon execution of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper shall, with the Authority, execute an Assessment Agreement pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.177, subd. 8, specifying an assessor's minimum Market Value for the
Redevelopment Property and Minimum Improvements constructed thereon. The amount of the
minimum Market Value shall be $8,100,000 as of January 2, 2018, and $16,200,000 as of January
2, 2019 and each January 2 thereafter, notwithstanding the status of construction by such dates.
(b) The Assessment Agreement shall be substantially in the form attached hereto as
Schedule G. Nothing in the Assessment Agreement shall limit the discretion of the assessor to
assign a market value to the property in excess of such assessor's minimum Market Value. The
Assessment Agreement shall remain in force for the period specified in the Assessment Agreement.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 41
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE VII
Other Financing
Section 7.1. Generally. Before issuance of the Note, the Redeveloper shall submit to the
Authority or provide access thereto for review by Authority staff, consultants and agents,
evidence reasonably satisfactory to the Authority that Redeveloper has available funds, or
commitments to obtain funds, whether in the nature of mortgage financing, equity, grants, loans,
or other sources sufficient for paying the cost of the developing the Minimum Improvements,
provided that any lender or grantor commitments shall be subject only to such conditions as are
normal and customary in the commercial lending industry.
Section 7.2. Authority’s Option to Cure Default on Mortgage. In the event that any
portion of the Redeveloper’s funds is provided through mortgage financing, and there occurs a
default under any Mortgage authorized pursuant to Article VII of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper shall cause the Authority to receive copies of any notice of default received by the
Redeveloper from the holder of such Mortgage. Thereafter, the Authority shall have the right,
but not the obligation, to cure any such default on behalf of the Redeveloper within such cure
periods as are available to the Redeveloper under the Mortgage documents.
Section 7.3. Modification; Subordination. The Authority agrees to subordinate its rights
under this Agreement to the Holder of any Mortgage securing construction or permanent
financing, in accordance with the terms of a subordination agreement substantially in the form
attached as Schedule D, or such other form as the Authority approves.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 42
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE VIII
Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer; Indemnification
Section 8.1. Representation as to Development. The Redeveloper represents and agrees
that its purchase of the Redevelopment Property, and its other undertakings pursuant to the
Agreement, are, and will be used, for the purpose of development of the Redevelopment
Property and not for speculation in land holding.
Section 8.2. Prohibition Against Redeveloper’s Transfer of Property and Assignment of
Agreement. The Redeveloper represents and agrees that prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Completion for all of the Minimum Improvements:
(a) Except only by way of security for, and only for, the purpose of obtaining
financing necessary to enable the Redeveloper or any successor in interest to the Redevelopment
Property, or any part thereof, to perform its obligations with respect to undertaking the
redevelopment contemplated under this Agreement, and any other purpose authorized by this
Agreement, the Redeveloper has not made or created and will not make or create or suffer to be
made or created any total or partial sale, assignment, conveyance, or lease, or any trust or power,
or transfer in any other mode or form of or with respect to this Agreement or the Redevelopment
Property or any part thereof or any interest therein, or any contract or agreement to do any of the
same, to any person or entity whether or not related in any way to the Redeveloper (collectively,
a “Transfer”), without the prior written approval of the Authority (whose approval will not be
unreasonably withheld, subject to the standards described in paragraph (b) of this Section) unless
the Redeveloper remains liable and bound by this Redevelopment Agreement in which event the
Authority’s approval is not required. Any such Transfer shall be subject to the provisions of this
Agreement. For the purposes of this Agreement, the term Transfer does not include
(i) acquisition of a controlling interest in Redeveloper by another entity or merger of
Redeveloper with another entity; or (ii) any sale, conveyance, or transfer in any form to any
Affiliate.
(b) In the event the Redeveloper, upon Transfer of the Redevelopment Property or
any portion thereof either before or after issuance of the final Certificate of Completion, seeks to
be released from its obligations under this Redevelopment Agreement as to the portions of the
Redevelopment Property that is transferred, the Authority shall be entitled to require, except as
otherwise provided in the Agreement, as conditions to any such release that:
(i) Any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial
responsibility, in the reasonable judgment of the Authority, necessary and adequate to
fulfill the obligations undertaken in this Agreement by the Redeveloper as to the portion
of the Redevelopment Property to be transferred.
(ii) Any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the
Authority and in form recordable in the public land records of Hennepin County,
Minnesota, shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 43
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
the Authority, have expressly assumed all of the obligations of the Redeveloper under
this Agreement as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property to be transferred and
agreed to be subject to all the conditions and restrictions to which the Redeveloper is
subject as to such portion; provided, however, that the fact that any transferee of, or any
other successor in interest whatsoever to, the Redevelopment Property, or any part
thereof, shall not, for whatever reason, have assumed such obligations or so agreed, and
shall not (unless and only to the extent otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement
or agreed to in writing by the Authority) deprive the Authority of any rights or remedies
or controls with respect to the Redevelopment Property, the Minimum Improvements or
any part thereof or the construction of the Minimum Improvements; it being the intent of
the parties as expressed in this Agreement that (to the fullest extent permitted at law and
in equity and excepting only in the manner and to the extent specifically provided
otherwise in this Agreement) no transfer of, or change with respect to, ownership in the
Redevelopment Property or any part thereof, or any interest therein, however
consummated or occurring, and whether voluntary or involuntary, shall operate, legally,
or practically, to deprive or limit the Authority of or with respect to any rights or
remedies on controls provided in or resulting from this Agreement with respect to the
Redevelopment Property that the Authority would have had, had there been no such
transfer or change. In the absence of specific written agreement by the Authority to the
contrary, no such transfer or approval by the Authority thereof shall be deemed to relieve
the Redeveloper, or any other party bound in any way by this Agreement or otherwise
with respect to the Redevelopment Property, from any of its obligations with respect
thereto.
(iii) Any and all instruments and other legal documents involved in effecting
the transfer of any interest in this Agreement or the Redevelopment Property governed by
this Article VIII, shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the Authority.
(iv) At the written request of Redeveloper, the Authority shall execute and
deliver to Redeveloper and the proposed transferee an estoppel certificate containing
commercially customary and reasonable certifications.
In the event the foregoing conditions are satisfied then the Redeveloper shall be released from its
obligation under this Agreement, as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property that is
transferred, assigned, or otherwise conveyed.
Section 8.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants. (a) Except for any willful
misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or negligence of the Indemnified Parties
as hereinafter defined, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified Parties of their
obligations under this Agreement, the Redeveloper releases from and covenants and agrees that
the Authority, the City, and the governing body members, officers, agents, servants, and
employees thereof (the “Indemnified Parties”) shall not be liable for and agrees to indemnify and
hold harmless the Indemnified Parties against any loss or damage to property or any injury to or
death of any person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Redevelopment
Property or the Minimum Improvements.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 44
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
(b)Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or
negligence of the Indemnified Parties, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified
Parties of their obligations under this Agreement (including without limitation any failure by the
Authority to perform any procedure required under law in connection with establishment of the
TIF District), the Redeveloper agrees to protect and defend the Indemnified Parties, now and
forever, and further agrees to hold the aforesaid harmless from any claim, demand, suit, action,
or other proceeding whatsoever by any person or entity whatsoever arising or purportedly arising
from this Agreement, or the transactions contemplated hereby or the acquisition, construction,
installation, ownership, maintenance, and operation of the Redevelopment Property.
(c)Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or
negligence of the Indemnified Parties as hereinafter defined, and except for any breach by any of
the Indemnified Parties of their obligations under this Agreement, the Indemnified Parties shall
not be liable for any damage or injury to the persons or property of the Redeveloper or its
officers, agents, servants, or employees or any other person who may be about the
Redevelopment Property or Minimum Improvements.
(d)All covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the Authority
contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements, and
obligations of such entity and not of any governing body member, officer, agent, servant, or
employee of such entities in the individual capacity thereof.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 45
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE IX
Events of Default
Section 9.1. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be “Events of Default”
under this Agreement and the term “Event of Default” shall mean, whenever it is used in this
Agreement, any one or more of the following events, after the non-defaulting party provides
thirty (30) days written notice to the defaulting party of the event, but only if the event has not
been cured within said thirty (30) days or, if the event is by its nature incurable within thirty (30)
days, the defaulting party does not, within such thirty-day period, provide assurances reasonably
satisfactory to the party providing notice of default that the event will be cured and will be cured
as soon as reasonably possible:
(a)Failure by the Redeveloper or Authority to observe or perform any covenant,
condition, obligation, or agreement on its part to be observed or performed under this
Agreement.
(b)If, before issuance of the certificate of completion for all the Minimum
Improvements, the Redeveloper shall
(i)file any petition in bankruptcy or for any reorganization, arrangement,
composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief under the United
States Bankruptcy Act or under any similar federal or State law, which action is not
dismissed within sixty (60) days after filing; or
(ii)make an assignment for benefit of its creditors; or
(iii)admit in writing its inability to pay its debts generally as they become due;
or
(iv)be adjudicated a bankrupt or insolvent.
Section 9.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred to in
Section 9.1 of this Agreement occurs, the non-defaulting party may:
(a)Suspend its performance under this Agreement until it receives assurances that the
defaulting party will cure its default and continue its performance under the Agreement.
(b)Upon a default by the Redeveloper under this Agreement, the Authority may
terminate the Note and this Agreement.
(c)Take whatever action, including legal, equitable, or administrative action, which
may appear necessary or desirable to collect any payments due under this Agreement, or to
enforce performance and observance of any obligation, agreement, or covenant under this
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 46
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
Agreement, provided that nothing contained herein shall give the Authority the right to seek
specific performance by Redeveloper of the construction of the Minimum Improvements.
Section 9.3. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to any
party is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every
such remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this
Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. No delay or omission to
exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such right or power or
shall be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from
time to time and as often as may be deemed expedient. To entitle the Authority to exercise any
remedy reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice, other than such notice as may be
required in this Article IX.
Section 9.4. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any agreement
contained in this Agreement should be breached by either party and thereafter waived by the
other party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be
deemed to waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder.
Section 9.5. Attorney Fees. Whenever any Event of Default occurs and if the non-
defaulting party employs attorneys or incurs other expenses for the collection of payments due or
to become due or for the enforcement of performance or observance of any obligation or
agreement on the part of the defaulting party under this Agreement, the defaulting party shall,
within ten (10) days of written demand by the non-defaulting party, pay to the non-defaulting
party the reasonable fees of such attorneys and such other expenses so incurred by the non-
defaulting party.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 47
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ARTICLE X
Additional Provisions
Section 10.1. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable. The
Authority and the Redeveloper, to the best of their respective knowledge, represent and agree
that no member, official, or employee of the Authority shall have any personal interest, direct or
indirect, in the Agreement, nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any
decision relating to the Agreement that affects his personal interests or the interests of any
corporation, partnership, or association in which he, directly or indirectly, is interested. No
member, official, or employee of the City or Authority shall be personally liable to the
Redeveloper, or any successor in interest, in the event of any default or breach by the Authority
or for any amount that may become due to the Redeveloper or successor or on any obligations
under the terms of the Agreement.
Section 10.2. Equal Employment Opportunity. The Redeveloper, for itself and its
successors and assigns, agrees that during the construction of the Minimum Improvements
provided for in the Agreement it will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local equal
employment and non-discrimination laws and regulations.
Section 10.3. Restrictions on Use. The Redeveloper agrees that until the Termination
Date, the Redeveloper, and such successors and assigns, shall devote the Redevelopment
Property to the operation of the Minimum Improvements as described in Section 4.1 hereof, and
shall not discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex or national origin in the sale, lease,
or rental or in the use or occupancy of the Redevelopment Property or any improvements erected
or to be erected thereon, or any part thereof. Redeveloper agrees that no portion of the
Redevelopment Property will be used for a sexually-oriented business, a pawnshop, a check-
cashing business, a tattoo business, a gun business, or a payday loan agency.
Section 10.4. Provisions Not Merged With Deed. None of the provisions of this
Agreement are intended to or shall be merged by reason of any deed transferring any interest in
the Redevelopment Property and any such deed shall not be deemed to affect or impair the
provisions and covenants of this Agreement.
Section 10.5. Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, Articles, and
Sections of the Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be
disregarded in construing or interpreting any of its provisions.
Section 10.6. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this
Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement by either party to
the other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, to the following addresses (or
to such other addresses as either party may notify the other):
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 48
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
To Redeveloper: 36th Street, LLC
Attn: Manager
5605 W. 36th Street, #202
St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55436
To Authority: St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
Attn: Executive Director
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416-2518
Section 10.7. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of
counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
Section 10.8. Recording. The Authority may record this Agreement and any
amendments thereto with the Hennepin County recorder. The Redeveloper shall pay all costs for
recording. The Redeveloper’s obligations under this Agreement are covenants running with the
land for the term of this Agreement, enforceable by the Authority against the Redeveloper, its
successor and assigns, and every successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part
thereof or any interest therein.
Section 10.9 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by written agreement
approved by the Authority and the Redeveloper.
Section 10.10. Authority Approvals. Unless otherwise specified, any approval required
by the Authority under this Agreement may be given by the Authority Representative, except
that final approval of issuance of the Note shall be made by the Authority’s board of
commissioners.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 49
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority and Redeveloper have caused this Agreement to be
duly executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date first above written.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________,
2017 by Anne Mavity and Tom Harmening, the President and Executive Director of the
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 50
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
36TH STREET, LLC
By
Donald Kasbohm
Its Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF ________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of __________,
2017, by Donald Kasbohm, the Manager of 36th Street, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability
company, on behalf of the company.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 51
A-1
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
SCHEDULE A
REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
Lot 1, Block 1, Elmwood Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 52
B-1
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
SCHEDULE B
AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. ______
RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF, AND
PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS, COVENANTS AND
DIRECTIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF ITS TAX
INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE, SERIES 20__ TO 36TH
STREET, LLC.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners (“Board”) of the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority, St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “Authority”) as follows:
Section 1. Authorization; Award of Sale.
1.01. Authorization. The Authority and the City of St. Louis Park have approved the
establishment of its Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District (the “TIF District”)
within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (“Project”), and have adopted a tax increment financing
plan for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.178, the Authority is authorized to issue and
sell its bonds for the purpose of financing a portion of the public development costs of the
Project. Such bonds are payable from all or any portion of revenues derived from the TIF
District and pledged to the payment of the bonds. The Authority hereby finds and determines that
it is in the best interests of the Authority that it issue and sell its Tax Increment Revenue Note,
Series 20__ (the “Note”) for the purpose of financing certain public redevelopment costs of the
Project.
1.02. Approval of Agreement; Issuance, Sale, and Terms of the Note. (a) The
Contract for Private Redevelopment between the Authority and 36th Street, LLC (the “Owner”),
as presented to the Board, is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not
alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President and Executive Director,
provided that execution of the Agreement by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of
approval. Authority staff and officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to perform the
Authority’s obligations under the Agreement as a whole, including without limitation execution of
any documents to which the Authority is a party referenced in or attached to the Agreement, all as
described in the Agreement.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 53
B-2
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
(b) The Authority hereby authorizes the President and Executive Director to issue the
Note in accordance with the Agreement. All capitalized terms in this resolution have the
meaning provided in the Agreement unless the context requires otherwise.
(c) The Note shall be issued in the maximum aggregate principal amount of $950,000 to
36th Street, LLC (the “Owner”) in consideration of certain eligible costs incurred by the Owner
under the Agreement, shall be dated the date of delivery thereof, and shall bear interest at the
lesser of 5.0% or the actual rate of financing obtained by the Owner, from the date of issue per
annum to the earlier of maturity or prepayment. The Note will be issued in the principal amount
of Public Redevelopment Costs submitted and approved in accordance with Section 3.3 of the
Agreement. The Note is secured by Available Tax Increment, as further described in the form of
the Note herein. The Authority hereby delegates to the Executive Director the determination of
the date on which the Note is to be delivered, in accordance with the Agreement.
Section 2. Form of Note. The Note shall be in substantially the following form, with
the blanks to be properly filled in and the principal and interest rate amounts adjusted as of the
date of issue:
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 54
B-3
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
UNITED STATE OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
No. R-1 $_____________
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE
SERIES 20__
Date
Rate of Original Issue
__% ___________, 20__
The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) for value
received, certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to 36th Street, LLC or registered
assigns (the “Owner”), the principal sum of $__________ and to pay interest thereon at the rate
of ______ percent (__%) per annum, solely from the sources and to the extent set forth herein.
Capitalized terms shall have the meanings provided in the Contract for Private Redevelopment
between the Authority and the Owner, dated as of ____________, 2017 (the “Agreement”),
unless the context requires otherwise.
1.Payments. Principal and interest (“Payments”) shall be paid on August 1, 20__
and each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including February 1, 20__ (“Payment
Dates”) in the amounts and from the sources set forth in Section 3 herein. Payments shall be
applied first to accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal. Interest accruing from the date of
issue through and including _________ 1, 20__ shall be compounded semiannually on
February 1 and August 1 of each year and added to principal.
Payments are payable by mail to the address of the Owner or such other address as the
Owner may designate upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Authority. Payments on this
Note are payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, on the Payment
Date, is legal tender for the payment of public and private debts.
2.Interest. Interest at the rate stated herein shall accrue on the unpaid principal,
commencing on the date of original issue. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a year of
360 days and charged for actual days principal is unpaid.
3.Available Tax Increment. (a) Payments on this Note are payable on each
Payment Date solely from and in the amount of Available Tax Increment, which shall mean, on
each Payment Date, Ninety-five percent (95%) of the Tax Increment attributable to the Minimum
Improvements and Redevelopment Property that is paid to the Authority by Hennepin County in
the six months preceding the Payment Date.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 55
B-4
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
(b) The Authority shall have no obligation to pay principal of and interest on this
Note on each Payment Date from any source other than Available Tax Increment and the failure
of the Authority to pay the entire amount of principal or interest on this Note on any Payment
Date shall not constitute a default hereunder as long as the Authority pays principal and interest
hereon to the extent of Available Tax Increment. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay
any unpaid balance of principal or accrued interest that may remain after the final Payment on
February 1, 20__.
4. Default. If on any Payment Date there has occurred and is continuing any Event
of Default under the Agreement, the Authority may withhold from payments hereunder under all
Available Tax Increment. If the Event of Default is thereafter cured in accordance with the
Agreement, the Available Tax Increment withheld under this Section shall be deferred and paid,
without interest thereon, within thirty (30) days after the Event of Default is cured. If the Event
of Default is not cured in a timely manner, the Authority may terminate this Note by written
notice to the Owner in accordance with the Agreement.
5. Prepayment. (a) The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this
Note is prepayable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty.
No partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular Payment otherwise
required to be made under this Note.
(b) Upon receipt by Redeveloper of the Authority’s written statement of the
Participation Amount as described in Section 3.4 of the Agreement, fifty percent (50%) of such
Participation Amount will be deemed to constitute, and will be applied to, prepayment of the
principal amount of this Note. Such deemed prepayment is effective as of the date of delivery of
such statement to the Owner, and will be recorded by the Registrar in its records for the Note.
Upon request of the Owner, the Authority will deliver to the Owner a statement of the
outstanding principal balance of the Note after application of the deemed prepayment under this
paragraph.
6. Nature of Obligation. This Note is one of an issue in the total principal amount of
$_________, issued to aid in financing certain public redevelopment costs and administrative
costs of a Project undertaken by the Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001
through 469.047, and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the “Resolution”) duly
adopted by the Authority on ________, 2017, and pursuant to and in full conformity with the
Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174
to 469.1794, as amended. This Note is a limited obligation of the Authority which is payable
solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under the Resolution. This
Note and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation of the State of
Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the Authority.
Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to pay the
principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto except out of Available Tax
Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or
any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this
Note or other costs incident hereto.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 56
B-5
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
7.Registration and Transfer. This Note is issuable only as a fully registered note
without coupons. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth
therein, this Note is transferable upon the books of the Authority kept for that purpose at the
principal office of the City Finance Director, by the Owner hereof in person or by such Owner’s
attorney duly authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Note together with a written
instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed by the Owner. Upon such
transfer or exchange and the payment by the Owner of any tax, fee, or governmental charge
required to be paid by the Authority with respect to such transfer or exchange, there will be
issued in the name of the transferee a new Note of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing
interest at the same rate and maturing on the same dates.
Except as otherwise provided in Section 3.3(d) of the Agreement, this Note shall not be
transferred to any person or entity, unless the Authority has provided written consent to such
transfer.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things
required by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen,
and to be performed in order to make this Note a valid and binding limited obligation of the
Authority according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been
performed in due form, time and manner as so required.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority have caused this Note to be executed with the manual signatures of its
President and Executive Director, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Executive Director President
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 57
B-6
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
REGISTRATION PROVISIONS
The ownership of the unpaid balance of the within Note is registered in the bond register
of the City Finance Director, in the name of the person last listed below.
Date of
Registration Registered Owner
Signature of
City Finance Director
_________, 20__ 36th Street, LLC
Federal Tax I.D No_____________
Section 3. Terms, Execution and Delivery.
3.01. Denomination, Payment. The Note shall be issued as a single typewritten note
numbered R-1.
The Note shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Principal of and interest on the
Note shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein.
3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Principal of and interest on the Note shall be
payable by mail to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of
the month preceding the Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day.
3.03. Registration. The Authority hereby appoints the City Finance Director to perform
the functions of registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect of
registration and the rights and duties of the Authority and the Registrar with respect thereto shall
be as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its office a bond register in which the
Registrar shall provide for the registration of ownership of the Note and the registration of
transfers and exchanges of the Note.
(b)Transfer of Note. Upon surrender for transfer of the Note duly endorsed by the
registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form reasonably
satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly
authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the
name of the designated transferee or transferees, a new Note of a like aggregate principal amount
and maturity, as requested by the transferor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Note shall not
be transferred to any person other than an affiliate, or other related entity, of the Owner unless
the Authority has been provided with an opinion of counsel or a certificate of the transferor, in a
form satisfactory to the Authority, that such transfer is exempt from registration and prospectus
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 58
B-7
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
delivery requirements of federal and applicable state securities laws. The Registrar may close
the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each
Payment Date and until such Payment Date.
(c)Cancellation. The Note surrendered upon any transfer shall be promptly
cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the Authority.
(d)Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When the Note is presented to the Registrar
for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement
on such Note or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur
no liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems
improper or unauthorized.
(e) Persons Deemed Owners. The Authority and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name the Note is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the
Note, whether the Note shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on
account of, the principal of and interest on such Note and for all other purposes, and all such
payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner’s order shall be valid and
effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the Authority upon such Note to the extent of the
sum or sums so paid.
(f)Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of the Note, the
Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for
any tax, fee, or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or
exchange.
(g)Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Note. In case any Note shall become
mutilated or be lost, stolen, or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Note of like amount,
Termination Dates and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of such
mutilated Note or in lieu of and in substitution for such Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon the
payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in
the case the Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory
to it that such Note was lost, stolen, or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon
furnishing to the Registrar of an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance, and amount
satisfactory to it, in which both the Authority and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. The
Note so surrendered to the Registrar shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation
shall be given to the Authority. If the mutilated, lost, stolen, or destroyed Note has already
matured or been called for redemption in accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to
issue a new Note prior to payment.
3.04. Preparation and Delivery. The Note shall be prepared under the direction of the
Executive Director and shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the signatures of its
President and Executive Director. In case any officer whose signature shall appear on the Note
shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of the Note, such signature shall nevertheless be
valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in office until
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 59
B-8
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
delivery. When the Note has been so executed, it shall be delivered by the Executive Director to
the Owner thereof in accordance with the Agreement.
Section 4. Security Provisions.
4.01. Pledge. The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Note all Available Tax Increment as defined in the Note.
Available Tax Increment shall be applied to payment of the principal of and interest on the Note
in accordance with the terms of the form of Note set forth in Section 2 of this resolution.
4.02. Bond Fund. Until the date the Note is no longer outstanding and no principal
thereof or interest thereon (to the extent required to be paid pursuant to this resolution) remains
unpaid, the Authority shall maintain a separate and special “Bond Fund” to be used for no
purpose other than the payment of the principal of and interest on the Note. The Authority
irrevocably agrees to appropriate to the Bond Fund on or before each Payment Date the
Available Tax Increment in an amount equal to the Payment then due, or the actual Available
Tax Increment, whichever is less. Any Available Tax Increment remaining in the Bond Fund
shall be transferred to the Authority’s account for the TIF District upon the termination of the
Note in accordance with its terms.
4.03. Additional Obligations. The Authority will issue no other obligations secured in
whole or in part by Available Tax Increment unless such pledge is on a subordinate basis to the
pledge on the Note.
Section 5. Certification of Proceedings.
5.01. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized
and directed to prepare and furnish to the Owner of the Note certified copies of all proceedings
and records of the Authority, and such other affidavits, certificates, and information as may be
required to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of the Note as the same
appear from the books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to
them, and all such certified copies, certificates, and affidavits, including any heretofore
furnished, shall be deemed representations of the Authority as to the facts recited therein.
Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective upon approval.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally blank.)
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 60
B-9
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority __________, 20__
Executive Director President
Attest
Secretary
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 61
C-1
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
SCHEDULE C
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”) and
36th Street, LLC (the “Redeveloper”) entered into a certain Contract for Private Redevelopment
dated _____________, 2017 (the “Contract”); and
WHEREAS, the Contract contains certain covenants and restrictions set forth in Articles
III and IV thereof related to completing certain Minimum Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper has performed said covenants and conditions insofar as it is
able in a manner deemed sufficient by the Authority to permit the execution and recording of this
certification;
NOW, THEREFORE, this is to certify that all construction and other physical
improvements related to the Minimum Improvements specified to be done and made by the
Redeveloper have been completed and the agreements and covenants in Articles III and IV of the
Contract have been performed by the Redeveloper, and this Certificate is intended to be a
conclusive determination of the satisfactory termination of the covenants and conditions of
Articles III and IV of the Contract related to completion of the Minimum Improvements, but any
other covenants in the Contract shall remain in full force and effect.
Dated: _______________, 20__. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
By
Authority Representative
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 62
C-2
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________,
20__ by ______________________, the __________________ of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
This document drafted by:
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 63
D-1
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
SCHEDULE D
Form of Subordination Agreement
THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is made as of this _____
day of __________, 20__, between _______________ (the “Lender”), whose address is at
_________________________, and the ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic (“Authority”), whose address is 5005
Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota, 55416.
RECITALS
A.36th Street, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the “Redeveloper”), is
the owner of certain real property situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota and legally described
in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the “Property”).
B.Lender has made a mortgage loan to Redeveloper in the original principal amount
of $__________ (the “Loan”). The Loan is the evidenced and secured by the following
documents:
(i)a certain promissory note (the “Note”) made by Redeveloper dated
__________, 20__, in the amount of $___________; and
(ii)a certain mortgage, security agreement and fixture financing statement
(the “Mortgage”) made by Redeveloper dated __________, 20__, filed __________,
200_, as Hennepin County Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. __________
encumbering the Property; and
(iii)a certain assignment of leases and rents (the “Assignment”) made by
Redeveloper dated __________, 20__, filed __________, 200_, as Hennepin County
Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. __________ encumbering the Property.
The Note, the Mortgage, the Assignment, and all other documents and instruments
evidencing, securing and executed in connection with the Loan, are hereinafter collectively
referred to as the “Loan Documents.”
C.Authority is the owner and holder of certain rights under a certain Contract for
Private Redevelopment (the “Contract”) by and between Redeveloper and Authority dated
____________________, 2017.
D.Redeveloper is entitled under the Contract to acquire a certain Tax Increment Tax
Revenue Note, Series 20__ in the original principal amount of $____________ (the “TIF Note”).
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and as an inducement to Lender
to make the Loan, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto represent, warrant and agree as follows:
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 64
D-2
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
1. Consent. The Authority acknowledges that the Lender is making the Loan to the
Redeveloper and consents to the same. The Authority also consents to and approves the
collateral assignment of the Contract and TIF Note (when and if issued) by the Redeveloper to
the Lender as collateral for the Loan; provided, however, that this consent shall not deprive the
Authority of or otherwise limit any of the Authority’s rights or remedies under the Contract and
TIF Note and shall not relieve the Redeveloper of any of its obligations under the Contract and
TIF Note; provided further, however, the limitations to the Authority’s consent contained in this
Paragraph 1 are subject to the provisions of Paragraph 2 below.
2. Subordination. The Authority hereby agrees that the rights of the Authority with
respect to [_____________________] under the Contract are and shall remain subordinate and
subject to liens, rights and security interests created by the Loan Documents and to any and all
amendments, modifications, extensions, replacements or renewals of the Loan Documents;
provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed as subordinating (a) the requirement
contained in the Contract the Property be used in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.3
of the Contract, (b) the Authority’s rights under the TIF Note to suspend payments in accordance
with the TIF Note, and (c) the Authority’s rights under the Assessment Agreement referenced in
Section 6.3 of the Contract.
3.Notice to Authority. Lender agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to
notify Authority of the occurrence of any Event of Default given to Redeveloper under the Loan
Documents, in accordance with Section 7.2 of the Contract. The Lender shall not be bound by
the other requirements in Section 7.2 of the Contract.
4.Statutory Exception. Nothing in this Agreement shall alter, remove or affect
Lender’s obligation under Minnesota Statutes, §469.029 to use the Property in conformity to
Section 10.3 of the Contract.
5.No Assumption. The Authority acknowledges that the Lender is not a party to the
Contract and by executing this Agreement does not become a party to the Contract, and
specifically does not assume and shall not be bound by any obligations of the Redeveloper to the
Authority under the Contract, and that the Lender shall incur no obligations whatsoever to the
Authority except as expressly provided herein.
6.Notice from Authority. So long as the Contract remains in effect, the Authority
agrees to give to the Lender copies of notices of any Event of Default given to Redeveloper
under the Contract.
7.Governing Law. This Agreement is made in and shall be construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
8.Successors. This Agreement and each and every covenant, agreement and other
provision hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their
respective successors and assigns, including any person who acquires title to the Property
through the Lender of a foreclosure of the Mortgage.
9.Severability. The unenforceability or invalidity of any provision hereof shall not
render any other provision or provisions herein contained unenforceable or invalid.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 65
D-3
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
10.Notice. Any notices and other communications permitted or required by the
provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly given
or served by depositing the same with the United States Postal Service, or any official successor
thereto, designated as registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, bearing adequate
postage, or delivery by reputable private carrier and addresses as set forth above.
11.Transfer of Title to Lender. The Authority agrees that in the event the Lender, a
transferee of Lender, or a purchaser at foreclosure sale, acquires title to the Property pursuant to
a foreclosure, or a deed in lieu thereof, the Lender, transferee, or purchaser shall not be bound by
the terms and conditions of the Contract except as expressly herein provided. Further the
Authority agrees that in the event the Lender, a transferee of Lender, or a purchaser at
foreclosure sale acquires title to the Property pursuant to a foreclosure sale or a deed in lieu
thereof, then the Lender, transferee, or purchaser shall be entitled to all rights conferred upon the
Redeveloper under the Contract, provided that no condition of default exists and remains
uncured beyond applicable cure periods in the obligations of the Redeveloper under the Contract.
12. Estoppel. The Authority hereby represents and warrants to Lender, for the
purpose of inducing Lender to make advances to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents that:
(a)No default or event of default by Redeveloper exists under the terms of the
Contract on the date hereof;
(b)The Contract has not been amended or modified in any respect, nor has any
material provision thereof been waived by either the Authority or the
Redeveloper, and the Contract is in full force and effect;
(c) Such other reasonable certifications as the Lender may request.
13. Amendments. The Authority hereby represents and warrants to Lender for the
purpose of inducing Lender to make advances to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents that
Authority will not agree to any amendment or modification to the or any TIF Note issued under
the Contract that materially affects the collection of Available Tax Increment (as defined in the
Contract) in any way affects the Property without the Lender’s written consent.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 66
D-4
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed and delivered as of the day
and year first written above.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of
___________, 20__, by _______________________ and ______________________ the
President and Executive Director, respectively, of the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority, a public body corporate and politic, on behalf of such public body.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 67
D-5
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
[LENDER]
By:
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of
___________, 20__, by _______________________ and ______________________ the
__________________, of __________________, a ________________, on behalf of
such____________________.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 68
D-6
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
Exhibit A of Subordination Agreement
PROPERTY
Lot 1, Block 1, Elmwood Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 69
E-1
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
SCHEDULE E
PRO FORMA
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 70
F-1
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
SCHEDULE F
SITE PLAN
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 71
G-1
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
SCHEDULE G
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
______________________________________________________________________________
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
and
ASSESSOR’S CERTIFICATION
By and Between
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
and
36TH STREET, LLC
This Document was drafted by:
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, Chartered
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 72
G-2
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the ___________, 20__ by and between the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body, corporate and politic (the
“Authority”) and 36th Street, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the “Redeveloper”).
WITNESSETH, that
WHEREAS, on or before the date hereof the Authority and Redeveloper have entered
into a Contract for Private Redevelopment dated _________________, 2017 (the
“Redevelopment Contract”), pursuant to which the Authority is to facilitate development of
certain property in the Authority of St. Louis Park hereinafter referred to as the “Property” and
legally described in Exhibit A hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Redevelopment Contract the Redeveloper is obligated to
construct certain improvements (the “Minimum Improvements”) upon the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and Redeveloper desire to establish a minimum market value
for the Property and the Minimum Improvements to be constructed thereon, pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 8; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and the City Assessor (the “Assessor”) have reviewed the
preliminary plans and specifications for the improvements and have inspected such
improvements;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this Agreement, in consideration of the promises,
covenants and agreements made by each to the other, do hereby agree as follows:
1.The minimum market value which shall be assessed for ad valorem tax purposes
for the Property described in Exhibit A, together with the Minimum Improvements constructed
thereon, shall be $8,100,000 as of January 2, 2018, and $16,200,000 as of January 2, 2019
notwithstanding the progress of construction by such date, and as of each January 2 thereafter
until termination of this Agreement under Section 2 hereof.
2.The minimum market value herein established shall be of no further force and
effect and this Agreement shall terminate on the earlier of the following: (a) the date of receipt
by the Authority of the final payment from Hennepin County of Tax Increments from the
Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District, or (b) the date when the Note, as
defined in the Redevelopment Contract, has been fully paid, defeased or terminated in
accordance with its terms.
The event referred to in Section 2(b) of this Agreement shall be evidenced by a certificate
or affidavit executed by the Authority.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 73
G-3
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
3.This Agreement shall be promptly recorded by the Authority. The Redeveloper
shall pay all costs of recording.
4.Neither the preambles nor provisions of this Agreement are intended to, nor shall
they be construed as, modifying the terms of the Redevelopment Contract between the Authority
and the Redeveloper.
5.This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors
and assigns of the parties.
6.Each of the parties has authority to enter into this Agreement and to take all
actions required of it, and has taken all actions necessary to authorize the execution and delivery
of this Agreement.
7.In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid and
unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render
unenforceable any other provision hereof.
8.The parties hereto agree that they will, from time to time, execute, acknowledge
and deliver, or cause to be executed, acknowledged and delivered, such supplements,
amendments and modifications hereto, and such further instruments as may reasonably be
required for correcting any inadequate, or incorrect, or amended description of the Property or
the Minimum Improvements or for carrying out the expressed intention of this Agreement,
including, without limitation, any further instruments required to delete from the description of
the Property such part or parts as may be included within a separate assessment agreement.
9.Except as provided in Section 8 of this Agreement, this Agreement may not be
amended nor any of its terms modified except by a writing authorized and executed by all parties
hereto.
10.This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of
which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
11.This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws
of the State of Minnesota.
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 74
G-4
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ________, 20__
by Anne Mavity and Thomas K. Harmening, the President and Executive Director of the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 75
G-5
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
36TH STREET, LLC
By
Donald Kasbohm
Its Manager
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of __________,
20__, by Donald Kasbohm, the Manager of 36th Street, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability
company, on behalf of the company.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 76
G-6
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
CERTIFICATION BY CITY ASSESSOR
The undersigned, having reviewed the plans and specifications for the improvements to
be constructed and the market value assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be
constructed, hereby certifies as follows: The undersigned Assessor, being legally responsible for
the assessment of the above described property, hereby certifies that the values assigned to the
land and improvements are reasonable.
City Assessor for the City of St. Louis Park
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of ____________,
20__ by _____________________, the City Assessor of the City of St. Louis Park.
Notary Public
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 77
G-7
498863v3 MNI SA285-110
EXHIBIT A of ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
Legal Description of Property
Lot 1, Block 1, Elmwood Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Economic Development Authority Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 7b)
Title: Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC Page 78
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Presentation: 2a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Presentation Accepting Monetary Donation from the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park for
the Summer Concert Series
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Lisa Abernathy, Recreation Supervisor, will be present to accept
a donation in the amount of $1,500. Members of the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park will be in
attendance to present the check for the summer concert series. The donation will be officially
accepted by the City Council as a consent item following the presentation.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions
on its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
The Rotary Club of St. Louis Park is graciously donating an amount of $1,500. The donation is
given with the restriction that it be used toward the Recreation Division’s Summer Concert
Series.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Rotary Club of St. Louis Park accepted
donations at the Bundled Up, Winter Fun Day event held on January 28, 2017. The donations
received are provided to support the Recreation Division’s Summer Concert Series. The Concert
Series is budgeted in the Organized Recreation budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Jason T. West, Recreation Superintendent
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Presentation: 2b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Retirement Recognition for Field Supervisor Bruce Berthiaume, and Public Service
Workers Elwood Backlund and Tim Jones
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Read resolution and present plaque to Bruce Berthiaume
(pronounced “Berth-YOOM”) for his 35 years of service. Also read resolutions for Public Service
Workers Elwood Backlund and Tim Jones, who will not be in attendance.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: City policy states that employees who retire or resign in good standing with over
20 years of service will be presented with a resolution from the Mayor, City Manager and City
Council.
Utilities Field Supervisor Bruce Berthiaume will be in attendance for the presentation at the
beginning of the meeting. The Mayor is asked to read the resolution and present Bruce with a
plaque in recognition of his years of service to the City. Woody and Tim have declined to attend
the meeting, but the Mayor is asked to read their resolutions in recognition of their years of service.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolutions
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR Manager
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 2b) Page 2
Title: Retirement Recognition for Bruce Berthiaume, Woody Backlund, and Tim Jones
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF AND EXPRESSING APPRECIATION
TO FIELD SUPERVISOR BRUCE BERTHIAUME
WHEREAS, Bruce Berthiaume began his employment with the City of St. Louis Park 35
years ago on February 8, 1982; and
WHEREAS, Bruce started as a laborer and worked his way to the water treatment and lift
station crew in June of 1991; and
WHEREAS, Bruce became a water treatment plant and lift station mechanic in June of 1999;
and
WHEREAS, Bruce became a Field Supervisor for the distribution of water, sanitary, and
storm sewer systems in August of 2001; and
WHEREAS, Bruce has made a difference for the residents of St. Louis Park and his fellow
employees; and
WHEREAS, Bruce has worked on or been involved in 1,024 broken water mains since he
started with the City of St. Louis Park; and
WHEREAS, Bruce now plans on inspecting the asphalt pavement along with scenery of the
United States and Canada on his motorcycle with his wife, along with spending time with his
children and grandchildren;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Bruce Berthiaume for his
great contributions and 35 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis Park and wish him
the best in his retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 2b) Page 3
Title: Retirement Recognition for Bruce Berthiaume, Woody Backlund, and Tim Jones
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF AND EXPRESSING APPRECIATION
TO PUBLIC SERVICE WORKER ELLWOOD BACKLUND
WHEREAS, Ellwood “Woody” Backlund began his employment with the City of St. Louis
Park over 28 years ago on February 27, 1989; and
WHEREAS, Woody has patched thousands of pot holes, repaired numerous water main
breaks, rebuilt countless retaining walls, and maintained other city assets; and
WHEREAS, Woody has driven thousands of miles within the city limits plowing, sweeping
streets, and various other maintenance activities over the last 28 years; and
WHEREAS, Woody has plowed over 1,300 inches or 109 feet of snow including 30+ inches
during the Halloween Storm of 1991, the snow season that reached 84” and the fifth snowiest on
record; and
WHEREAS, if you converted all of the pavement in the area Woody plowed each day to a
lane mile, it would stretch to almost 45 miles; and
WHEREAS, Woody has seen many changes to the road systems within the city including the
Hwy. 12 conversion to 394, the 36th & Hwy 100 and Wooddale & Hwy 7 intersections going from
signals to overpasses, and Louisiana from going under Hwy 7 using the old rail grade to a signal
at grade then back to going under Hwy 7 once again; and
WHEREAS, Woody will enjoy spending more time with the family, being active in meals on
wheels, but will not miss driving in rush hour traffic or inclement weather to come to work;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Ellwood Backlund for his
great contributions and 28 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis Park and wish him
the best in his retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 2b) Page 4
Title: Retirement Recognition for Bruce Berthiaume, Woody Backlund, and Tim Jones
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF AND EXPRESSING APPRECIATION
TO PUBLIC SERVICE WORKER TIM JONES
WHEREAS, R. Timothy Jones began his employment with the City of St. Louis Park 22 years
ago on December 12, 1994; and
WHEREAS, Tim started as a night custodian and worked his way into a Maintenance I
Utilities Maintenance in August of 1999; and
WHEREAS, Tim was then promoted to a Maintenance II Facilities Maintenance in April
2000; and
WHEREAS, on May 16, 2005, Tim was promoted to Maintenance IV Treatment Plant
Maintenance where he excelled and took ownership of preventative maintenance of all 23 sanitary
and 10 storm sewer lift stations; and
WHEREAS, Tim has made a difference in keeping our drinking water safe and our sewer
system up and running; and
WHEREAS, Tim will spend more time with his lovely wife and two beautiful school aged
daughters that participate in multiple activities;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Tim Jones for his great
contributions and 22 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis Park and wish him the best
in his retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Presentation: 2c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Recognition of Kevin Locke’s Service
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council is asked to recognize Kevin Locke’s 13 years
of service as Community Development Director.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: Kevin Locke has begun a phased retirement program and has transitioned from full
time CD Director to part time SWLRT Project Specialist effective May 1, 2017. He concluded 13
years of service as CD Director. The Council is asked to honor Kevin for his service and thank
him for his work and dedication during the past 13 years on behalf of the City. Formal recognition
of Kevin’s years of service will be done in accordance with policy upon Kevin’s official retirement
in the future.
Some of Kevin’s accomplishments during his tenure as CD Director include:
• Kevin was responsible for overseeing the development of the City's housing policies and
programs, including oversight of the Housing Authority and annual administration of over 500
affordable housing units; and the development of housing tools and strategies, including the
Inclusionary Housing Policy to create new affordable units and preserve existing affordable
housing options in the community.
• Kevin oversaw the Comprehensive Plan update as well as played a significant role in past and
current Vision St. Louis Park initiatives.
• Under Kevin’s steady leadership a number of significant redevelopment projects came to
fruition including Brookside School, Aquila Commons, Hoigaard Village, Highway 7
Corporate Center, The West End, Ellipse on Excelsior (Al’s bar), TowerLight, Melrose Center,
Siena Apartments, The Shoreham, 4800 Excelsior and PLACE.
• Kevin displayed particular finesse as the chief staff liaison related to Southwest Light Rail
Transit and its potential impacts on St. Louis Park.
• Kevin has developed and maintained positive relationships with citizens, neighborhoods,
businesses and other community groups and agencies, always working towards building a
better community.
• Kevin has been a great leader and mentor, encouraging employee development, working with
staff on issues or problems and providing coaching and support as needed.
• Kevin has been a valuable member of the City’s management team, working toward attainment
of the City’s overall goals, objectives and mission and always demonstrating the desired high
standards of conduct and work performance.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR Manager
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Presentation: 2d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Recognition of Donations
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to announce and express thanks and appreciation for the
following donations being accepted at the meeting and listed on the Consent Agenda:
From Amount For
Community Charities of MN,
on behalf of St. Louis Park
American Legion Post 282
$2,500 Float & Flick special events to be held at the
Rec Center Aquatic Park
Zachary Strouts $2,200 Purchase and installation of a memorial bench
in Dakota Park honoring Steven Strouts
Sara Schonwald $2,200 Purchase and installation of a memorial bench
in Wolfe Park honoring Javi Moran
The Mulligan Family $300 Purchase and installation of a memorial tree in
Oak Hill Park honoring Richard “Dick” Solseth
David and Ruth Bowman $300 Purchase and installation of a memorial tree in
Wolfe Park honoring Parker Dionne
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Minutes: 3a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MARCH 27, 2017
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Pro Tem Tim Brausen, Gregg Lindberg, Anne Mavity, Thom
Miller, and Susan Sanger.
Excused Absence: Mayor Jake Spano, Steve Hallfin
Staff present: Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Director of
Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Housing Supervisor (Ms. Schnitker), Director of Community
Development (Mr. Locke), Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Olson), Economic Development
Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Mr. Walther), Sr. Engineering Project
Manager (Mr. Sullivan), Environment and Sustainability Coordinator (Ms. Pinc), and Recording
Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
Guests: ESC Members Ryan Griffin, Terry Gips, Judy Voigt, Nancy Rose; Tim Thompson,
Attorney for the Housing Justice Project; James Lenhoff, of Ehlers; Dean Dovolis; and, Mr.
Marguelies, Elmwood Architect and Developer.
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – April 2017
Ms. Deno presented the proposed Study Session agenda for April, 2017.
Councilmember Miller asked that the council review the Nest concept with St. Louis Park High
School students before they graduate in May.
Councilmember Sanger stated both the historical society and the school district are looking for
space near the high school. Additionally, Youth Frontiers is looking for space, and the owner of
the Walker building – the oldest building in St. Louis Park – may be willing to discuss selling the
building to one of these groups. Councilmember Sanger added in light of this, there may be a larger
discussion to explore at the next study session.
Councilmember Mavity noted the agenda for the April 3 council meeting looks and feels like it
might be too much. She asked staff to consider changing the agenda.
2. Living Street Policy
Ms. Heiser presented the Living Streets Policy and noted that since April, 2016, staff from
Operations and Recreation, Community Development, and Administration have been working
with the Environmental and Sustainability Commission’s (ESC) Transportation Workgroup on
developing this policy. She added the goals of the policy are:
• Invest in neighborhood livability
• Promote travel by walking or bicycling
• Enhance the safety and security of streets
• Improve the quality and reduce the quantity of stormwater runoff
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2017
• Support the urban forest
• Improve the aesthetics of streets
• Reduce life cycle costs
Ms. Heiser explained that the Living Streets Policy will formalize practices used to inform
decision-making for transportation projects and define what will be looked at when developing
transportation projects for construction. She noted that it is not intended to be prescriptive or a
“one size fits” all policy. Instead, it identifies principles that staff will apply when developing a
project. For each project, specific recommendations will be tailored to the neighborhood and the
feedback received during the public process. The draft policy was presented and discussed with
the ESC on March 1, 2017. The ESC Transportation Workgroup included comments regarding the
draft Living Streets Policy in the packet.
Mr. Griffin, Acting Chair of the ESC, stated it has been a pleasure and honor to work with city
staff on this policy, adding staff and council have been strong advocates of the commission’s work.
Mr. Griffin stated the ESC strongly supports the idea of a Living Streets Policy in order to make
St. Louis Park more livable and walkable and to reduce the impact on the environment. He added
it has been a pleasure participating in this process.
Mr. Griffin did note there are a few things missing from the policy. While the commission
members are not city planning professionals, they have compared best practices in Living Streets
Policies from other communities near St. Louis Park. Mr. Griffin stated the ESC would like to see
a stronger vision and stronger wording in the policy. He added that the commission recommends
language be inserted into the policy in order to get to the heart of greenhouse gas emissions and
how it contributes to climate change. He stated currently gas emissions make up 29% of climate
change effects, and there is nothing in the policy on gas emissions. Mr. Griffin stated that the city
has adopted a climate resolution and is working on a climate action plan, so he believes that gas
emissions should be addressed in the Living Streets Policy, as well.
Mr. Griffin added when looking at the Minneapolis Complete Streets policy, it is not as broad as
the St. Louis Park policy. He recommended that St. Louis Park rebalance its transportation system.
What in the past was built around vehicles needs to be changed to focus on people, as they walk,
bike, and transit. He added that the city will need to think about transitioning away from a complete
auto-centric environment. Additionally, Mr. Griffin noted that language on plants and trees should
be strengthened in the policy.
Mr. Griffin stated these are recommendations, and while the commission members are not experts,
they want to present opportunities to improve the policy. He added he does not think the city needs
to wait for another visioning process as there is already agreement from the community and the
city. Mr. Griffin thanked city staff for including the ESC in this process.
Nancy Rose, ESC Member, added this is the essence of what the commission has concluded. She
noted she loved Ms. Heiser’s presentation and stated that the Edina and Minneapolis policies have
stronger language and are more rigorous than the St. Louis Park draft at this time.
Councilmember Sanger stated she is fine with everything the ESC proposed and agreed she does
not think the policy goes far enough. She added Mr. Griffin and the workgroup have made some
really fine suggestions. She continued that she would like to see included in the policy something
about installing grass boulevards adjacent to sidewalks on the streets wherever feasible. She noted
that narrowing streets to add grass boulevards and adding trees are good goals to work toward.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 3
Title: Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2017
Additionally, she noted that the city ought to be plowing the snow on sidewalks where they are
not already plowing to increase walkability and quality of life. Councilmember Sanger also noted
that mass transit is important versus single drivers, and a shuttle bus service in St. Louis Park might
be a good concept to look at again.
Councilmember Mavity agreed with Councilmember Sanger, adding that she likes the direction of
the staff report and that the work of the ESC is high quality, helpful information. She added this
needs to be looked at through the lens of “people before cars” and suggested staff look at including
the Minneapolis Complete Streets policy language, which would strengthen the already good
framework of the policy. She added pedestrians should always be prioritized over cars, while
ensuring safety, and the language on this topic needs to be stronger than the current language.
Councilmember Lindberg stated he agreed the draft policy resonates with council priorities. He
also appreciates the work that the ESC has done. He noted, however, he has a different view. In
relation to what he is hearing from Ward 3 residents, he would not want stronger language in the
policy. He added he wanted to make sure there is balance in the policy in order to ensure we do
not lose sight of situational concerns that come up on projects. Councilmember Lindberg also
noted residents may not agree with the implementation of a very aggressive policy, citing some of
the comments he has received regarding the impact of the Texas Avenue project. He added that
the approach needs to be tempered, and the council must not lose sight of practical application and
citizen feedback.
Councilmember Sanger asked Ms. Heiser to explain the timeline for implementation.
Councilmember Lindberg asked about the public process.
Ms. Heiser stated that staff has already been implementing and refining the principles of the Living
Streets Policy as a part of the 2017 project design and public process. She added that during the
public process, staff consistently hears concerns from residents about not being asked for their
input on the vision that informed the policies and projects being implemented. For this reason,
staff was very intentional to reference the 2007 vision when developing this administrative policy.
By doing this, staff can point to a robust vetting process with the community. She added that the
Vision 3.0 process is currently underway, and from that feedback, the council will make
recommendations for an updated city vision. She added that it is staff’s recommendation to update
the vision section of the policy once the updated vision is established.
Councilmember Miller stated he is fully supportive of the Living Streets Policy. He added he
agrees with what has been said, asking how this can also be looked at through the race equity lens.
Councilmember Miller stated not all streets are living streets, especially in underprivileged areas.
He asked that staff and council analyze areas where residents of color live and make these streets
a higher priority. He challenged everyone to look harder in these areas. Councilmember Mavity
agreed.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen thanked all for the work done on this policy and stated he agreed with
the ESC points, especially the gas emissions. He strongly supports the native and low maintenance
vegetation, vision, dark skies, and self-driving vehicles. He would like to see St. Louis Park
advance to a Green Cities level. He stated the city needs to address these issues, adding he is in
favor of making it more aspirational, with lofty goals and making streets environmentally
productive for our residents.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 4
Title: Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2017
Councilmember Lindberg supports the policy, but stated we do need to ask ourselves how the costs
of Living Streets will affect our budget. He asked for more information regarding what the
financial obligations and impacts are.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen added if a cost benefit analysis is done, staff could also look at carbon
analysis over time.
Councilmember Mavity added it will be the responsibility of staff to figure out how we get there,
while prioritizing pedestrians more than anything else.
Councilmember Sanger stated to Councilmember Lindberg, it sounds like he is making the
assumption that Living Streets will cost the city more in terms of dollars; however, she added it
may cost less, adding that staff can provide information on cost differentials.
Ms. Heiser thanked the council for their feedback, adding staff will review the written comments
from the ESC and then come back to the council with a revised draft policy at a future study
session.
3. Review of the Inclusionary Housing Policy and Advance Notice of Sale Policy Update
Ms. Schnitker provided a report to review the existing Inclusionary Housing Policy and the impact
it has had on affordable housing development in St. Louis Park, asking if council would like to
modify the policy. She also provided an update on work in progress related to an Advance Notice
of Sale Policy.
Ms. Schnitker explained that in June of 2015, the council adopted an Inclusionary Housing Policy
that requires the inclusion of affordable housing units for lower income households in new market
rate multi-unit residential developments receiving financial assistance from the city. The primary
goal of the policy is to increase the overall supply of affordable housing and to promote economic
and social integration. The number of affordable dwelling units within a residential project subject
to the policy is:
Rental projects – at least 10% of the units shall be affordable for households at 60% Area Median
Income, or at least 8% of the units shall be at affordable for households at 50% Area Median
Income.
Ownership projects – at least 10% of units shall be affordable for households at 80% Area Median
Income.
Ms. Schnitker added the council had stated they were interested in exploring the possibility of
increasing the percentage of affordable housing units required per the policy. She added staff is
looking at adding an amendment to the policy about not discriminating against persons with a
housing voucher.
Ms. Schnitker recommended that the council consider increasing the required percentage of
affordable units per the policy to 15% at 60% AMI and 10% at 50% AMI.
Councilmember Miller stated he has concerns about owner occupied units and would like to review
this further at a later date, adding the easiest way to develop wealth is to own a home.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 5
Title: Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2017
Councilmember Sanger noted her issue on the policy is the TIF provided to developers for the
affordable policy. She added it is not legal to use TIF to subsidize affordable housing; however,
developers need TIF in order to provide affordable units. She added she is concerned the city is
paying for the inclusion of affordable housing, and she does not think it should be used as a
financing mechanism. She stated the city is subsidizing affordable units, and this is not acceptable.
Councilmember Sanger added the city needs to do a better job when raising TIF for these projects
and not assume we are getting affordable units as a freebee for providing TIF.
Councilmember Lindberg stated he would like the city attorney’s perspective on this issue.
Councilmember Mavity asked Mr. Thompson to comment. Mr. Thompson stated he agrees that
developers have put affordable units into projects, which are not always that affordable. Mr.
Thompson added he is watching what is happening in Minneapolis now related to affordable
housing, stating what St. Louis Park is doing with the policy is the right step.
Councilmember Sanger stated she is objecting to the inflation of the TIF amount.
Councilmember Miller noted St. Louis Park is not going far enough and asked if the city is in the
middle or bottom when compared to similar city policies. Ms. Schnitker stated there are not many
inclusionary policies in the metro, adding that Edina’s is at 20%. She added that of 18 policies in
the various metro cities outside of Minnesota, 5 are at 10%, 2 are at 12% and 6 are at 15% and 5
are at 20% or greater.
Councilmember Miller stated St. Louis Park is just scratching the surface on affordable housing,
adding he would like to increase the percentages. He stated he also disagrees with Councilmember
Sanger on TIF. If it takes TIF to have affordable housing, then he is all for it, as long as it is legal.
Councilmember Miller added the city has some great parcels that will be ready for redevelopment
soon, and he would like to see the policy become really beefy to get as much bang for the buck as
possible.
Councilmember Lindberg stated the policy is good but can be more aggressive, and he agrees with
the non-discrimination language.
Councilmember Sanger added she does not agree with raising the percentage requirements more
than what Ms. Schnitker is proposing. She added St. Louis Park is way ahead of every other
community in Hennepin County and is reaching their Metropolitan Council goals. She stated
affordable housing is a problem statewide, but added it is not up to St. Louis Park to solve it for
everyone else. Others must do their part as well. She noted this is her concern.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen stated he supports the non-discrimination policy and would like to see
18-20% of 60% Area Median Income in the policy. He added the city will need to make a
commitment to work on affordable housing.
It was the consensus of the council to have staff prepare the policy for 15% at 60% of AMI and
10% at 50% AMI, and at the meeting when this is discussed, the council may then propose to raise
it to 18-20%. However, Mayor Pro Tem Brausen added there are two councilmembers absent, who
will need to weigh in on this, as well.
Councilmember Sanger asked Ms. Schnitker if there is a policy that says landlords cannot advertise
that they don’t accept Section 8 or if the policy will say that if a developer is provided TIF funding,
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 6
Title: Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2017
they have to accept Section 8, and how this could be enforced. Ms. Schnitker stated if a person
thinks they are being discriminated against in housing, they can file a report with Housing and
Urban Development. City staff would not typically get involved in a fair housing complaint
between a landlord and tenant. Councilmember Sanger asked what if it was made part of the city’s
TIF policy. Ms. Schnitker stated the city would try to assist if a TIF funded development denied a
tenant because they have Section 8.
Ms. Schnitker noted there is a work group researching the feasibility of implementing an Advance
Notice of Sale Policy, which would require an owner to give advance notice if they were selling a
multi-family building or property. She added the advance notice would give the city an opportunity
to send that information to preservation buyers and also to check if it is a good use for affordable
housing and for the preservation of NOAH property.
Ms. Schnitker stated the group is looking at a 90-day timeframe for this notification. However,
they don’t want the timeframe to be so lengthy that it encumbers the owner from selling the
building.
Councilmember Sanger stated it seems there is an assumption built into these policies that whoever
is the purchaser will not continue the NOAH status of the building. Likewise, if the owner has to
give a 90-day notice, she asked if we know how many purchasers walk away if they are in a hurry
or looking for a lower price. Councilmember Sanger also asked how this policy would help
Meadowbrook. Ms. Schnitker stated it would not have helped with Meadowbrook.
Mr. Thompson stated there is evidence that much of this type of inventory is at risk, with this value
add business model on the rise. He added the 90-day notice also means the buyer and seller cannot
enter into a purchase agreement for 90 days, making it a factor in negotiations which will affect
price. He added that many sellers will go to non-profit purchasers first to avoid all of this.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen stated this should be applied to all buildings. He agrees with the 90-day
timeframe and is in favor of enforcement. He also stated he would like to ask the city attorney
about a requirement for 60-day notice on all leases in St. Louis Park and if this can be done on rent
increases.
Councilmember Sanger added she would like to see how this 90-day timeframe works in other
communities. She stated it does not seem fully formed as an idea yet and won’t achieve the
practical results some people are hoping for, while being an intrusion on property owners. She
added there should also be a public process involved as she would like to hear from some St. Louis
Park landlords.
Councilmember Mavity stated she supports this but wants to be certain the city has a clear strategy
and knows what to do in order to be impactful. She added that affordable housing is what stabilizes
families and schools and communities. More resources are needed to create more affordable
housing. Councilmember Mavity noted we are at a tipping point to get other cities on board, while
more regional tools are needed to move this forward.
4. Connect the Park! CIP Update
Mr. Sullivan presented the staff report, which included updates regarding upcoming projects for
2018 implementation, proposed amendments, and other related initiatives. He noted that the city’s
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 7
Title: Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2017
10-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) includes adding additional sidewalks, trails, and
bikeways throughout the community.
Councilmember Sanger stated she is fine with the projects noted in the report but had a question
about the pedestrian bridge over Highway 100 near Beth El Synagogue. She stated when the bridge
is modified, there will be a major ADA issue, as the bridge is not in compliance. She suggested to
leave the pedestrian bridge as is and add lights, noting they will need to save that bridge. She added
that with the proposed bikeway project west of Highway 100 on Minnetonka Boulevard, she has
concerns that the county will take on this project. Mr. Sullivan stated the county has this on tier
one of their bike routes, adding there is a possibility the majority of the funding may come from
the county.
Councilmember Sanger stated the bikeway on Louisiana Avenue is also a major problem, and the
bike trail there needs to be separated and protected. She added if we cannot do that, we do not want
to have a bikeway there.
Councilmember Lindberg agreed with Councilmember Sanger on the Minnetonka Boulevard issue
and also the timing impact. He added that residents who will be impacted by the 28th Street project
will speak up, so it is critical that the project is well-coordinated.
Ms. Heiser stated staff will do a feasibility report first as staff knows it will be challenging and
might require rerouting. She added we want to make it safe, so it will start with an analysis. She
added that the bridge by Methodist Hospital will also need to be rebuilt in 2018.
Councilmember Mavity asked if the France Avenue portion, between 39th and 40th Street, was
new. Mr. Sullivan stated that part is an amendment because of the change of ownership on that
parcel on the west side. He explained that St. Louis Park would be responsible for their portion
and Edina for their portion. The cities would then be reimbursed by Hennepin County. He stated
that a sidewalk will be added on the west side of France Avenue.
Councilmember Mavity asked staff to keep the council updated on any obstacles that face the city
before it gets too late in the process.
Mr. Sullivan also noted that Monterey Drive will have a user activated crossing added this summer.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen asked with the Bridgewater project now uncertain, will that affect the
sidewalk there. Ms. Heiser stated staff is looking at developing a better buffer there. At this point,
if Bridgewater does not move ahead, the city will purchase the right-of-way and finish off half of
the block.
Councilmember Sanger asked if a pedestrian light will be added near Benilde. Mr. Sullivan stated
yes.
Councilmember Lindberg asked for an update on the Virginia crossing and the north side of Cedar
Lake Trail. Mr. Sullivan stated it is slated for bike lanes on 28th, and Three Rivers Park District
has agreed to be part of the long-term project in conjunction with whatever the city does there.
Councilmember Miller challenged staff to develop a report on the kind of sidewalk segments the
city will put in for our economically-challenged areas. He stated these folks depend more on
sidewalks to get to bus routes and have fewer vehicles. Councilmember Miller stated he believes
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 8
Title: Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2017
it is the city’s responsibility to make sure there is equitability and that we identify these areas first
and take care of them. Ms. Deno noted this fits right in with race equity and is good to bring up.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen stated he is fine with all the proposals and additions in Ward 4, while
acknowledging that Louisiana Avenue will be a challenge related to bike lanes. He asked if a
feasibility study will be done there, as well. Mr. Sullivan stated yes, it has been completed.
Councilmember Mavity added if LRT does not develop, the city will want to look at bike trail
crossings in the Beltline area also.
5. 36th Street LLC’s Application for TIF Assistance – The Elmwood Apartments
Mr. Hunt stated staff would like to review and receive feedback on the 36th Street LLC’s proposed
mixed-use redevelopment project located at 5605 36th Street W. called The Elmwood.
Additionally, staff is asking if the EDA supports entering into a redevelopment contract to
reimburse the developer for qualified costs up to $950,000 in tax increment generated by the
project over a maximum term of six years to assist the project’s financial feasibility.
Councilmembers Mavity and Lindberg expressed support for the TIF request.
Councilmember Sanger asked the developer if there was no affordable housing in the project, if
there would still be a request for TIF. Mr. Margulies stated the developer would still make this
request for TIF because the return on investment is simply not high enough to attract capital to the
project, and the site development costs are too high.
Councilmember Sanger asked if the development went back to the five-story proposal if that would
change the TIF request. Mr. Margulies stated he was not sure there would be enough funding to
cover the project at five stories either.
Councilmember Miller stated he was not in support of the project.
Councilmember Sanger noted she supports the project but is not sure she supports the TIF request.
Mr. Locke stated that there is a limited list of things that are eligible to be paid for with TIF but
having eligible project expenses in and of itself does not qualify a project for assistance. The test
for whether a project may receive TIF assistance is its financial need for the assistance. The true
test for whether any project can be provided TIF assistance is the “but for” test. The “but for” test
requires the City/EDA to make a finding that “but for” the provision of TIF assistance this project
would not be feasible. In addition, projects must meet the City’s other applicable policies and
codes, some of which are unique to St. Louis Park, to be eligible for TIF assistance. To be eligible
for assistance projects must meet, among other things, the Green Building Policy, code
requirements such as DORA and the Inclusionary Housing Policy. The Elmwood project as
proposed meets the “but for” test, includes TIF eligible expenses such as soil corrections, asbestos
removal, under-ground parking needs; and, meets the City’s policies and codes. Elimination or
changes to any of these policies or codes could have an impact on project feasibility, but attempting
to isolate the impacts of changing any one policy is challenging because changing one requirement
essentially results in a different project with different numbers and the need for a new
feasibility/but for test analysis. He explained the only way this project will happen is with TIF
assistance.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3a) Page 9
Title: Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2017
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen stated the TIF request is under $1 million, and the developer said in
advance that they would require TIF. He added the developer increased the affordable units to
20%, which is above the city’s requirements, so he is in support of the TIF request.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
The council discussed several of the written reports noting the Water Treatment Plant #4 project
has been extended by six weeks. Mayor Pro Tem Brausen asked for a report of costs for buying
water from other communities. Ms. Deno stated Mr. Harmening sent a detailed email to the council
on this issue.
Councilmember Sanger thanked the Fire Chief for the EMS report and the right sizing included
therein.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen noted he would like staff to review how we manage the consent agenda
during council meetings. He would like to have a comment period and also present the consent
agenda on the broadcast, and list the items out. He stated this increases transparency, and he would
like to see the city provide this detail to residents.
The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
6. February 2017 Monthly Financial Report
7. Proposed Terms of Property Purchase Agreement with Hennepin County HRA
8. Proposed TIF Note Assignment – E2 Purchase and Redevelopment contract
9. Update on EMS Initiative
10. Water Treatment Plant #4 Project Updates
11. 2016 Annual Housing Programs Activity Report
12. Proposed Development 9808 and 9920 Wayzata Blvd. (former Santorini’s site)
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Tim Brausen, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Minutes: 3b
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 1, 2017
The meeting convened at 6:15 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Thom
Miller, and Susan Sanger.
Councilmember absent: Gregg Lindberg.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Human Resources Director/Deputy City Manager
(Ms. Deno), Chief Financial Officer (Mr. Simon), Finance Manager (Mr. Ebensteiner), and
Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
Guest: None.
1. Debt Model and Upcoming 2017 Bond Issue Review
Mr. Simon presented the report and comprehensive debt modeling tool created by the Finance
Division staff. He explained that as a best practice, staff would like to annually review a newly
created and interactive 10-year debt model for upcoming bond issuances. While things will change,
the debt model is flexible enough for long-term planning purposes to forecast future issuances and
amounts needed based on identified projects in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and potential
impacts. Mr. Simon indicated that future action is on May 15 when the council will be asked to
approve the pre-sale report/resolution for the 2017A bonds and on June 19 to award the bond sale
via resolution.
Mr. Harmening stated there is a lot of infrastructure work being conducted related to Connect the
Park and Texas Avenue. Being able to utilize a debt modeling tool can help forecast what the
homeowner impact will be over time, as well as the cumulative impact of spending, including
operating levy, utility fees, franchise fees, and pavement management program, while taking into
consideration tax increment districts. He added that staff and council will be able to observe the
cumulative impact on homeowners over 10 years. He thanked Mr. Simon and the financial staff
for this tool, adding it will help the council in decision making.
Mr. Simon presented the debt model to the council.
Councilmember Sanger asked for an explanation of the 2% of fiscal disparity and what that is
assuming. Mr. Simon said that it is difficult to know, but there will be an extra 2% contributed
annually. However, it is just a start and can change. Mr. Simon added that the model looks at
scenarios in real time to see the true impacts.
Mr. Simon presented the tax levy rates, while looking at the annual percentage changes and
fluctuations over time.
Mr. Harmening stated that the model assumes a built-in operating levy of 4% per year. By 2022,
the rate goes down, and the property taxes are spread.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: Special Study Session Minutes of May 1, 2017
Councilmember Sanger noted this also assumes houses do not have any significant remodels or
improvements over time. She stated this is a wonderful tool that could be an example to other
communities.
Mr. Simon stated he will utilize the tool and plug in numbers related to refinancing with the bonds.
He added that he can come back to the council at a future date for more modeling and further
review. Additionally, the tool will be utilized at the council’s fall Capital Improvement Plan
discussions.
Mr. Simon reviewed the 2017 bond issue. Since we are below the BQ amount, we will be looking
at refinancing one bond, also.
The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Monetary Donation from Rotary Club of St. Louis Park for the Summer
Concert Series
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a
monetary donation from the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park in the amount of $1,500 for the
Recreation Division’s Summer Concert Series.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions
on its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
The Rotary Club of St. Louis Park is graciously donating an amount of $1,500. The donation is
given with the restriction that it be used toward the Summer Concert Series.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used to support the
Recreation Division’s Summer Concert Series. The Series is budgeted in the Organized
Recreation budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Jason T. West, Recreation Superintendent
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Accept Monetary Donation from Rotary Club of St. Louis Park for the Summer Concert Series
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,500
TO BE USED FOR THE SUMMER CONCERT SERIES
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize
acceptance of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park donated $1,500 to assist in the funding of
the Recreation Division’s Summer Concert Series; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park with the
understanding that it must be used to assist in funding the Recreation Division’s Summer
Concert Series.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bid Tabulation: 2017 Alley Reconstruction (4017-1500)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to designate G.L. Contracting, Inc. the lowest responsible
bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $389,882.00 for the
2017 Alley Reconstruction Project No. 4017-1500.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to implement our Alley
Reconstruction Program?
SUMMARY:
Alley Reconstruction Project Bid Tabulation
A total of four (4) bids were received for this project. A summary of the bid results is as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
G.L. Contracting, Inc.$389,882.00
BKJ Land Company $424,220.85
Urban Companies, Inc.$519,108.00
C.S. McCrossan Construction, Inc. $527,349.40
Engineer’s Estimate $414,287.00
A review of the bids indicates G. L. Contracting, Inc. submitted the lowest bid. G. L. Contracting,
Inc. is a reputable contractor currently under contract with the City of St. Louis Park for the 2017
Pavement Management Project in the Sorenson and Birchwood neighborhoods. Staff recommends
that a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $389,882.00.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project is included in the City’s Capital
Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2017. Funding will be provided using Pavement Management
(franchise fees) and storm water utility with no assessments to residents. Additional information
on the breakdown of the funding can be found later in this report.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Senior Engineering Project Engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation: 2017 Alley Reconstruction (4017-1500)
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: Bids were received on May 9, 2017 for the 2017 Alley Reconstruction Project
(4017-1500). The 2017 construction season will be the first year of a 10 year plan to reconstruct
all gravel and bituminous alleyways to concrete pavement.
This year’s project, will reconstruct four sections of alleys in the Lenox neighborhood that are
currently gravel. 67 homes and businesses abut the alleys and will be impacted by the project.
Improvements to the alley include grading, storm sewer installation for better drainage, and an 8
inch concrete pavement.
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on April 6, 2017. In
addition, plans and specifications are noticed on the City Website and are made available
electronically via the internet by our vendor QuestCDN.com.
Email notification was provided to four (4) minority associations and final printed plans were
available for viewing at Dodge Data, Construct Connect, The Blue Book Building & Construction
Network, and at City Hall.
Twenty seven contractors/vendors purchased plan sets with three (3) Disadvantaged Business
Enterprises (DBE) identifying themselves as subcontractors.
Funding Details
Staff has analyzed the bids and determined that G.L. Contracting, Inc. is a qualified contractor that
can complete this work during the 2017 construction season.
Based on the low bid received, cost and funding details are as follows:
Estimated Costs Engineer’s Est. Low Bid
Construction Cost $414,287.00 $389,882.00
Contingencies (10%) $41,428.00 $27,000.00
Total Construction $455,715.00 $416,882.00
Engineering & Administration (10%) $45,571.50 $12,887.00
Project Total $501,286.50 $428,947.00
Funding Sources
Pavement Management Fund $364,459.22 $313,132.00
Storm Sewer Fund $136,827.28 $115,815.00
Project Total $501,286.50 $428,947.00
Construction Timeline:
Construction is anticipated to begin in late May and should be completed by November 2017.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Second Reading of Ordinance Related to Municipal Primary Elections and Candidate
Filing Requirements
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve second reading and Adopt
Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter related to Municipal Primary
Elections and Candidate Filing Requirements. (A unanimous vote of all 7 councilmembers
is required for approval.)
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the proposed Charter
amendments related to municipal primary elections and candidate filing requirements?
SUMMARY: On April 17, 2017 a public hearing was held and the first reading of the
proposed ordinance was unanimously approved by the City Council.
The proposed Charter amendment would achieve the following objectives:
-Eliminate the need to hold a municipal primary election when 3 or more candidates file for
any city office. All candidates filing for municipal offices would be placed on the General
Election ballot.
-Amend the filing requirements for candidates for municipal office to increase the number
of signatures required on a nominating petition from 15 to 50.
If approved, the ordinance would be effective 90 days after passage and publication according to
law, August 16, 2017.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Ordinance
Summary Ordinance
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Page 2 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Related to Municipal Primary Elections and Candidate Filing Requirements
ORDINANCE NO. ___-17
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
HOME RULE CHARTER SECTIONS 4.01, 4.03, 4.04, 4.05, 4.06, and 4.07
CONCERNING MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS
AND CANDIDATE FILING REQUIREMENTS
PREAMBLE
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 410.12, Subd. 7 the Charter Commission has
recommended to the City Council that the Charter be amended as provided herein; and
WHEREAS, Minn. Stat. § 410.12, Subd. 7 provides that upon recommendation of the Charter
Commission the City Council may enact a Charter Amendment by ordinance.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. The St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter Sections 4.01, 4.03, 4.04, 4.05, 4.06,
and 4.07 are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language:
Section 4.01. General Election Laws to Apply. Except as hereinafter provided, the general laws
of the State of Minnesota pertaining to registration of voters and the conduct of primary and general
elections shall apply for all municipal elections of such officers as are specified in this Charter.
The Council shall, through ordinances adopted in compliance with such state laws and the Charter,
adopt suitable and necessary regulations for the conduct of such elections.
Section 4.03. Primary Elections. The Council shall, whenever three (3) or more candidates have
filed for any elective City office, provide through ordinance or resolution for a primary election to
be held for each such office. The primary election shall be held on the second Tuesday in August.
At least two (2) weeks' notice shall be given by the Clerk of the time and places of holding such
election, and of the officers to be elected, by posting a notice thereof in at least one (1) public place
in each voting precinct where a primary election will be held and by publishing a notice thereof at
least once in the official newspaper of the City. Failure to give such notice shall not invalidate such
election.
Section 4.04. 4.03. Special Elections. The Council may by resolution order a special election, fix
the time, and provide the means for holding such special election. Three (3) weeks’ published
notice shall be given of any special election. The procedure at such elections shall conform as
nearly as possible to that herein provided for other municipal elections.
Section 4.05. 4.04. Judges of Election. The Council shall at least twenty-five (25) days before
each municipal election appoint at least three (3) qualified voters to be judges of elections for each
precinct.
Section 4.06. 4.05. Nomination by Petition. The nomination of elective officers provided for by
this Charter shall be by petition. The name of any nominee shall be printed upon the ballot
whenever a petition meeting the requirements specified in this Charter has been filed on the
nominee's behalf with the City Clerk. Such petition shall be signed by at least fifteen (15) fifty
(50)currently registered electors qualified to vote for the office specified in the petition. No elector
shall sign petitions for more candidates than the number of places to be filled at the election, and
should the elector do so that signature shall be void as to the petition or petitions last filed. All
nomination petitions shall be filed with the City Clerk no more than eighty four 84 ninety eight
Page 3 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Related to Municipal Primary Elections and Candidate Filing Requirements
(98)days nor less than seventy (70) eighty four (84) days before the second Tuesday in August
before the general city election municipal general election held in November of any year. The
Clerk shall prepare the ballots with names of the candidates for an office in a manner provided by
ordinance. Each petition, when presented, must be accompanied by a twenty dollar ($20.00) fifty
dollar ($50.00) filing fee.
Section 4.07. 4.06. Nomination Petitions. The signatures to the nomination petition need not be
contained on one (1) paper. Each paper shall include an affidavit of its circulator stating the
number of signators and affirming that each signature was written in the circulator’s presence and
is the signature of the person who signed it. The residence address of each signer shall be affixed
to the petition. The nominee shall indicate acceptance of the office, if elected, by an endorsement
on the petition. The form of the nomination petition shall be substantially as follows:
NOMINATION PETITION
We, the undersigned, electors of the City of St. Louis Park, nominate ______________,
whose residence is ________________, for the office of _________________ to be voted
for at the election to be held on the _________ day of ____________; and we individually
certify that we are qualified electors and that we have not signed more nomination petitions
of candidates for this office than there are persons to be elected.
____________ being duly sworn, deposes and says that the undersigned circulated the
foregoing petition and that the signatures were made in the circulator’s presence and are
the signatures of the persons who signed them.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this _________ day of __________, ___________
Notary Public for Hennepin County,
Minnesota
This petition, if found insufficient by the City Clerk, shall be returned to ______________
at Number _________________ Street.
I hereby indicate my willingness to accept the office of ___________ if duly elected.
Nominee ______________
Section 4.08. 4.07. Canvass of Elections and Taking of Office. The Council shall meet and
canvass the election returns within seven (7) days after any regular or special elections, declare the
results as soon as possible, and file a statement thereof with the City Clerk. Said statement shall
be made part of the minutes and shall include:
Name Street and Number
-------------- ----------------------
-------------- ----------------------
Signed ____________
Page 4 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Related to Municipal Primary Elections and Candidate Filing Requirements
(a)The total number of good ballots cast;
(b)The total number of spoiled or defective ballots;
(c) The vote for each candidate with a declaration of those who were elected;
(d)A true copy of the ballots used;
(e)The names of the judges and clerks of election; [and]
(f)Such other information as may seem pertinent
The City Clerk shall notify all persons elected of the fact after their election, and the persons
elected shall qualify to take office at the time provided for by Section 3.01, by taking, subscribing,
and filing the required oath of office with the City Clerk.
SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect ninety days after its publication.
Date of Publication Notice of Public Hearing March 23, 2017
Public Hearing and First Reading April 17, 2017
Second Reading May 15, 2017
Date of Publication of Adopted Ordinance May 18, 2017
Date Ordinance takes effect August 16, 2017
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney
Page 5 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Second Reading of Ordinance Related to Municipal Primary Elections and Candidate Filing Requirements
SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO. ____-17
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
HOME RULE CHARTER SECTIONS 4.01, 4.03, 4.04, 4.05, 4.06, and 4.07
CONCERNING MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS
AND CANDIDATE FILING REQUIREMENTS
This ordinance states that the St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter Sections 4.01, 4.03, 4.04, 4.05,
4.06, and 4.07 shall be amended to eliminate the option for municipal Primary elections and to
change the number of signatures required on a nominating petition.
This ordinance shall take effect 90 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Jake Spano /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: May 18, 2017
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Second Reading Knollwood PUD Chick-fil-A
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance
amending Chapter 36 to add Section 36-268-PUD 10, amending the Zoning Map from C-2 General
Commercial to PUD 10, and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to amend the City Code to establish
the Shoppes at Knollwood PUD which will include the redevelopment of the former TCF bank
building into a Chick-fil-A restaurant including a drive-thru?
SUMMARY: Chick-fil-A (CFA) submitted an application for a Preliminary and Final PUD for
the Shoppes at Knollwood site. The purpose of the PUD is two-fold:
1.Convert the existing Knollwood Mall PUD to the current PUD format which requires creation
of a new PUD zoning district that is specific to the Shoppes at Knollwood development.
Converting the old PUD to the new PUD will require a rezoning of the property from C-2
General Commercial to the new PUD zoning district. If approved, the new PUD district will
be called “PUD 10” on the zoning map, and known as “Shoppes at Knollwood”.
2.Redevelop the former TCF bank building with in-vehicle service (drive-thru) into a proposed
CFA restaurant with a drive-thru.
At the May 1, 2017 city council meeting, the city council voted 6-0 to approve the Preliminary and
Final Planned Unit Development, and the First Reading of the Ordinance. The city council
approved the Preliminary and Final PUD with the additional condition that the CFA permit not be
issued until the permit for the Shoppes at Knollwood stormwater permit is approved. That
condition was added to the list of conditions for the Preliminary and Final PUD approval.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Summary Ordinance for Publication
PUD Ordinance
Development Plans (available upon request)
Planning Commission Minutes (available upon request)
Allies of SLP Letter submitted at Public Hearing
(available upon request)
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Second Reading Knollwood PUD Chick-fil-A
SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION
ORDINANCE NO. ___-17
AN ORDINANCE CREATING A NEW
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT
8332 HIGHWAY 7
This ordinance states that the Zoning Map shall be amended from C-2 General Commercial to
PUD 10 for property located at 8332 Highway 7 and the Zoning Ordinance Code, Section-268
will be amended to add Section 36-268-PUD 10.
This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Jake Spano /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: May 25, 2017
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4d) Page 3
Title: Second Reading Knollwood PUD Chick-fil-A
ORDINANCE NO. ___-17
ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE
RELATING TO ZONING BY CREATING SECTION 36-268-PUD 10
AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT
FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 8332 HIGHWAY 7
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Findings
Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 17-08-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance to create a new Planned
Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District.
Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as C-2 General Commercial.
Sec. 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands
from C-2 General Commercial to PUD 10:
See Exhibit A
Sec. 4. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 17-08-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance to create a new PUD
Zoning District.
Sec. 5. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the
following Planned Unit Development Zoning District:
Section 36-268-PUD 10.
(a) Development Plan.
The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD
signed Official Exhibits:
(1)Site Plans
(2)Landscaping Plans
(3)Lighting Plans
(4)Grading Plans
(5)Building Plans
(6)Storm Water Plans
(7)Utility Plans
(8)Survey
(9)The site shall also conform to the following requirements:
a.A minimum of 1,695 parking spaces shall be provided on-site.
b.The maximum building height shall be 40 feet.
(b) Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted uses in PUD 10.
(1)Shopping Center. The shopping center shall be limited to the following uses:
a. Office.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4d) Page 4
Title: Second Reading Knollwood PUD Chick-fil-A
b. Medical or dental office.
c. Adult day care.
d. Group day care/nursery school.
e. Bank.
f. Food service.
g. Private entertainment (indoor).
h. Retail.
i. Liquor store.
j. Service.
k. Showroom.
l. Studios.
m. Restaurants with or without intoxicating liquor.
n. Museum.
o. Police service substation.
p. Post office.
(c) Accessory Uses. The following uses shall be permitted accessory uses in PUD 10.
(1) Incidental repair or processing which is necessary to conduct a permitted use and does not
exceed ten percent of the gross floor area of the associated permitted use.
(2) Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery.
(3) Food service.
(4) Outdoor seating and service of food and beverages with the following conditions:
a. No speakers or other electronic devices which emit sound are permitted outside of the
principal structure if the use is located within 500 feet of a residential use.
b. Hours of operation shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. if located within 500 feet
of a residential use.
c. Additional parking will not be required if the outdoor seating area does not exceed 500
square feet or ten percent of the gross floor area of the principal use, whichever is less.
Parking will be required at the same rate as the principal use for that portion of outdoor
seating area in excess of 500 square feet or ten percent of the gross building area,
whichever is less.
(5) In-vehicle sales or service, limited to restaurants, banks, and pharmacies.
a. Drive-through facilities and stacking areas shall not be located within 100 feet of any
parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an
occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious
institutions, and community centers, unless the entire facility and stacking areas are
separated from the lot in an R district by a building wall.
b. Stacking shall be provided for six cars per customer service point and shall comply
with all yard requirements.
c. This use shall only be permitted when it can be demonstrated that the operation will
not have a significant adverse effect on the existing level of service on adjacent streets
and intersections.
d. The drive-through facility shall be designed so it does not impede traffic or impair
vehicular and pedestrian traffic movement, or exacerbate the potential for pedestrian or
vehicular conflicts.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4d) Page 5
Title: Second Reading Knollwood PUD Chick-fil-A
e. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or
arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating
significant traffic on local residential streets.
f. Any canopy constructed as part of this use shall be compatible with the architectural
design and materials of the principal structure.
g. The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of
the redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood
in which it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying
this requirement.
(d) Special Performance Standards
(1) All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met,
including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking
and screening requirements.
(2) Signage shall be subject to the regulations found in Section 36-362 pertaining to signs.
PUD 10 shall be subject to the C-2 regulations with the following clarifications and
modifications:
a. The maximum sign area shall be increased by 240 square feet with the condition that
the additional signage be used in its entirety for a free-standing sign located at the
corner of Highway 7 and Texas Ave S. The sign shall be double sided, and not exceed
120 square feet per side.
(3) Awnings shall be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl
awnings are prohibited. Backlit awnings are prohibited.
Sec. 6. The contents of Planning Case File 17-08-PUD are hereby entered into and made
part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Sec. 7. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Public Hearing March 8, 2017
First Reading May 1, 2017
Second Reading May 15, 2017
Date of Publication May 25, 2017
Date Ordinance takes effect June 9, 2017
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4d) Page 6
Title: Second Reading Knollwood PUD Chick-fil-A
EXHIBIT A
PARCEL 1:
That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 117 North, Range
21 West of the 5th Principal Meridian, which lies North of State Trunk Highway No. 7 and East
of the following described line:
Beginning at the Northwest corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter: thence South along
the West line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 87.45 feet; thence deflecting to the left
71 degrees 01 minutes 30 seconds and running Southeasterly 325.2 feet; thence deflecting to the
right 50 degrees 47 minutes 30 seconds and running Southeasterly 262.1 feet; thence deflecting to
the left 27 degrees 12 minutes and running Southeasterly 954.12 feet, more or less, to a point on
the Northerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 7; excepting therefrom the following
5 parcels:
1. That part of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter described as follows: Beginning at
the Northeast corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence running West along the
North line of the said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 783 feet; thence South parallel with the
East line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 499.55 feet; thence East parallel with the
North line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 783 feet, more or less, to a point in the East
line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence North along said East line 499.55 feet
more or less to the point of beginning.
2. The right-of-way of Texas Avenue;
3. That part of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter described as follows: Beginning at
the Northwest corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence running East along the
North line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter 316.82 feet, more or less, to the Northwest
corner of the East seven-eighths of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter, said Northwest corner
being the actual point of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence running South at
right angles 192.92 feet; thence deflecting to the left 21 degrees 57 minutes and running
Southeasterly 252.36 feet; thence deflecting to the left 27 degrees 12 minutes and running
Southeasterly 954.12 feet, more or less, to a point in the Northerly right-of-way line of State Trunk
Highway No. 7; thence deflecting to the left 52 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds and running
Northeasterly along said right-of-way line 37.6 feet; thence deflecting to the left 127 degrees 04
minutes 30 minutes and running Northwesterly 967.5 feet; thence deflecting to the right 27 degrees
12 minutes and running Northwesterly 239.28 feet; thence deflecting to the right 21 degrees 57
minutes and running Northerly 187.1 feet, more or less to a point in the North line of said South
Half of the Southeast Quarter, which point is 30 feet East of the actual point of beginning as
measured along said North line; thence running West along said North line to the actual point of
beginning;
4. That part of South Half of the Southeast Quarter described as follows: Commencing at the
Northwest corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence South 87.45 feet; thence
deflecting to the left 71 degrees 00 minutes 30 seconds a distance of 325.2 feet; thence North
parallel to the West line of said Southeast Quarter to the North line of said South Half of the
Southeast Quarter; thence West along the North line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter
to the point of beginning less the following: Commencing at a point 30 feet Southerly
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4d) Page 7
Title: Second Reading Knollwood PUD Chick-fil-A
along the quarter line from the Northwest corner of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter
of Section 18, Township 117, Range 21, Hennepin County, Minnesota, which will be called the
point of beginning: thence 20 feet Southerly along the quarter line; thence 120.00 feet Easterly
along a line paralleling the North line of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter to a point
of curvature of a 31 degrees 53 minutes 24 seconds curve to the right to its intersection with the
Western right-of-way line of Aquila Avenue; thence Northerly along the right-of-way line to a
point 30 feet South of the North line of the Southwest Quarter of the Southeast Quarter, thence
Westerly along the Southerly right-of-way line of West 36th Street to the point of beginning.
5. That part of the said South Half of the Southeast Quarter described as follows:
Commencing at the Northeasterly corner of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter; thence
Westerly along the Northerly line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter a distance of 783.00
feet; thence Southerly, parallel with the Easterly line of said South Half of the Southeast Quarter,
a distance of 499.55 feet; thence Easterly, parallel with said Northerly line, a distance of 736.99
feet to the intersection with a line 46.00 feet Westerly of, as measured at right angles to and parallel
with said Easterly line, and the point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing
Easterly along the last described course a distance of 13.00 feet to the intersection with a line 33.00
feet Westerly of as measured at right angles to and parallel with said Easterly line; thence Southerly
parallel with said Easterly line a distance of 155.00 feet to the Northerly right of way line of State
Trunk Highway No. 7; thence Southwesterly along said Northwesterly right-of-way line a distance
of 20.40 feet to the intersection with a line 46.00 feet Westerly of, as measured at right angles to
and parallel with said Easterly line; thence Northerly, parallel with said Easterly line, a distance of
171.01 feet to the point of beginning; according to the United States Government Survey thereof
and situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota.
PARCEL 2:
That part of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 117 North, Range
21 West of the 5th Principal Meridian described as follows:
Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the West line of Texas Avenue in the Village of
St. Louis Park, MN and the North line of said South Half of said Southeast Quarter ; thence South
along the West line of said Texas Avenue a distance of 499.55 feet; thence West and parallel with
said North line of said South Half of said Southeast Quarter a distance of 750 feet; thence North
to a point on the North line of said Texas Avenue; thence East along the North line of said South
Half of said Southeast Quarter a distance of 750 feet to the point of beginning, except the North
30 feet thereof, also save and except the West 13.00 feet of the East 46.00 feet of the North 499.55
feet of the South Half of the Southeast Quarter of Section 18, Township 117 North, Range 21 West
of the 5th P.M., except the North 30.00 feet thereof.
According to the United States Government Survey thereof and situated in Hennepin County,
Minnesota.
Abstract
PARCEL 3:
Lots 1 and 2, Block 1; Knollwood Mall 1st Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota
Torrens
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Retirement Recognition Resolutions for Field Supervisor Bruce Berthiaume, and
Public Service Workers Elwood Backlund and Tim Jones
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolutions to recognize Utilities Field
Supervisor Bruce Berthiaume for 35 years of service, Streets Public Service Worker Elwood
Backlund for 28 years of service, and Utilities Public Service Worker Tim Jones for 22 years of
service.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: City policy states that employees who retire or resign in good standing with over
20 years of service will be presented with a resolution from the Mayor, City Manager and City
Council.
This consent item will officially adopt the resolutions that honor Bruce, Woody and Tim for their
years of service.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolutions
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR Manager
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Retirement Recognition Resolutions for Bruce Berthiaume, Woody Backlund, and Tim Jones
RESOLUTION NO. 17-___
RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF AND EXPRESSING APPRECIATION
TO FIELD SUPERVISOR BRUCE BERTHIAUME
WHEREAS, Bruce Berthiaume began his employment with the City of St. Louis Park 35
years ago on February 8, 1982; and
WHEREAS, Bruce started as a laborer and worked his way to the water treatment and lift
station crew in June of 1991; and
WHEREAS, Bruce became a water treatment plant and lift station mechanic in June of
1999; and
WHEREAS, Bruce became a Field Supervisor for the distribution of water, sanitary, and
storm sewer systems in August of 2001; and
WHEREAS, Bruce has made a difference for the residents of St. Louis Park and his fellow
employees; and
WHEREAS, Bruce has worked on or been involved in 1,024 broken water mains since he
started with the City of St. Louis Park; and
WHEREAS, Bruce now plans on inspecting the asphalt pavement along with scenery of
the United States and Canada on his motorcycle with his wife, along with spending time with his
children and grandchildren;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Bruce Berthiaume for
his great contributions and 35 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis Park and wish
him the best in his retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4e) Page 3
Title: Retirement Recognition Resolutions for Bruce Berthiaume, Woody Backlund, and Tim Jones
RESOLUTION NO. 17-___
RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF AND EXPRESSING APPRECIATION
TO PUBLIC SERVICE WORKER ELLWOOD BACKLUND
WHEREAS, Ellwood Backlund began his employment with the City of St. Louis Park over
28 years ago on February 27, 1989; and
WHEREAS, Woody has patched thousands of pot holes, repaired numerous water main
breaks, rebuilt countless retaining walls, and maintained other city assets; and
WHEREAS, Woody has driven thousands of miles within the city limits plowing, sweeping
streets, and various other maintenance activities over the last 28 years; and
WHEREAS, Woody has plowed over 1,300 inches or 109 feet of snow including 30+
inches during the Halloween Storm of 1991, the snow season that reached 84” and the fifth
snowiest on record; and
WHEREAS, if you converted all of the pavement in the area Woody plowed each day to a
lane mile, it would stretch to almost 45 miles; and
WHEREAS, Woody has seen many changes to the road systems within the city including
the Hwy. 12 conversion to 394, the 36th & Hwy 100 and Wooddale & Hwy 7 intersections going
from signals to overpasses, and Louisiana from going under Hwy 7 using the old rail grade to a
signal at grade then back to going under Hwy 7 once again; and
WHEREAS, Woody will enjoy spending more time with the family, being active in meals
on wheels, but will not miss driving in rush hour traffic or inclement weather to come to work;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Ellwood Backlund for
his great contributions and 28 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis Park and wish
him the best in his retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4e) Page 4
Title: Retirement Recognition Resolutions for Bruce Berthiaume, Woody Backlund, and Tim Jones
RESOLUTION NO. 17-___
RESOLUTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
RECOGNIZING THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF AND EXPRESSING APPRECIATION
TO PUBLIC SERVICE WORKER TIM JONES
WHEREAS, R. Timothy Jones began his employment with the City of St. Louis Park 22
years ago on December 12, 1994; and
WHEREAS, Tim started as a night custodian and worked his way into a Maintenance I
Utilities Maintenance in August of 1999; and
WHEREAS, Tim was then promoted to a Maintenance II Facilities Maintenance in April
2000; and
WHEREAS, on May 16, 2005, Tim was promoted to Maintenance IV Treatment Plant
Maintenance where he excelled and took ownership of preventative maintenance of all 23 sanitary
and 10 storm sewer lift stations; and
WHEREAS, Tim has made a difference in keeping our drinking water safe and our sewer
system up and running; and
WHEREAS, Tim will spend more time with his lovely wife and two beautiful school aged
daughters that participate in multiple activities;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, by this resolution and public record, would like to thank Tim Jones for his great
contributions and 22 years of dedicated service to the City of St. Louis Park and wish him the best
in his retirement.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4f
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Traffic Study No. 680: Authorize Removal of Parking Restrictions on Wooddale
Avenue
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution rescinding Resolution removing
parking restrictions on the west side of Wooddale Avenue between Vernon Avenue and Toledo
Avenue.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The removal of parking restrictions is allowed per the City’s
established regulatory authority.
SUMMARY: City staff has received a request to evaluate the parking restrictions on the west side
of Wooddale Avenue in front of the Wooddale Flats Townhomes. Currently, some areas of the
street restrict parking from 8am – 4pm Monday through Friday, while other areas are posted with
parking restrictions at all times. These restrictions were originally approved to accommodate bus
pick up and drop off for the former Most Holy Trinity Catholic Church / School. The Traffic
Committee discussed this matter and recommends lifting restrictions on the west side of Wooddale
Avenue between Vernon Avenue and Toledo Avenue.
Earlier this year, staff sent letters to addresses along Wooddale Avenue to solicit feedback about
the proposed modifications to on-street parking restrictions. A majority of respondents were in
favor of lifting restrictions.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The cost to remove the parking signs on the
street will be minimal and will come out of the general operating budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Location Map for Proposed Parking Changes
Resolution 5622 - to be rescinded
Prepared by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Page 2 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Traffic Study No. 680: Authorize Removal of Parking Restrictions on Wooddale Avenue
RESOLUTION NO. 17-___
RESOLUTION REMOVING PARKING RESTRICTIONS
ON WOODDALE AVENUE BETWEEN VERNON AVENUE AND TOLEDO AVENUE
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 680
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota received requests from residents to
evaluate the existing parking restrictions on the west side of Wooddale Avenue between Vernon
Avenue and Toledo Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has collected feedback from residents
about removing parking restrictions on the west side of Wooddale Avenue; and
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has completed a full public process to
inform interested parties about Traffic Committee recommendation to lift parking restrictions on
the west side of Wooddale Avenue between Vernon Avenue and Toledo Avenue.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that the Engineering Director is hereby authorized to rescind Resolution 5622
and lift parking restrictions on the west side of Wooddale Avenue between Vernon Avenue and
Toledo Avenue.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Page 3 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Traffic Study No. 680: Authorize Removal of Parking Restrictions on Wooddale Avenue
EXHIBIT 1: PARKING RESTRICTION MODIFICATION
Remove parking
restrictions
• , • �
' C'" -I
OCTOBER 18, 1976
9a
RESOLUTION NO. 5622
RESOLUTION REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 4924
ENTITLED "RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT
OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS REGULATING PARKING
ON WOODDALE AVENUE" AND AUTHORIZING PLACE
MENT OF TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNS ON WO�DDALE
AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that
a traffic analysis, having indicated that traffic control signs are not
warranted, the Director of Public Works is authorized and directed to remove the following signs:
"No parking on the west side of Wooddale Avenue from 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. from a point 110feet south of Utica Avenue to a point 190 'feet south"
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that a traffic analysis having indicated that traffic control signs
are warranted, the Director of Public Works is authorized and directed
to install the following signs:
'
11 2 hour parking" on the we!:lt side of Wooddale Avenue
from a point 110 feet south of Utica Avenue to 190
feet south
"No Parking -8:00 a.m. -4:00 p.m. Weekdays" on the west side of Wooddale Avenue from a point
320 feet south of Utica Avenue (south building line of Church) to the south curb l.1ne of W. 40Lh
Street for a bus unloading zone
Adopted by the City Council Oc
��
)
��;l___
Mayor
Approved as to form and legality:
}
,'</<,· / ., .: /,·,t..:, '-C1ty l\tt6rncy
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4f)
Title: Traffic Study No. 680: Authorize Removal of Parking Restrictions on Wooddale Avenue Page 4
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4g
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution providing for the Sale of
$10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds 2017A. (Requires 6 affirmative votes of the Council.)
POLICY CONSIDERATION:
•Does the City Council desire to issue Charter General Obligation Bonds in the amount of
$3,430,000 for sidewalk and trails, fiber, and SWLRT related expenses?
•Does the City Council desire to issue General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue
Bonds in the amount of $4,985,000 for water treatment plant improvements, water
rehab/infrastructure and sewer improvements in the current year?
•Does the City Council desire to do a current refunding of the Series 2010B bonds in the
amount of $1,585,000 for interest savings?
SUMMARY: At the May 1st work session, staff reviewed with Council the 2017 bond issue
and future issues with our debt model. The Charter General Obligations Bonds of $3,430,000
will fund the current year Sidewalk and Trails projects, fiber installation and a portion of
SWLRT related expenses. Since these are Charter Bonds, they will require approval by at least 6
of the 7 City Council Members.
The G.O. Revenue Bonds of $4,985,000 will finance all or a portion of capital projects within the
Water and Sewer funds this year, including a portion for the WTP#4 project in 2017, with the
remaining in 2018.
The current refunding bonds will refinance the 2010B bonds for an interest rate savings. Current
projections are a present value savings of 3.39% or $54,645. Since we had capacity under the
Bank Qualification amount we included this bond for the interest savings.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed bond issues will be
consolidated into one for potential investors to bid. The Charter G.O. Bonds, which are 10 years
and repaid with tax levy are estimated at a True Interest Cost (TIC) of 2.24%. Annual Principal
and Interest repayment of ($382,222 to $386,770). The G.O. Revenue Bonds, which are 15 years
and repaid with water and sewer rates are estimated at a TIC of 2.57%. Annual Principal and
Interest repayment of ($398,278 to $407,478).
NEXT STEPS: June 19th – Council action item to award sale of bonds
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Presale Report
Resolution
Prepared by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
May 15, 2017
Pre-Sale Report for
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
$10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds Series 2017A
Prepared by:
Stacie Kvilvang, CIPMA
Senior Municipal Advisor/Director
And
James Lehnhoff,
Municipal Advisor
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 2
Executive Summary of Proposed Debt
Proposed Issue: $10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds Series 2017A
Purposes: The proposed 2017A Bond issue includes three components:
1. City Charter General Obligation Bonds: $3,430,000
This portion of the proposed Bond issue provides funding for sidewalk, trail,
SWLRT, and fiber projects. Debt service will be paid from ad valorem
property taxes.
2. General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds: $4,985,000
This portion of the proposed Bond issue includes:
$1,020,000 for a water treatment plant filter,
$3,000,000 for water rehab/infrastructure work
$965,000 for sewer improvements
Debt service will be paid from utility revenues (water and sewer revenue).
3. Current Refunding of General Obligation Water and Sewer Revenue
Bonds, Series 2010B - $1,585,000
This portion of the proposed Bond issue is to complete a current refunding
of the 2010B bonds that were originally issued to finance water and sewer
improvements. The 2010B Bonds are considered a current refunding
because the prior Bonds are callable (pre-payable now) as of February 1,
2017. The debt service is currently paid from water and sewer revenue,
which will continue. This current refunding does not extend the term of the
Bonds.
Interest rates on this portion of the Bonds are 1.2% to 2.15%. The refunding
is expected to reduce interest expense by approximately $59,328 from 2018
to 2025 or an average of $7,400 per year. The present value benefit of the
refunding is estimated to be approximately $54,645, which equals to
3.395% of the refunded debt service.
Authority: The Bonds are being issued pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 444 and 475
and Section 6.15 of the City’s Charter:
Chapter 444 allows cities to issue debt without limitation provided the debt
service is expected to be paid from utility revenues
Chapter 475 provides general bonding authority for issuing debt and for
refundings of existing debt
Section 6.15 of the City’s Charter enables the City to issue general
obligation bonds for any corporate purpose pursuant to a “super majority”
vote of the City Council.
The portion of the Bonds being issued pursuant to the City’s Charter ($3,430,000),
count against the City’s statutory debt limit, which is limited to 3% of the City’s
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 3
estimated market value (EMV). The City’s EMV is $6,339,381,200 for Pay 2017,
and 3% of the EMV produces a debt limit of $190,181,436.
Including the proposed $3,430,000 of new debt, the City’s outstanding debt that
counts against the debt limit as of May 4, 2017, is $24,945,000, which is well below
the $190 million noted above.
The 2017A Bonds will be general obligations of the City for which its full faith,
credit and taxing powers are pledged.
Term/Call Feature: The $3,430,000 of Bonds for the Sidewalks/Trails/SWLRT/Fiber project are being
issued for a 10-year term. Principal on the Bonds will be due on February 1 in the
years 2019 through 2028.
The $4,985,000 of Bonds for the Water and Sewer Infrastructure/Improvements are
being issued for a 15-year term. Principal on the Bonds will be due on February 1 in
the years 2019 through 2033.
The $1,585,000 of Refunding Bonds are being issued for the same term as the prior
bonds and have eight years remaining. Principal on the Refunding Bonds will be due
on February 1 in the years 2018 through 2025.
The Bonds maturing on and after February 1, 2027 will be subject to prepayment at
the discretion of the City on February 1, 2026 or any date thereafter.
Bank Qualification: Because the City is expecting to issue no more than $10,000,000 in tax exempt debt
during the calendar year, the City will be able to designate the Bonds as “bank
qualified” obligations. Bank qualified status broadens the market for the Bonds,
which can result in lower interest rates.
Rating: The City’s most recent bond issues were rated AAA by Standard & Poor’s. The
City will request a new rating for the Bonds.
Basis for
Recommendation:
Based on our knowledge of your situation, your objectives communicated to us, our
advisory relationship as well as characteristics of various municipal financing
options, we are recommending the issuance of General Obligation Bonds as a
suitable financing option because:
- This is a viable option available to finance these types of project under the
City’s Charter and State law;
- This is the most overall cost effective option that still maintains future
flexibility for the repayment of debt; and,
- This coincides with the City’s past practices to finance these types of
projects with this type of debt issue.
Method of
Sale/Placement:
In order to obtain the lowest interest cost to the City, we will competitively bid the
purchase of the Bonds from local and national underwriters/banks.
We have included an allowance for discount bidding equal to 0.80000% of the
principal amount of the issue. The discount is treated as an interest item and provides
the underwriter with all or a portion of their compensation in the transaction.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 4
If the Bonds are purchased at a price greater than the minimum bid amount
(maximum discount), the unused allowance may be used to lower your borrowing
amount.
Premium Bids: Under current market conditions, most investors in municipal
bonds prefer “premium” pricing structures. A premium is achieved when the
coupon for any maturity (the interest rate paid by the issuer) exceeds the yield to the
investor, resulting in a price paid that is greater than the face value of the bonds. The
sum of the amounts paid in excess of face value is considered “reoffering premium.”
The amount of the premium varies, but it is not uncommon to see premiums for
new issues in the range of 2.00% to 10.00% of the face amount of the issue. This
means that an issuer with a $2,000,000 offering may receive bids that result in
proceeds of $2,040,000 to $2,200,000.
For this issue of Bonds we have been directed to use the premium to reduce the size
of the issue. The adjustments may slightly change the true interest cost of the
original bid, either up or down.
You have the choice to limit the amount of premium in the bid specifications. This
may result in fewer bids, but it may also eliminate large adjustments on the day of
sale and other uncertainties.
Review of Existing
Debt:
We have reviewed all outstanding indebtedness for the City and find that, other than
the obligations proposed to be refunded by the Bonds, there are no other refunding
opportunities at this time.
We will continue to monitor the market and the call dates for the City’s outstanding
debt and will alert you to any future refunding opportunities.
Continuing Disclosure: Because the City has more than $10,000,000 in outstanding debt (including this
issue) and this issue is over $1,000,000, the City will be agreeing to provide certain
updated Annual Financial Information and its Audited Financial Statement annually
as well as providing notices of the occurrence of certain reportable events to the
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (the “MSRB”), as required by rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The City is already obligated to
provide such reports for its existing bonds, and has contracted with Ehlers to prepare
and file the reports.
Arbitrage Monitoring:
Because the Bonds are tax-exempt obligations/tax credit obligations, the City must
ensure compliance with certain Internal Revenue Service (IRS) rules throughout the
life of the issue. These rules apply to all gross proceeds of the issue, including initial
bond proceeds and investment earnings in construction, escrow, debt service, and
any reserve funds. How issuers spend bond proceeds and how they track interest
earnings on funds (arbitrage/yield restriction compliance) are common subjects of
IRS inquiries. Your specific responsibilities will be detailed in the Tax Certificate
prepared by your Bond Attorney and provided at closing. You have retained Ehlers
to assist you with compliance with these rules.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 5
Risk Factors: Utility Revenue: For the Water and Sewer Infrastructure/Improvements, the City
expects to pay the Bond debt service with utility funds. If utility revenue is
inadequate, the City may have to levy taxes to pay debt service on the Bonds.
Current Refunding: The Refunding Bonds are being issued for the purpose of
current refunding prior City debt obligations. Those prior debt obligations are
“callable” now and can therefore be paid off within 90 days or less. The new Bonds
will not be pre-payable until February 1, 2026. The debt service is also paid with
utility funds. If utility revenue is inadequate, the City may have to levy taxes to pay
debt service on the Bonds.
This refunding is being undertaken based in part on an assumption that the City does
not expect to have future revenues that are adequate to pay off this debt in full at the
call date and that market conditions warrant the refinancing at this time.
Other Service
Providers:
This debt issuance will require the engagement of other public finance service
providers. This section identifies those other service providers, so Ehlers can
coordinate their engagement on your behalf. Where you have previously used a
particular firm to provide a service, we have assumed that you will continue that
relationship. For services you have not previously required, we have identified a
service provider. Fees charged by these service providers will be paid from
proceeds of the obligation, unless you notify us that you wish to pay them from other
sources. Our pre-sale bond sizing includes a good faith estimate of these fees, so
their final fees may vary. If you have any questions pertaining to the identified
service providers or their role, or if you would like to use a different service provider
for any of the listed services please contact us.
Bond Attorney: Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
Paying Agent: Bond Trust Services Corporation
Rating Agency: Standard & Poor's Global Ratings (S&P)
This presale report summarizes our understanding of the City’s objectives for the structure and terms of
this financing as of this date. As additional facts become known or capital markets conditions change, we
may need to modify the structure and/or terms of this financing to achieve results consistent with the City’s
objectives.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 6
Proposed Debt Issuance Schedule
Pre-Sale Review by City Council: May 15, 2017
Distribute Official Statement: Week of June 5, 2017
Conference with Rating Agency: Week of June 12, 2017
City Council Meeting to Award Sale of the Bonds: June 19, 2017
Estimated Closing Date: July 10, 2017
Redemption Date for Bond August 15, 2017
Attachments
Sources and Uses of Funds
Proposed Debt Service Schedule
Refunding Savings Analysis
Resolution Authorizing Ehlers to Proceed with Bond Sale
Ehlers Contacts
Municipal Advisors: Stacie Kvilvang (651) 697-8506
Jason Aarsvold (651) 697-8512
James Lehnhoff (651) 697-8552
Disclosure Coordinator: Meghan Lindblom (651) 697-8549
Financial Analyst: Alicia Gage (651) 697-8551
The Official Statement for this financing will be mailed to the City Council at their home address or e-
mailed for review prior to the sale date.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 7
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Issue Summary
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Total Issue Sources And Uses
Dated 07/10/2017 | Delivered 07/10/2017
Sidewalk/Trails/
SWLRT/Fiber
Water
Treatment
Plant Filter
Water Rehab/
Infrastructure
Sewer
Improvements
Cur Ref GO
Util Bds
2010B
Issue
Summary
Sources Of Funds
Par Amount of Bonds $3,430,000.00 $1,020,000.00 $3,000,000.00 $965,000.00 $1,585,000.00 $10,000,000.00
Total Sources $3,430,000.00 $1,020,000.00 $3,000,000.00 $965,000.00 $1,585,000.00 $10,000,000.00
Uses Of Funds
Total Underwriter's Discount (0.800%)27,440.00 8,160.00 24,000.00 7,720.00 12,680.00 80,000.00
Costs of Issuance 31,213.00 9,282.00 27,300.00 8,781.50 14,423.50 91,000.00
Deposit to Project Construction Fund 3,370,000.00 1,000,000.00 2,950,000.00 950,000.00 -8,270,000.00
Deposit to Current Refunding Fund ----1,556,867.83 1,556,867.83
Rounding Amount 1,347.00 2,558.00 (1,300.00)(1,501.50)1,028.67 2,132.17
Total Uses $3,430,000.00 $1,020,000.00 $3,000,000.00 $965,000.00 $1,585,000.00 $10,000,000.00
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Issue Summary | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 8
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Issue Summary
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
07/10/2017 -----
02/01/2018 175,000.00 1.200%114,191.72 289,191.72 289,191.72
08/01/2018 --101,211.25 101,211.25 -
02/01/2019 805,000.00 1.250%101,211.25 906,211.25 1,007,422.50
08/01/2019 --96,180.00 96,180.00 -
02/01/2020 805,000.00 1.450%96,180.00 901,180.00 997,360.00
08/01/2020 --90,343.75 90,343.75 -
02/01/2021 820,000.00 1.550%90,343.75 910,343.75 1,000,687.50
08/01/2021 --83,988.75 83,988.75 -
02/01/2022 835,000.00 1.750%83,988.75 918,988.75 1,002,977.50
08/01/2022 --76,682.50 76,682.50 -
02/01/2023 855,000.00 1.800%76,682.50 931,682.50 1,008,365.00
08/01/2023 --68,987.50 68,987.50 -
02/01/2024 870,000.00 2.050%68,987.50 938,987.50 1,007,975.00
08/01/2024 --60,070.00 60,070.00 -
02/01/2025 880,000.00 2.150%60,070.00 940,070.00 1,000,140.00
08/01/2025 --50,610.00 50,610.00 -
02/01/2026 685,000.00 2.250%50,610.00 735,610.00 786,220.00
08/01/2026 --42,903.75 42,903.75 -
02/01/2027 700,000.00 2.350%42,903.75 742,903.75 785,807.50
08/01/2027 --34,678.75 34,678.75 -
02/01/2028 715,000.00 2.500%34,678.75 749,678.75 784,357.50
08/01/2028 --25,741.25 25,741.25 -
02/01/2029 350,000.00 2.550%25,741.25 375,741.25 401,482.50
08/01/2029 --21,278.75 21,278.75 -
02/01/2030 360,000.00 2.700%21,278.75 381,278.75 402,557.50
08/01/2030 --16,418.75 16,418.75 -
02/01/2031 370,000.00 2.800%16,418.75 386,418.75 402,837.50
08/01/2031 --11,238.75 11,238.75 -
02/01/2032 385,000.00 2.850%11,238.75 396,238.75 407,477.50
08/01/2032 --5,752.50 5,752.50 -
02/01/2033 390,000.00 2.950%5,752.50 395,752.50 401,505.00
Total $10,000,000.00 -$1,686,364.22 $11,686,364.22 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $72,603.33
Average Life 7.260 Years
Average Coupon 2.3227091%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.4328969%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.4269292%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.3039968%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.5685054%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.3227091%
Weighted Average Maturity 7.260 Years
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Issue Summary | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 9
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$10,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Issue Summary
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Detail Costs Of Issuance
Dated 07/10/2017 | Delivered 07/10/2017
COSTS OF ISSUANCE DETAIL
Municipal Advisor $57,000.00
Bond Counsel $16,500.00
Rating Agency Fee (S&P)$16,500.00
Miscellaneous $1,000.00
TOTAL $91,000.00
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Issue Summary | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 10
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$3,430,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Sidewalk/Trails/SWLRT/Fiber
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
07/10/2017 -----
02/01/2018 --36,974.23 36,974.23 36,974.23
08/01/2018 --33,111.25 33,111.25 -
02/01/2019 320,000.00 1.250%33,111.25 353,111.25 386,222.50
08/01/2019 --31,111.25 31,111.25 -
02/01/2020 320,000.00 1.450%31,111.25 351,111.25 382,222.50
08/01/2020 --28,791.25 28,791.25 -
02/01/2021 325,000.00 1.550%28,791.25 353,791.25 382,582.50
08/01/2021 --26,272.50 26,272.50 -
02/01/2022 330,000.00 1.750%26,272.50 356,272.50 382,545.00
08/01/2022 --23,385.00 23,385.00 -
02/01/2023 340,000.00 1.800%23,385.00 363,385.00 386,770.00
08/01/2023 --20,325.00 20,325.00 -
02/01/2024 345,000.00 2.050%20,325.00 365,325.00 385,650.00
08/01/2024 --16,788.75 16,788.75 -
02/01/2025 350,000.00 2.150%16,788.75 366,788.75 383,577.50
08/01/2025 --13,026.25 13,026.25 -
02/01/2026 360,000.00 2.250%13,026.25 373,026.25 386,052.50
08/01/2026 --8,976.25 8,976.25 -
02/01/2027 365,000.00 2.350%8,976.25 373,976.25 382,952.50
08/01/2027 --4,687.50 4,687.50 -
02/01/2028 375,000.00 2.500%4,687.50 379,687.50 384,375.00
Total $3,430,000.00 -$449,924.23 $3,879,924.23 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $21,305.08
Average Life 6.211 Years
Average Coupon 2.1118163%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.2406119%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.2433109%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.3039968%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.4045138%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.1118163%
Weighted Average Maturity 6.211 Years
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Sidewalk/Trails/SWLRT/Fib | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 11
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$1,020,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Water Treatment Plant Filter
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
07/10/2017 -----
02/01/2018 --12,790.02 12,790.02 12,790.02
08/01/2018 --11,453.75 11,453.75 -
02/01/2019 60,000.00 1.250%11,453.75 71,453.75 82,907.50
08/01/2019 --11,078.75 11,078.75 -
02/01/2020 60,000.00 1.450%11,078.75 71,078.75 82,157.50
08/01/2020 --10,643.75 10,643.75 -
02/01/2021 60,000.00 1.550%10,643.75 70,643.75 81,287.50
08/01/2021 --10,178.75 10,178.75 -
02/01/2022 60,000.00 1.750%10,178.75 70,178.75 80,357.50
08/01/2022 --9,653.75 9,653.75 -
02/01/2023 65,000.00 1.800%9,653.75 74,653.75 84,307.50
08/01/2023 --9,068.75 9,068.75 -
02/01/2024 65,000.00 2.050%9,068.75 74,068.75 83,137.50
08/01/2024 --8,402.50 8,402.50 -
02/01/2025 65,000.00 2.150%8,402.50 73,402.50 81,805.00
08/01/2025 --7,703.75 7,703.75 -
02/01/2026 65,000.00 2.250%7,703.75 72,703.75 80,407.50
08/01/2026 --6,972.50 6,972.50 -
02/01/2027 70,000.00 2.350%6,972.50 76,972.50 83,945.00
08/01/2027 --6,150.00 6,150.00 -
02/01/2028 70,000.00 2.500%6,150.00 76,150.00 82,300.00
08/01/2028 --5,275.00 5,275.00 -
02/01/2029 70,000.00 2.550%5,275.00 75,275.00 80,550.00
08/01/2029 --4,382.50 4,382.50 -
02/01/2030 75,000.00 2.700%4,382.50 79,382.50 83,765.00
08/01/2030 --3,370.00 3,370.00 -
02/01/2031 75,000.00 2.800%3,370.00 78,370.00 81,740.00
08/01/2031 --2,320.00 2,320.00 -
02/01/2032 80,000.00 2.850%2,320.00 82,320.00 84,640.00
08/01/2032 --1,180.00 1,180.00 -
02/01/2033 80,000.00 2.950%1,180.00 81,180.00 82,360.00
Total $1,020,000.00 -$228,457.52 $1,248,457.52 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $9,154.50
Average Life 8.975 Years
Average Coupon 2.4955762%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.5847127%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.5796409%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.3039968%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.6972363%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.4955762%
Weighted Average Maturity 8.975 Years
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Water Treatment Plant Fil | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 12
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$3,000,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Water Rehab/Infrastructure
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
07/10/2017 -----
02/01/2018 --37,592.58 37,592.58 37,592.58
08/01/2018 --33,665.00 33,665.00 -
02/01/2019 175,000.00 1.250%33,665.00 208,665.00 242,330.00
08/01/2019 --32,571.25 32,571.25 -
02/01/2020 175,000.00 1.450%32,571.25 207,571.25 240,142.50
08/01/2020 --31,302.50 31,302.50 -
02/01/2021 180,000.00 1.550%31,302.50 211,302.50 242,605.00
08/01/2021 --29,907.50 29,907.50 -
02/01/2022 185,000.00 1.750%29,907.50 214,907.50 244,815.00
08/01/2022 --28,288.75 28,288.75 -
02/01/2023 185,000.00 1.800%28,288.75 213,288.75 241,577.50
08/01/2023 --26,623.75 26,623.75 -
02/01/2024 190,000.00 2.050%26,623.75 216,623.75 243,247.50
08/01/2024 --24,676.25 24,676.25 -
02/01/2025 195,000.00 2.150%24,676.25 219,676.25 244,352.50
08/01/2025 --22,580.00 22,580.00 -
02/01/2026 195,000.00 2.250%22,580.00 217,580.00 240,160.00
08/01/2026 --20,386.25 20,386.25 -
02/01/2027 200,000.00 2.350%20,386.25 220,386.25 240,772.50
08/01/2027 --18,036.25 18,036.25 -
02/01/2028 205,000.00 2.500%18,036.25 223,036.25 241,072.50
08/01/2028 --15,473.75 15,473.75 -
02/01/2029 210,000.00 2.550%15,473.75 225,473.75 240,947.50
08/01/2029 --12,796.25 12,796.25 -
02/01/2030 215,000.00 2.700%12,796.25 227,796.25 240,592.50
08/01/2030 --9,893.75 9,893.75 -
02/01/2031 225,000.00 2.800%9,893.75 234,893.75 244,787.50
08/01/2031 --6,743.75 6,743.75 -
02/01/2032 230,000.00 2.850%6,743.75 236,743.75 243,487.50
08/01/2032 --3,466.25 3,466.25 -
02/01/2033 235,000.00 2.950%3,466.25 238,466.25 241,932.50
Total $3,000,000.00 -$670,415.08 $3,670,415.08 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $26,880.00
Average Life 8.960 Years
Average Coupon 2.4941037%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.5833894%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.5782795%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.3039968%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.6960406%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.4941037%
Weighted Average Maturity 8.960 Years
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Water Rehab/Infrastructur | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 13
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$965,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Sewer Improvements
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
07/10/2017 -----
02/01/2018 --12,096.29 12,096.29 12,096.29
08/01/2018 --10,832.50 10,832.50 -
02/01/2019 55,000.00 1.250%10,832.50 65,832.50 76,665.00
08/01/2019 --10,488.75 10,488.75 -
02/01/2020 55,000.00 1.450%10,488.75 65,488.75 75,977.50
08/01/2020 --10,090.00 10,090.00 -
02/01/2021 60,000.00 1.550%10,090.00 70,090.00 80,180.00
08/01/2021 --9,625.00 9,625.00 -
02/01/2022 60,000.00 1.750%9,625.00 69,625.00 79,250.00
08/01/2022 --9,100.00 9,100.00 -
02/01/2023 60,000.00 1.800%9,100.00 69,100.00 78,200.00
08/01/2023 --8,560.00 8,560.00 -
02/01/2024 60,000.00 2.050%8,560.00 68,560.00 77,120.00
08/01/2024 --7,945.00 7,945.00 -
02/01/2025 60,000.00 2.150%7,945.00 67,945.00 75,890.00
08/01/2025 --7,300.00 7,300.00 -
02/01/2026 65,000.00 2.250%7,300.00 72,300.00 79,600.00
08/01/2026 --6,568.75 6,568.75 -
02/01/2027 65,000.00 2.350%6,568.75 71,568.75 78,137.50
08/01/2027 --5,805.00 5,805.00 -
02/01/2028 65,000.00 2.500%5,805.00 70,805.00 76,610.00
08/01/2028 --4,992.50 4,992.50 -
02/01/2029 70,000.00 2.550%4,992.50 74,992.50 79,985.00
08/01/2029 --4,100.00 4,100.00 -
02/01/2030 70,000.00 2.700%4,100.00 74,100.00 78,200.00
08/01/2030 --3,155.00 3,155.00 -
02/01/2031 70,000.00 2.800%3,155.00 73,155.00 76,310.00
08/01/2031 --2,175.00 2,175.00 -
02/01/2032 75,000.00 2.850%2,175.00 77,175.00 79,350.00
08/01/2032 --1,106.25 1,106.25 -
02/01/2033 75,000.00 2.950%1,106.25 76,106.25 77,212.50
Total $965,000.00 -$215,783.79 $1,180,783.79 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $8,653.79
Average Life 8.968 Years
Average Coupon 2.4935173%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.5827267%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.5776570%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.3039968%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.6953105%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 2.4935173%
Weighted Average Maturity 8.968 Years
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Sewer Improvements | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 14
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$1,585,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Cur Ref GO Util Bds 2010B
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Debt Service Schedule
Date Principal Coupon Interest Total P+I Fiscal Total
07/10/2017 -----
02/01/2018 175,000.00 1.200%14,738.60 189,738.60 189,738.60
08/01/2018 --12,148.75 12,148.75 -
02/01/2019 195,000.00 1.250%12,148.75 207,148.75 219,297.50
08/01/2019 --10,930.00 10,930.00 -
02/01/2020 195,000.00 1.450%10,930.00 205,930.00 216,860.00
08/01/2020 --9,516.25 9,516.25 -
02/01/2021 195,000.00 1.550%9,516.25 204,516.25 214,032.50
08/01/2021 --8,005.00 8,005.00 -
02/01/2022 200,000.00 1.750%8,005.00 208,005.00 216,010.00
08/01/2022 --6,255.00 6,255.00 -
02/01/2023 205,000.00 1.800%6,255.00 211,255.00 217,510.00
08/01/2023 --4,410.00 4,410.00 -
02/01/2024 210,000.00 2.050%4,410.00 214,410.00 218,820.00
08/01/2024 --2,257.50 2,257.50 -
02/01/2025 210,000.00 2.150%2,257.50 212,257.50 214,515.00
Total $1,585,000.00 -$121,783.60 $1,706,783.60 -
Yield Statistics
Bond Year Dollars $6,609.96
Average Life 4.170 Years
Average Coupon 1.8424261%
Net Interest Cost (NIC)2.0342579%
True Interest Cost (TIC)2.0407153%
Bond Yield for Arbitrage Purposes 2.3039968%
All Inclusive Cost (AIC)2.2745745%
IRS Form 8038
Net Interest Cost 1.8424261%
Weighted Average Maturity 4.170 Years
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Cur Ref GO Util Bds 2010B | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 15
St Louis Park, Minnesota
$1,585,000 General Obligation Bonds, Series 2017A
Cur Ref GO Util Bds 2010B
Assumes Current Market BQ AAA rates plus 30bps
Debt Service Comparison
Date Total P+I Net New D/S Old Net D/S Savings
02/01/2018 189,738.60 188,709.93 199,015.00 10,305.07
02/01/2019 219,297.50 219,297.50 223,655.00 4,357.50
02/01/2020 216,860.00 216,860.00 223,705.00 6,845.00
02/01/2021 214,032.50 214,032.50 223,155.00 9,122.50
02/01/2022 216,010.00 216,010.00 222,455.00 6,445.00
02/01/2023 217,510.00 217,510.00 226,117.50 8,607.50
02/01/2024 218,820.00 218,820.00 224,455.00 5,635.00
02/01/2025 214,515.00 214,515.00 222,525.00 8,010.00
Total $1,706,783.60 $1,705,754.93 $1,765,082.50 $59,327.57
PV Analysis Summary (Net to Net)
Gross PV Debt Service Savings.....................53,616.33
Net PV Cashflow Savings @ 2.304%(Bond Yield).....53,616.33
Contingency or Rounding Amount....................1,028.67
Net Present Value Benefit $54,645.00
Net PV Benefit / $1,609,711.79 PV Refunded Debt Service 3.395%
Net PV Benefit / $1,555,000 Refunded Principal...3.514%
Net PV Benefit / $1,585,000 Refunding Principal..3.448%
Refunding Bond Information
Refunding Dated Date 7/10/2017
Refunding Delivery Date 7/10/2017
Series 2017A GO Bonds - P | Cur Ref GO Util Bds 2010B | 5/ 5/2017 | 2:58 PM
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 16
RESOLUTION NO. 17- ____
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF
$10,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS SERIES 2017A
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has heretofore
determined that it is necessary and expedient to issue the City's $10,000,000 General Obligation
Bonds, Series 2017A (the "Bonds"), pursuant to (a) Minnesota Statutes, Section 444 to finance
projects related to water treatment plant filter, water rehabilitation/infrastructure, and sewer
improvements in the City; (b) pursuant to the authority granted under Section 6.15 of the City
Charter to finance projects related to sidewalks, trails, SWLRT, and fiber in the City; and (c)
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.67, subd. 3 to effect a current refunding of the City’s
General Obligation Bonds, Series 2010B; and
WHEREAS, the City has retained Ehlers & Associates, Inc., in Roseville, Minnesota
("Ehlers"), as its independent municipal advisor for the Bonds in accordance with Minnesota
Statutes, Section 475.60, Subdivision 2(9);
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, as follows:
1. Authorization; Findings. The City Council hereby authorizes the issuance of the Bonds, and
further authorizes Ehlers to assist the City in negotiating the sale of the Bonds.
2. Meeting; Proposal Opening. The City Council shall meet at 7:30 p.m. on June 19, 2017, for
the purpose of considering proposals for and awarding the sale of the Bonds.
3. Official Statement. In connection with said sale, the officers or employees of the City are
hereby authorized to cooperate with Ehlers and participate in the preparation of an official
statement for the Bonds and to execute and deliver it on behalf of the City upon its completion.
The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by City Council
Member _______________________ and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being
taken thereon, the following City Council Members voted in favor thereof:
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4g)
Title: Series 2017A General Obligation Bonds Page 17
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4h
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Boy Scout Troop 282 Temporary Signs in the Public Right-of-Way
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution authorizing Boy Scout Troop 282’s
request for placing temporary signs in the public right-of-way.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The recommended action is allowed by city code.
SUMMARY: The Boy Scout Troop 282 requests installation of temporary signs in the public
right-of-way for their annual Waffle and Sausage Breakfast event. The Council has granted a
similar request for the Lion’s Pancake Breakfast every year since 2005.
Section 36-362(e)(2) of the Zoning Code states that prohibited signs include, “Signs on or over the
public right-of-way unless the City Council grants permission for a temporary sign on or over the
public right-of-way for a period not to exceed ten days.”
The requested signs advertise the Waffle and Sausage Breakfast event scheduled for Sunday
morning, June 18, 2017. This activity is a fundraiser for the Troop. The request is to install 7
sandwich board style signs as early as June 10, 2017. The signs will be removed on the day of the
event.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Letter from Boy Scout Troop 282
Sign Plan
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: Boy Scout Troop 282 Temporary Signs in the Public Right-of-Way
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE BOY SCOUT TROOP 282'S
APPLICATION FOR THE PLACEMENT OF TEMPORARY SIGNS
WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
WHEREAS, The Boy Scout Troop 282 made application for the placement of 7 temporary
sandwich board type signs for eight days beginning June 10, 2017; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 36-362(e)(2) of the St. Louis Park Zoning Ordinance, the
City Council may approve the placement of temporary signs within the public right-of-way for a
period not to exceed 10 days;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that the City Council approves the Boy Scout Troop 282's application for the
placement of 8 sandwich board type temporary signs within the public right-of-way beginning
June 10, 2017, and to be removed immediately following the conclusion of the event on June 18,
2017. All signs are to be removed by the end of the day on June 18, 2017.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the size and placement of the 7 sandwich board
temporary signs are approved as shown on the attached sign plan (Exhibit A).
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
_________________________________ ___________________________________
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
_________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4h) Page 3
Title: Boy Scout Troop 282 Temporary Signs in the Public Right-of-Way
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4h) Title: Boy Scout Troop 282 Temporary Signs in the Public Right-of-WayPage 4
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4h) Page 5
Title: Boy Scout Troop 282 Temporary Signs in the Public Right-of-Way
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Donation from Community Charities of MN, on behalf of St. Louis Park
American Legion Post 282
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a monetary
donation from Community Charities of Minnesota, on behalf of the St. Louis Park American
Legion Post 282, in the amount of $2,500 for Float & Flick special events to be held at the Rec
Center Aquatic Park.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions
on its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Community Charities of Minnesota, on behalf of the St. Louis Park American Legion Post 282, is
graciously donating an amount of $2,500. The donation is given with the restriction that it be used
toward Aquatic Park Special Events titled Float & Flick.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used to support the
Float & Flick special events to be held at the Aquatic Park on June 10, July 8 and August 12.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Nate Rosa, Recreation Supervisor
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations & Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: Accept Donation from Community Charities of MN, on behalf of St. Louis Park American Legion Post 282
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,500 FROM
COMMUNITY CHARITIES OF MINNESOTA,
ON BEHALF OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK AMERICAN LEGION POST 282,
TO BE USED FOR AQUATIC PARK SPECIAL EVENTS TITLED FLOAT & FLICK
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Community Charities of Minnesota, on behalf of the St. Louis Park American
Legion Post 282, donated $2,500 to assist in the funding of Float & Flick Aquatic Park Special
Events; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to Community Charities of Minnesota, on behalf
of the St. Louis Park American Legion Post 282, with the understanding that it must be used to
assist in funding Float & Flick, Aquatic Park Special Events.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4j
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Donation for Memorial Bench Honoring Steven Strouts from Zachary Strouts
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,200
donation from Zachary Strouts for the purchase and installation of a memorial bench in Dakota
Park honoring Steven Strouts.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on
its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Zachary Strouts graciously donated $2,200 for the purchase and installation of a memorial bench.
The donation is given with the restriction that the memorial bench ($2,200) be placed in Dakota
Park honoring Steven Strouts.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used to purchase and
install a bench in Dakota Park.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Rick Beane, Park Superintendent
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Title: Accept Donation for Memorial Bench Honoring Steven Strouts from Zachary Strouts
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,200 FOR A MEMORIAL BENCH
TO BE PLACED IN DAKOTA PARK HONORING STEVEN STROUTS
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Zachary Strouts donated $2,200 to purchase and install a memorial bench in
Dakota Park honoring Steven Strouts; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to Zachary Strouts with the understanding that it
must be used to purchase and install a bench in Dakota Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Jake Spano, Mayor Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4k
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Donation for Memorial Bench honoring Javi Moran from Sara Schonwald
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,200
donation from Sara Schonwald for the purchase and installation of a memorial bench in Wolfe
Park honoring Javi Moran.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on
its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Sara Schonwald graciously donated $2,200 for the purchase and installation of a memorial bench.
The donation is given with the restriction that the memorial bench ($2,200) be placed in Wolfe
Park honoring Javi Moran.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used to purchase and
install a bench in Wolfe Park.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Rick Beane, Park Superintendent
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: Accept Donation for Memorial Bench honoring Javi Moran from Sara Schonwald
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,200 FOR A MEMORIAL BENCH
TO BE PLACED IN WOLFE PARK HONORING JAVI MORAN
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, Sara Schonwald donated $2,200 to purchase and install a memorial bench in
Wolfe Park honoring Javi Moran; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to Sara Schonwald with the understanding that it
must be used to purchase and install a bench in Wolfe Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4l
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Donation for Memorial Tree Honoring Richard “Dick” Solseth from The
Mulligan Family
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $300
donation from The Mulligan Family for the purchase and installation of a memorial tree in Oak
Hill Park honoring Richard “Dick” Solseth.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on
its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
The Mulligan Family graciously donated $300 for the purchase and installation of a memorial tree.
The donation is given with the restriction that the memorial tree be placed in Oak Hill Park
honoring Richard “Dick” Solseth.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used to purchase and
install a tree in Oak Hill Park.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Jim Vaughan, Natural Resources Coordinator
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4l) Page 2
Title: Accept Donation for Memorial Tree Honoring Richard “Dick” Solseth from The Mulligan Family
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $300 FOR A MEMORIAL TREE
TO BE PLACED IN OAK HILL PARK HONORING RICHARD “DICK” SOLSETH
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, The Mulligan Family donated $300 to purchase and install a memorial tree
in Oak Hill Park honoring Richard “Dick” Solseth; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to The Mulligan Family with the understanding
that it must be used to purchase and install a tree in Oak Hill Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4m
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Accept Donation for Memorial Tree honoring Parker Dionne from David and Ruth
Bowman
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $300
donation from David and Ruth Bowman for the purchase and installation of a memorial tree in
Wolfe Park honoring Parker Dionne.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on
its use?
SUMMARY: State statute requires City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
David and Ruth Bowman graciously donated $300 for the purchase and installation of a memorial
tree. The donation is given with the restriction that the memorial tree be placed in Wolfe Park
honoring Parker Dionne.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This donation will be used to purchase and
install a tree in Wolfe Park.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Jim Vaughan, Natural Resources Coordinator
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4m) Page 2
Title: Accept Donation for Memorial Tree honoring Parker Dionne from David and Ruth Bowman
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING ACCEPTANCE OF DONATION
IN THE AMOUNT OF $300 FOR A MEMORIAL TREE
TO BE PLACED IN WOLFE PARK HONORING PARKER DIONNE
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
WHEREAS, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by
the donor; and
WHEREAS, David and Ruth Bowman donated $300 to purchase and install a memorial
tree in Wolfe Park honoring Parker Dionne; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the gift is hereby accepted with thanks to David and Ruth Bowman with the
understanding that it must be used to purchase and install a tree in Wolfe Park.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4n
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Special Assessment for Fire Suppression Sprinkler System
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution establishing a special assessment for
the installation of a fire suppression sprinkler system at 6509 Walker Street, St. Louis Park, MN.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: This action is consistent with a policy the Council established in
1995.
SUMMARY: Paul Revere Masonic Center LLC, owner of the commercial building at 6509
Walker Street, has requested the City to authorize the installation of an automatic fire suppression
sprinkler system for the commercial building and assess the cost against the property in accordance
with the City’s special assessment policy.
The special assessment policy for installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in existing
buildings was adopted by the City Council in 1995. The City promotes the installation of fire
suppression sprinkler systems and facilitates their installation to promote the general public health,
safety and welfare within the community.
The Building Code requires the installation of a fire sprinkler system due to a major remodeling
project of the building. The property owner will be hiring a contractor to install the sprinkler
system throughout the building and bring it up to compliance with the current code. Based on the
proposed work, the system qualifies for the City’s special assessment program. The property owner
has petitioned the City to authorize the installation of the fire sprinkler system and special assess
the cost of the installation. Sprinkler plans have been submitted and approved by City staff. The
total eligible cost of the installation has been determined to be $59,900.00. An administrative fee
of $299.50 will be received prior to the release of the special assessment funds.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Staff has determined that adequate funds are
available through the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to assist with this project.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Cary Smith, Assistant Chief/Fire Marshal
Reviewed by: Steve Koering, Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4n) Page 2
Title: Special Assessment for Fire Suppression Sprinkler System
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT
OF FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM AT
6509 WALKER STREET, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426
WHEREAS, Paul Revere Masonic Center LLC, the Property Owner at 6509 Walker Street
has petitioned the City of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the installation of a
fire sprinkler system in the building on the Benefited Property; and
WHEREAS, the Property Owner has agreed to waive their right to a public hearing, right
of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
Fire Marshal related to the installation of the fire sprinkler system
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that:
1. The petition from the Property Owner requesting the approval and special assessment
for the fire sprinkler system is hereby accepted.
2. The installation of the fire sprinkler system in conformance with the plans and
specifications approved by the Fire Department and Department of Inspections is
hereby authorized.
3. The total estimated cost for the design and complete installation of the fire sprinkler
system is accepted at $59,900.00.
4. An administrative fee of $299.50 for processing shall be received prior to the release
of special assessment funds.
5. The total special assessment against the property will be $59,900.00.
6. The Property Owners have agreed to waive their rights to a public hearing, notice and
appeal from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
429, or by other statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common
law.
7. The Property Owners agree to pay the City for the cost of the above improvements
through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at four percent (4.0%) interest.
8. The Property Owners agree to execute an agreement with the City and any other
document’s necessary to implement the installation of the fire sprinkler system and the
special assessment of all costs associated therewith.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4n) Page 3
Title: Special Assessment for Fire Suppression Sprinkler System
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
PETITION FOR PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT AND ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
FIRE PROTECTION (SPRINKLER) IMPROVEMENT, FOR PAUL REVERE
MASONIC CENTER LLC, PROPERTY LOCATED AT
6509 WALKER STREET, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55426
AGREEMENT made as of May 15, 2017 between the City of St. Louis Park, a Minnesota
corporation (“City”) and Paul Revere Masonic Center LLC, (Owner). “Property Owner(s)”,
concerning special assessment on fire sprinkler improvement on property located at 6509 Walker
Street, Hennepin County P.I.D. number 17-117-21-44-0016,
The City and the Property Owner agree as follows:
1) Property Owner(s). The Property Owner is Paul Revere Masonic Center LLC.
2) Subject Property. The Property Owner is the fee owner of the property legally
described in attached “Exhibit A” incorporated by reference herein.
3) Purpose of Agreement. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429 sub. 3 and
St. Louis Park Resolution 17-______ the Property Owner petitioned the City on May 15, 2017 to
specially assess the cost of the installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system in his building at
the Benefited Property. The petition attached as “Exhibit B” is incorporated into this agreement
by reference. The City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the public for the
City to facilitate the installation of a fire sprinkler system in the Benefited Property to promote the
public health, safety and welfare.
4) Administrative Fee. An administrative fee of $299.50 for the processing of the
sprinkler special assessment shall be received prior to the release of special assessment funds.
5) The Improvement Project. The construction of an automatic fire sprinkler system
throughout the commercial building at the Benefited Property in conformance with plans and
specifications as described in Exhibit B and as approved by the St. Louis Park Fire and Inspections
Departments.
6) Responsibility. The Property Owner shall assume all responsibility for the
installation, operation and maintenance of the fire sprinkler system, including all construction
contracts and monitoring agreements.
7) Amount to be assessed. The total estimated cost of the project, based on the lowest
responsible bid, is $59,900.00, all of which is proposed to be assessed against the Benefited
Property as described in Paragraph 2 above. It is hereby agreed that the full cost of the project and
minus the administrative fee of $299.50 will be assessed against the property. The total Special
Assessment against the property will be $59,900.00.
8) Waiver of Notice and Hearing. In connection with this improvement, the
Property Owner agrees to waive and does waive any and all rights to public hearing and right to
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4n) Page 4
Title: Special Assessment for Fire Suppression Sprinkler System
any notice, whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or any other statute or by
ordinance, City Charter, constitution, or common law.
9) Waiver of Right of Appeal. In connection with this improvement, the Property
Owner agrees to waive and does waive any and all rights to appeal from the special assessment set
forth above, whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or any other statute or by
ordinance, City Charter, constitution, or common law.
10) Implementation. Each party to this agreement agrees to execute any other
documents upon request of the City, necessary to implement the waivers of notice, hearing and
right of appeal for the special assessment for the improvement project.
11) Payment. The Property Owner agrees to pay the City for the cost of the above
improvements in accordance with the following terms:
a) The assessment shall be paid in equal installments over ten (10) years at four percent
(4.0%) interest on the unpaid balance and in accordance with all provisions of the City
policy for special assessments for fire sprinkler improvements.
12) Indemnification. The Property Owner shall indemnify and hold harmless the City
and its officers, agents and employees from and against all claims, damages, losses, or expenses,
including attorney’s fees, which may be suffered or from which they may be held liable, rising out
of or resulting from the assertion against them of any claims, debts or obligations in consequence
of the performance of this agreement by the City, its employees, agents or subcontractors.
13) Certification of Encumbrances or Contract for Deed. Each party to this
agreement certifies that the property described in Paragraph 1 above, is owned by that party in
simple fee and is free and clear of all encumbrances or Contracts for Deed except as follows:
14) Right to Record. It is agreed that the City may record this document in the chain
of title of the Benefited Property legally described above.
15) Payment. The Property Owner agrees that, after the City has completed the
required inspections and has determined that the installation of the fire sprinkler system is in
conformance with the applicable City ordinances and State laws, the Property Owner will provide
the following documents to the City to allow the City to process payment of the amount to be
assessed for the installation of the fire sprinkler system on the Benefited Property:
a) A sworn construction statement stipulating the contractors and suppliers involved in the
fire sprinkler installation on the Benefited Property and the agreed payment amounts, and
b) A written notice from the Property Owner that they have determined the installation of the
fire sprinkler system has been substantially completed as stipulated in their contract with
their contractor, and
c) Evidence of receipt of a lien waiver from the contractors and suppliers for the improvement
project on the Benefited Property.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4n) Page 5
Title: Special Assessment for Fire Suppression Sprinkler System
It is further agreed by the City and the Property Owners, in making payment to the Property Owner,
the City is not assuming responsibility for payment to any contractor or supplier for the installation
of the improvement project on the Benefited Property.
This agreement has been entered into as of the 15 day of May 2017.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4o
OFFICIAL MINUTES OF MARCH 23, 2017
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals conducted a meeting on March 23, 2017, 6:00 p.m.,
at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota – Council
Chambers.
Members Present: Susan Bloyer, James Gainsley, Justin Kaufman, Henry Solmer
Members Absent: Paul Roberts
Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Nancy Sells, Office Assistant
1.CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL
Vice Chair Kaufman called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2.APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 22, 2016
Commissioner Bloyer made a motion to approve the minutes of December 22, 2016. The
motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
3.CONSENT AGENDA: None
4.PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.Variance:Setback requirements for a sign
Location: 2001 Flag Avenue South
Applicant: Minneapolis Golf Club
Case No.: 17-02-VAR
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. The applicant
is requesting a seven foot variance to the required ten foot setback for signs. He showed
photos and drawings indicating the location of the sign, entryway and proposed sign.
Mr. Morrison noted the applicant has requested a change to recommended conditions of
approval. The applicant requests that the sign face can be no more than thirteen square
feet in area rather than nine square feet in area.
Mr. Morrison reviewed the variance criteria. He noted it is a subtle sign and for
identification only. Mr. Morrison stated that staff finds the application meets the criterion
considered for granting a variance.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4o) Page 2
Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of March 23, 2017
Commissioner Bloyer asked what the hardship is for the sign. She said it appears there is
a legal alternative to the variance.
Mr. Morrison responded that the hardship is related to lack of visibility due to shrubbery
with the sign structure at three feet off the property line. The shrubs are required by city
code to screen the parking lot.
Vice Chair Kaufman asked the distance from the roadway to the sign.
Mr. Morrison responded that distance was not identified but it looks like the typical 14
feet. He said a typical parking lot is located further away from the property line.
Vice Chair Kaufman opened the public hearing.
Joseph Zimmerley, Club Manager, Minneapolis Golf Club, said the club has good
support from the neighborhood for the sign plan. He stated that the sign works for the city
as well as for the club and it marks the historical building. He said that the property line
is 20 feet from the current sign.
Blois Olson, 1801 Flag Ave. S., said many of the neighbors enjoy the club as a
neighborhood amenity and they believe the sign is well designed and doesn’t impact the
neighborhood in a negative way.
Letters in support of the variance request were received from Nicholas Davis, Flag &
18th, and from Chad and Holly Nichols, 1811 Independence Ave. S.
As no one was present wishing to speak, Vice Chair Kaufman closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Gainsley said he has no objection to the requested variance. He said the
identification aspect of the sign is what is important.
Commissioner Solmer said there will be minimal impact on the neighborhood. The sign
provides the minimum required to identify the club as vehicles approach it. He added that
it lines up with existing parking and won’t be noticed.
Commissioner Bloyer said the sign looks good and she has no qualms about the club.
She said she is thinking about the last two sign variances before BOZA which BOZA
tried to craft so that it applied to those particular buildings. She said she feels granting
this variance would open the door for everybody’s signs because a hedge is in the way.
She said she is not in favor of the request.
Vice Chair Kaufman noted the modification to the resolution regarding square footage
area of the sign face. He said all he was bothered about was that the sign was all but
created and now BOZA approval is needed. He remarked that the sign impact is minimal
and he is in favor of the variance request.
Commissioner Gainsley made a motion approving a seven foot variance to allow a three
foot setback instead of the ten foot setback required for a sign, with modification to
condition in the resolution that the sign face can be no more than thirteen square feet in
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4o) Page 3
Title: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting Minutes of March 23, 2017
area rather than nine square feet in area. The motion passed on a vote of 3-1 (Bloyer
opposed).
Mr. Morrison read the statement regarding appeal to the City Council. The 10-day appeal
period ends on April 3, 2017.
5.ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4p
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
April 5, 2017 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen,
Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich
MEMBERS ABSENT: Torrey Kanne, Rick Person, Ethan Rickert (youth member)
STAFF PRESENT: Erick Francis, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of March 8, 2017
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to approve the minutes of March 8, 2017.
Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
3. Public Hearings
A. St. Louis Park Walker Stormwater Ponds – Conditional Use Permit
Location: 3400 Republic Avenue & 7015 Walker Street
Applicant: St. Louis Park Engineering Department
Case No.: 17-10-CUP
Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. Plans for a stormwater treatment
facility require excavation of 2,160 square cubic yards of soil from the site and 500 cubic
yards of clean fill material to be imported to the site. A conditional use permit is required
to excavate or fill more than 400 cubic yards of fill.
Ms. Monson provided background on the site. She discussed landscaping, construction
haul routes, construction hours and construction schedule. She said a neighborhood
meeting was held and no one indicated concerns regarding the stormwater project.
Commissioner Carper asked if the diverted stormwater would drain into the groundwater.
Erick Francis, Water Resources Manager, explained the design of the treatment facility
which prevents diverted water from being infiltrated into the groundwater.
Commissioner Carper asked about involvement with the Minnehaha Watershed District
on the project.
Mr. Francis responded that there are no restrictions placed on the project by the
Watershed District.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4p) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 5, 2017
Commissioner Carper asked if there are any measures in place regarding blowing dust
and dirt during construction.
Mr. Francis said additional measures for dust control will be in place.
Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, she
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Carper made a motion approving the Conditional Use Permit for 3400
Republic Avenue and 7015 Walker Street. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded
the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
4. Other Business
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:11 p.m.
STUDY SESSION
6:15 p.m.
1. Architectural Design Study
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, explained that staff wishes to discuss the
architectural design section of the zoning ordinance for direction and insight on these
items: update list of materials in all three classes, review design criteria, screening and
effectiveness of the ordinance.
Chair Peilen said she liked the idea of a focus group to assist with research and selection
of materials and criteria.
Commissioner Robertson said it is a good idea to regularly review the materials list as
new materials come on to the market. He said at the same time it’s often tough with
architectural materials as it is a challenge to be cutting edge and the city doesn’t want to
risk putting materials on our buildings that will not perform well. It’s good to have a
regular review or have something in the code for reviewing an alternative material. It’s
best to have a comprehensive list.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4p) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 5, 2017
Commissioner Robertson said sustainability is very complex and the city shouldn’t reject
a material that isn’t sustainable. He suggested using extra points or consideration, similar
to what is used with energy efficiency.
Commissioner Robertson said in addition to some architects, focus group participants
should include manufacturing reps, installers and a developer.
Commissioners suggested the following criteria for materials: longevity, aesthetic
durability, performance durability and maintenance.
Commissioner Carper spoke about looking at the types of energy to be used. He spoke
about solar panels and looking ahead to the future.
Commissioner Carper said the focus group might also include large construction
company representative and someone from an architecture school.
2. Vision 3.0 Facilitated Conversation
Mr. Walther conducted a Vision 3.0 community conversation with commissioners.
Discussion items included:
a. Welcome and Why We’re Here
b. Introductions
c. The Big Questions
d. The Closing Circle
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Consent Agenda Item: 4q
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 19, 2017 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne,
Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson,
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member)
STAFF PRESENT: Greg Hunt, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of March 15, 2017
Commissioner Carper made a motion approving the minutes of March 15, 2017.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote
of 4-0-2 (Person and Robertson abstained).
3. Other Business
A. Consideration of Resolution No. 90 – Wooddale Station TIF District
Conformance with Comprehensive Plan
Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator, stated the request is adoption of a
resolution finding the Tax Increment Financing Plans for the proposed Wooddale Station
Tax Increment Financing District conform to the general plans for the development and
redevelopment of the city. He explained that the proposed TIF District would incorporate
PLACE’s proposed plans to construct a major mixed-use redevelopment at the southeast
quadrant of Highway 7 and Wooddale Ave., and the northeast corner of W. 36th St. and
Wooddale Ave. He provided background on the PLACE E-generation project. Mr. Hunt
discussed the TIF assistance to be provided and the proposed redevelopment TIF District.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 90 finding the TIF
Plans for the proposed Wooddale Station Tax Increment Financing District to be in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan of the City of St. Louis Park. Commissioner
Person seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-1 (Johnston-Madison
opposed).
4. Hearings
A. Special Permit Major Amendment
Location: 2501 State Highway 100
Applicant: Benilde-St. Margaret’s School
Case No.: 17-12-CUP
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4q) Page 2
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2017
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, provided the staff report. The applicant
is requesting an amendment to add approximately 2,200 square feet of flex space within
its building and to convert approximately 4,700 square feet of storage space into science
lab classroom space.
Mr. Morrison reviewed construction plans, parking and lighting. He stated that all the
new lighting inside the building is strictly downcast and the windows are slightly tinted
helping to mitigate light coming from the windows. He said an architectural element, a
cross, will not be lit by flood lights but would be back lit with an LED strip along the
back side of the cross, providing a halo effect. He said this was a concern at the first
neighborhood meeting. He said at the second neighborhood meeting putting the cross
lighting on the same timer as parking lot lights was discussed. That seemed amenable to
residents and it is written into the conditions of approval.
Natalie Ramier, CFO, Benilde-St. Margaret’s School, spoke about the proposed plans.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison stated it was a nice addition.
Commissioner Robertson stated the design is top notch.
Commissioner Carper said he attended the second neighborhood meeting and had some
questions about the cross and lighting. Those questions have been answered satisfactorily
for him. He asked if the cross facing Highway 100 is illuminated.
Ms. Ramier responded she did not think the cross facing Hwy. 100 was illuminated.
Chair Peilen opened the public hearing.
Elisabeth Shapiro, 2500 Princeton Court, said she was representing her husband who was
unable to attend, several of her neighbors who face the wetlands, school fields and
school. She said she also represented the magnificent wildlife that is present in the
wetlands adjacent to their homes, the neighborhood and the school. She said they
understand and are excited about the proposed addition. She said, however, that the
modified design still has a negative impact on the residents, the wildlife and the wetland.
Ms. Shapiro said she is the neighbor who was concerned about lighting at the first
neighborhood meeting. She said she is grateful that the plans were modified somewhat
from the first meeting. She said she could not attend the second meeting. She stated that
the modifications are inadequate and unacceptable to the residents for the following
reasons: 1) downcast lighting in the atrium is still visible from the outdoors; 2) an
illuminated cross, even backlit, causing a halo effect at night, and even on a timer, still
faces their homes and is visible clearly from the north facing windows and decks,
illuminated and visible at night. She said to be very honest it is an affront to the diversity
of the residential neighborhood. She said it shows a total lack of respect and sensitivity to
the diversity and harmony of their neighborhood. 3) The tinted glass windows still allow
light downward emitted out to the surrounding fields, wetlands and neighborhood. 4)
Ms. Shapiro stated that the glass windows will also reflect external lighting. She added
that there is a lot of external lighting at the school. She said the school’s minor
modification to address their concerns by redirecting the atrium lighting downward and
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4q) Page 3
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2017
placing the cross illumination on a timer are really ineffective in minimizing the impact
on the neighborhood.
Ms. Shapiro presented and distributed to the Commission four nighttime photographs
illustrating her concerns about existing lighting on residences and wetland.
Ms. Shapiro spoke about light pollution impact on the wildlife and environment.
Ms. Shapiro spoke about glass that can be used that doesn’t reflect light and will not emit
light.
Ms. Shapiro distributed letters from the following neighbors concerned about the
proposal and lighting: Nancy Murphy, 2504 Princeton Ct.; Marc Rothstein, 2512
Princeton Ct.; Jeffrey Sawyer and Karli Koski, 2500 Quentin Ct.; and Judy and Jerel
Shapiro, 2516 Monterey Ave. S.
Ms. Shapiro distributed materials from Joanna Eckles, Audubon Society; Kristen
Osterwood, Green Building Alliance; Leeanna Newsome, Green Business Certification;
International Dark-Sky Association; Audubon Minnesota; and Report of the Council on
Science and Public Health regarding Human and Environmental Effects of LED
Community Lighting.
Ms. Shapiro concluded by saying the neighbors vigorously oppose any addition to the
light pollution that impacts them nightly. She said the proposed plan is insensitive and
disregards the neighbors, wildlife and wetland. The atrium proposal adds more light
pollution. They ask that the city demands that BSM respectfully and sensitively deal with
the plan so that the neighborhood and wetlands will be able to live in a neighborhood
with lighting plans that emit zero additional lighting impact.
Lee Snitzer, 2504 Quentin Court, said he missed both neighborhood meetings. His
concerns were outlined by Ms. Shapiro. He said it seems significant that BSM chose not
to light the cross across from Hwy. 100. He said he assumed that had to do with amount
of signage allowed by city code. He asked the Commission to explore that. He suggested
that the cross should not be lit. He said BSM is a great neighbor and tries to address
concerns. He said timers are not always controlled well. He spoke about property values
going down due to excessive lighting on their properties.
Jay Jaffee, 2521 Princeton Court, said his property faces east. He does see the light
coming from the north at night, often until 10 or 11 at night even without school events.
He spoke about moving there seven years ago and enjoying the wildlife and wetlands.
He said anything adding illumination is not a good idea. He spoke about the non-lit cross
which faces the service road and Hwy. 100. He said he wasn’t sure why the proposed
new cross needs to be lit.
As no one else was present wishing to speak the Chair closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Kanne spoke about property values decreasing over time due to excessive
light.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4q) Page 4
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2017
Commissioner Robertson said the lit cross isn’t necessary for the auditorium and science
rooms. It is an applied ornament. He said the amount of light that would come from
atrium and cross is dwarfed by the field lighting. He said it would be wise on BSM’s part
not to light the cross. He said he is sensitive to wildlife biology. He said it is frustrating
the field lights are on unnecessarily. He said the issue of the lit cross should be revisited
before the item comes to city council.
Commissioner Person asked staff for a reminder of what types of conditions were put in
place when the athletic field was expanded.
Mr. Morrison and Mr. Walther spoke about hours of lighting, use of audio equipment,
and lighting fixtures reducing the spill lighting and glare. The Council required BSM to
meet regularly with neighborhood regarding relations and concerns between the two.
The committee has been meeting regularly.
Dean Laird, Facilities Director, BSM, said parking lights are on all night for security
reasons and interior lights are shut down at 11 p.m. He spoke about exterior security
lighting.
Commissioner Carper said he thought parking lights were on a timer.
Mr. Laird said the cross lighting could be put on a timer.
Commissioner Kanne said the effect of lighting on property values is relevant and
important to consider.
Commissioner Robertson said when the field lights go off the cross light should also go
off.
Chair Peilen said, setting aside lighting, she didn’t think the addition of the cross was
insensitive. She said she believes BSM wants to be as good a neighbor as it has been.
She also spoke about the good relationship between BSM and Beth El Synagogue.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she didn’t think Benilde intended to offend
anyone. It could be discussed further. She suggested that all lighting on the property
could be reviewed as a condition of approval.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion recommending approval of a major amendment
to the Special Permit with staff conditions, and including further review of all lighting
and conformity to current zoning, prior to city council consideration.
Commissioner Carper said he is against the motion as proposed. He said there is an
established working community committee so there is an ability for discussion of light
pollution, including back lit cross, so it wouldn’t need to be covered in the motion.
Commissioner Robertson said he thought it would be wise to have an additional lighting
conversation prior to consideration by city council.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4q) Page 5
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2017
Natalie Ramier, CFO, said BSM wanted to hear more discussion this evening, and she
said they are willing to remove the back lighting of the cross. She will speak with BSM
and community members about lighting that occurs when an event is not occuring.
Commissioner Robertson removed his original motion. He then made a motion
recommending approval of a major amendment to the Special Permit to allow a building
expansion at Benilde-St. Margaret’s (BSM) school with conditions recommended by
staff. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-1
(Kanne opposed).
Commissioners asked staff to review the BSM parking lot lighting.
B. Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness
Location: 7210 Minnetonka Boulevard
Applicant: Steven Cherney
Case No.: 17-11-CUP
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He explained
that the request is a CUP to operate a Snap Fitness 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
Without the CUP the hours are limited to 6 am to midnight. He reviewed the zoning
regulations and the conditions of approval.
Steve Cherney, Snap Fitness, said he appreciated the Commission’s consideration.
The Chair opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak she closed
the public hearing.
Commissioner Carper made a motion recommending approval of a Conditional Use
Permit to allow the Snap Fitness located at 7210 Minnetonka Blvd. to operate 24 hours, 7
days a week with conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Johnston-Madison
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
C. Major Amendment to PUD – Parkway 25
Location: 4005, 4015 and 4027 County Rd. 25
Applicant: Sela Group, LLC
Case No.: 17-13-PUD
Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. She noted a correction in the
proposed motion. The zoning code section to be amended is 36-268 PUD 7, not 26-268
PUD 7. She explained that the original PUD commercial uses included a restaurant. The
applicant has requested an amendment to the PUD to allow for medical uses and to
increase the size of the commercial area. Proposed changes occur only on the ground
floor of the building. The amendment would decrease the west surface parking lot and the
east surface parking lot. Landscaping on the west property line will be removed and
additional landscaping will be installed elsewhere on the site to make up for removals.
Ms. Monson presented existing approved plans and proposed plans. She reviewed uses,
height, parking, landscaping, DORA and public input.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 4q) Page 6
Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 19, 2017
Commissioner Person asked if the developer has a medical office tenant.
Ms. Monson responded that a medical office tenant has been named.
Commissioner Person asked about the small commercial space.
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, stated that space would be an executive
office space of the medical office.
Chair Peilen asked about the pool house from the existing plan.
Dean Dovolis, architect, DJR Architecture, explained that pool equipment would have
been stored in the pool house. That equipment space has now been moved inside,
resulting in more green space outdoors.
Chair Peilen stated she was disappointed over the loss of the restaurant as an amenity.
She said she understood with the amendment that there was no longer the required
parking available for a restaurant. She asked if in the future there might be a food service
of some type.
Mr. Dovolis said it’s possible a coffee shop or food service use could operate in the
future.
Chair Peilen opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak she
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion recommending approval of Major
Amendment to Section 36-268 PUD 7 subject to conditions recommended by staff.
Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:35 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Action Agenda Item: 5a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to appoint citizen representatives to the Boards and
Commissions as listed in Exhibit A.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable
SUMMARY: The City received a tremendous response from individuals interested in serving on
a Board or Commission. A total of 107 applications were received for open positions on eight (8)
different boards and commissions. The City Council evaluated the applications that were
submitted and conducted candidate interviews on April 24 and May 8.
Because there are more applicants than positions available not all candidates will be able to be
appointed to a Board or Commission at this time. Applications for candidates not selected will be
kept on file for the period of 1 year. Should additional positions become available during that time
period the City Council will attempt to fill the open positions from the already established
candidate pool.
Each of the individuals appointed by the City Council will be notified by staff and provided with
orientation information from staff liaisons prior to the start of their terms on May 31, 2017.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Exhibit A
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 5a) Page 2
Title: Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions
EXHIBIT A
Name Board/Commission Term
Expiration
Jim Gainsley Board of Zoning Appeals 5/31/20
Anthony Howard Board of Zoning Appeals 5/31/20
Henry Solmer Board of Zoning Appeals 5/31/20
Stefan Collinet Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/18
Nicole Ciulla Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/19
Claire Lukens Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/19
Susan Bloyer Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/20
Keir Stiegler Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/20
Bridget Rathsack Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/20
Catherine Johnson Housing Authority – Program Participant 5/31/22
Katherine Arnold Human Rights Commission – Attorney Commissioner 5/31/20
Mary Feldman Human Rights Commission 5/31/18
Greg Gidden Human Rights Commission 5/31/20
Zaylore Stout Human Rights Commission 5/31/20
Sara Wilhelm Garbers Human Rights Commission 5/31/20
Elizabeth Griffin Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Bruce Cantor Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Carl Robertson Planning Commission 5/31/20
Claudia Johnston-
Madison Planning Commission 5/31/20
David Pacheco Police Advisory Commission 5/31/18
Alicia Hamilton Police Advisory Commission 5/31/18
Matt Kinney Police Advisory Commission 5/31/18
Jay Arneson Police Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Vladimir Sivriver Police Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Ellen Sackrison Police Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Eric Brown Police Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Nathan Munson Telecommunications Advisory Commission 5/31/19
Maren Anderson Telecommunications Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Bruce Browning Telecommunications Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Cindy Hoffman Telecommunications Advisory Commission 5/31/20
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Public Hearing Agenda Item: 6a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to Adopt Resolution
approving the establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District within
Redevelopment Project No. 1 (a redevelopment district).
(The EDA will have considered establishment of the Wooddale Station TIF District earlier in the
evening.)
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the establishment of the Elmwood
Apartments TIF District to facilitate the construction of a mixed use redevelopment at 5605 W 36th
Street?
SUMMARY: 36th Street LLC’s application for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance in
connection with its proposed redevelopment at 5605 W 36th Street was reviewed at the March 27th
Study Session where it received consensus support. Constructing The Elmwood project is not
financially feasible but for the use of the proposed tax increment assistance. At its April 3rd
meeting, the City Council set a public hearing date of May 15 th for consideration of the proposed
Elmwood Apartments Redevelopment TIF District. It is now time to take the final step in the TIF
process which is to formally authorize the creation of the Redevelopment TIF district. Such
authorization enables the EDA to designate tax increment generated from the completed Elmwood
apartments redevelopment as partial reimbursement for certain qualified redevelopment costs
incurred in connection with the construction of the project so as to make it financially feasible.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Creation of the TIF district provides the
funding vehicle to reimburse 36th Street LLC for a portion of its qualified project costs. The terms
and amount of TIF assistance are specified within the Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street
LLC which is also scheduled for consideration May 15 th.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
TIF Plan Overview (provided in the related EDA staff report)
Elmwood Apartments TIF Plan (available upon request from staff)
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Page 2 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: 36th Street LLC (“Redeveloper”) owns the property located at 5605 W 36th
Street. This one-acre parcel is situated at the southeast corner of Xenwood Avenue and 36th Street
West. The subject property is currently occupied by a two-story multi-tenant commercial building
known as 36th Street Business Center which was recently determined structurally substandard.
Proposed Redevelopment Site: 5605 W 36th Street
REDEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: The Redeveloper proposes to raze the existing building and
construct a six-story, mixed-use senior housing building called The Elmwood. The project will
consist of two levels of underground parking, 85 residential units restricted to residents age 55+,
of which 17 (or 20%) will be affordable at 60% of the area median income (AMI), and 188 parking
stalls. Additionally, the west wing of the building will contain 4,920 gross square feet of
commercial space, with space for outdoor seating. Active uses fronting 36th Street include a fitness
studio, leasing office and main entrance. The Redeveloper’s applications for an Alley Vacation,
Final Plat and PUD to allow construction of the proposed project on the subject site were approved
by the City Council on March 20, 2017.
Page 3 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Rendering of proposed building – The Elmwood
Redeveloper’s Request for Public Financing Assistance
The Total Development Cost to construct The Elmwood project is approximately $19 million.
There are significant extraordinary costs associated with redeveloping the subject site. These
include: asbestos abatement, building demolition, soil correction, site preparation, shoring,
underground stormwater retention, and structured underground parking. Altogether, these costs
exceed $3.6 million and prevent the proposed project from achieving financial feasibility.
Consequently the Redeveloper applied to the EDA for Tax Increment Financing (TIF) assistance
to offset a portion of these costs so as to enable the project to proceed. Tax increment financing
uses the increased future property taxes generated by a new development to finance certain
qualified extraordinary costs incurred during construction of that development for a limited period
of time.
TIF Application Review
The EDA/City Council reviewed the Redeveloper’s TIF Application for the proposed project at
the March 27th Study Session. At that meeting there was consensus support for favorably
considering the recommended level of tax increment assistance - $950,000. As a result, Staff was
directed to call for a public hearing on the proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF District and prepare
business terms for a formal redevelopment contract with 36th Street LLC.
TIF District Approvals
At its April 3rd meeting, the City Council set a public hearing date of May 15, 2017 for
consideration of the proposed Redevelopment TIF District. The EDA will consider the approval
of the redevelopment contract that same evening.
The Planning Commission reviewed the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing Plan on May
3rd, as required by the MN TIF Act, and determined it was in conformance with the City’s general
redevelopment plans.
Page 4 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Synopsis of the Proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF District
The subject site is located within the boundaries of the City’s Redevelopment Project Area which
is the portion of the city where TIF districts are statutorily authorized to be established. Inclusion
of the proposed project within a designated Redevelopment Project Area allows the EDA/City
Council to establish a TIF district so as to enable the EDA to provide the proposed financial
assistance to The Elmwood project. As shown in the attached TIF District maps, the proposed
Elmwood Apartments TIF District encompasses one parcel: 5605 36th St West along with adjacent
rights of way and abutting roadways.
Attached is an Overview which summarizes the basic elements of the proposed Elmwood
Apartments TIF District. Additional details of the proposed TIF District may be found in the
Elmwood Apartments TIF District Plan (available upon request from Staff). Both the Overview
and TIF Plan were prepared by the EDA’s TIF consultant, Ehlers. In a general sense, TIF Plans
may be viewed as enabling legislation. They establish the proposed TIF district’s classification,
geographic boundaries, maximum duration, maximum budget authority for tax increment revenues
and expenditures, fiscal disparities election as well as estimated impact on various taxing
jurisdictions along with findings which statutorily qualify the district. The specific mutual
obligations between the EDA and the Redeveloper as well as the precise terms of the financial
assistance are contained in the separate Redevelopment Contract between the parties. Both the TIF
Plan and the Redevelopment Contract need to be approved in order for redevelopment projects
involving tax increment to proceed.
Qualifications of the Proposed TIF District
Consulting firm LHB was retained to conduct a TIF district feasibility analysis to determine if the
subject site qualified as a Redevelopment District under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174,
Subdivision 10. After inspecting and evaluating the subject property and applying current statutory
criteria, LHB made the following findings in its report entitled: Report of Inspection Procedures
and Results for Determining Qualifications of a Tax Increment Financing District as a
Redevelopment District: 5605 36th Street West Redevelopment TIF District dated February 1,
2017:
• The proposed TIF District has a coverage calculation of 100 percent which exceeds the 70
percent requirement.
• 100 percent of the buildings are structurally substandard which exceeds the 50 percent
requirement.
• The substandard building is reasonably distributed throughout the area of the proposed TIF
District.
Thus the proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF District met both the “Coverage Test” and the
“Condition of Buildings Test” and thereby qualifies under Minnesota Statutes Section 479.174,
Subdivision 10 as a redevelopment TIF district. Other findings for the qualification of the proposed
TIF District are contained in Appendix G of the TIF Plan.
Duration of the Proposed TIF District
Under the TIF Act, the duration of redevelopment districts is up to 25 years after receipt of the
first increment by the City (a total of 26 years of tax increment). The date of receipt by the City
of the first tax increment is expected to be 2019. Thus, the full term of the district is estimated to
terminate after 2044. The EDA and City have the right to decertify the District prior to the legally
required date. The City’s expressed obligations to the Redeveloper, as per the terms of the
Page 5 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Redevelopment Contract, are estimated to be satisfied in approximately 6 years. Once those
obligations are satisfied, the City may terminate the District.
TIF District Budget
The TIF Plan authorizes the use of tax increment generated by the District to pay for certain
qualifying project expenses and capital improvements associated with the District should they be
necessary. It should be noted that the financing uses and project costs reflected within Subsection
2-10 (Uses of Funds) of the TIF Plan is a not-to-exceed budget and not the actual expected project
budget.
Fiscal Disparities Election within the Proposed TIF District
The proposed redevelopment will contain commercial property. Therefore, the proposed TIF
District is subject to the fiscal disparities calculation. Consistent with the city’s TIF Policy and
past practice, the Elmwood Apartments TIF District will contribute to fiscal disparities (as opposed
to the tax base of the City making the contribution).
Recommendation
The EDA’s financial consultant, Ehlers, prepared the proposed Elmwood Apartments TIF Plan in
consultation with the EDA’s legal counsel, Kennedy & Graven, and staff; all of whom recommend
approval of the establishment the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District.
NEXT STEPS: The Redevelopment Contract with 36th Street LLC which specifies the terms and
amount of TIF assistance related to the PLACE project is also scheduled for consideration by the
EDA May 15th.
Page 6 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY
STATE OF MINNESOTA
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION ADOPTING A MODIFICATION TO THE
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1;
ESTABLISHING THE ELMWOOD APARTMENTS TAX INCREMENT
FINANCING DISTRICT THEREIN AND ADOPTING A TAX
INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota (the "City"), as follows:
Section 1. Recitals
1.01. The Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority (the "EDA") has heretofore established Redevelopment Project No. 1 and adopted the
Redevelopment Plan therefor. It has been proposed by the EDA and the City that the City adopt a
Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment
Plan Modification") and establish the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District (the
"District") therein and adopt a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the
Redevelopment Plan Modification and the TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the
"Plans"), all pursuant to and in conformity with applicable law, including Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.090 to 469.1082 and Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, all inclusive, as amended (the
"Act"), all as reflected in the Plans, and presented for the Council's consideration.
1.02. The EDA and City have investigated the facts relating to the Plans and have caused
the Plans to be prepared.
1.03. The EDA and City have performed all actions required by law to be performed prior
to the establishment of the District and the adoption and approval of the proposed Plans, including,
but not limited to, notification of Hennepin County and Independent School District No. 283
having taxing jurisdiction over the property to be included in the District, a review of and written
comment on the Plans by the City Planning Commission on May 3, 2017, approval of the Plans
by the EDA on May 15, 2017, and the holding of a public hearing by the Council upon published
notice as required by law.
1.04. Certain written reports (the ''Reports") relating to the Plans and to the activities
contemplated therein have heretofore been prepared by staff and consultants and submitted to the
Council and/or made a part of the City files and proceedings on the Plans. The Reports, including
the redevelopment qualifications reports and planning documents, include data, information and/or
substantiation constituting or relating to the basis for the other findings and determinations made
in this resolution. The Council hereby confirms, ratifies and adopts the Reports, which are hereby
incorporated into and made as fully a part of this resolution to the same extent as if set forth in full
herein.
1.05 The City is not modifying the boundaries of Redevelopment Project No. 1.
Page 7 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Section 2. Findings for the Adoption and Approval of the Redevelopment Plan Modification
2.01. The Council approves the Redevelopment Plan Modification, and specifically finds
that: (a) the land within the Project area would not be available for redevelopment without the
financial aid to be sought under the Redevelopment Plan; (b) the Redevelopment Plan, as modified,
will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with the needs of the City as a whole, for the
development of the Project by private enterprise; and (c) the Redevelopment Plan, as modified,
conforms to the general plan for the development of the City as a whole.
Section 3. Findings for the Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment
Financing District
3.01. The Council hereby finds that the District is in the public interest and is a
"redevelopment district" under Section 469.174, Subd. 10 of the Act.
3.02. The Council further finds that the proposed redevelopment would not occur solely
through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future and that the increased market
value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without the use of tax increment
financing would be less than the increase in the market value estimated to result from the proposed
development after subtracting the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum
duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan, that the TIF Plan conforms to the general plan
for the development or redevelopment of the City as a whole; and that the TIF Plan will afford
maximum opportunity consistent with the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development
or redevelopment of the District by private enterprise.
3.03. The Council further finds, declares and determines that the City made the above
findings stated in this Section and has set forth the reasons and supporting facts for each
determination in writing, attached hereto as Exhibit A.
3.04. The EDA elects to calculate fiscal disparities for the District in accordance with
Section 469.177, Subd. 3, clause b of the Act, which means the fiscal disparities contribution will
be taken from inside the District.
Section 4. Public Purpose
4.01. The adoption of the Plans conforms in all respects to the requirements of the Act
and will help fulfill a need to develop an area of the City which is already built up, to provide
diversified housing opportunities, to improve the tax base and to improve the general economy of
the State and thereby serves a public purpose. For the reasons described in Exhibit A, the City
believes these benefits directly derive from the tax increment assistance provided under the TIF
Plan. A private developer will receive only the assistance needed to make this development
financially feasible. As such, any private benefits received by a developer are incidental and do
not outweigh the primary public benefits.
Page 8 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Section 5. Approval and Adoption of the Plans
5.01. The Plans, as presented to the Council on this date, including without limitation the
findings and statements of objectives contained therein, are hereby approved, ratified, established,
and adopted and shall be placed on file in the office of the Economic Development Coordinator.
5.02. The staff of the City, the City's advisors and legal counsel are authorized and
directed to proceed with the implementation of the Plans and to negotiate, draft, prepare and
present to this Council for its consideration all further plans, resolutions, documents and contracts
necessary for this purpose.
5.03 The Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County ("Manager") is
requested to certify the original net tax capacity of the District, as described in the Plans, and to
certify in each year thereafter the amount by which the original net tax capacity has increased or
decreased; and the EDA is authorized and directed to forthwith transmit this request to the Manager
in such form and content as the Manager may specify, together with a list of all properties within
the District, for which building permits have been issued during the 18 months immediately
preceding the adoption of this resolution.
5.04. The Economic Development Coordinator is further authorized and directed to file
a copy of the Plans with the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Revenue and the
Office of the State Auditor pursuant to Section 469.175, Subd. 4a of the Act.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney
Page 9 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
The reasons and facts supporting the findings for the adoption of the Tax Increment Financing
Plan (TIF Plan) for the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District (District), as
required pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.175, Subdivision 3 are as follows:
1.Finding that the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District is a
redevelopment district as defined in M.S., Section 469.174, Subd. 10.
The District consists of one parcel with plans to redevelop the area for housing and
commercial purposes. At least 70 percent of the area of the parcel in the District is occupied
by buildings, streets, utilities, paved or gravel parking lots or other similar structures and
the building in the District, not including outbuildings, is structurally substandard to a
degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance. (See Appendix F of the TIF Plan.)
2.Finding that the proposed development, in the opinion of the City Council, would not
reasonably be expected to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably
foreseeable future and that the increased market value of the site that could reasonably be
expected to occur without the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase
in the market value estimated to result from the proposed development after subtracting
the present value of the projected tax increments for the maximum duration of the District
permitted by the TIF Plan.
The proposed development, in the opinion of the City, would not reasonably be expected
to occur solely through private investment within the reasonably foreseeable future: This
finding is supported by the fact that the redevelopment proposed in the TIF Plan meets the
City's objectives for redevelopment, but that due to the high costs of redevelopment on the
parcel currently occupied by substandard buildings, including costs associated with
demolition, soil remediation, site improvements, and utilities; costs to finance the proposed
improvements; and costs to include affordable housing, this project is feasible only through
assistance, in part, from tax increment financing. The developer was asked for and provided
a letter and a proforma as justification that the developer would not have gone forward
without tax increment assistance.
The increased market value of the site that could reasonably be expected to occur without
the use of tax increment financing would be less than the increase in market value estimated
to result from the proposed development after subtracting the present value of the projected
tax increments for the maximum duration of the District permitted by the TIF Plan: This
finding is justified on the grounds that the costs of demolition, soil remediation, site
improvements, utility improvements and construction of affordable housing add to the total
redevelopment cost. Historically, the costs of site and public improvements in the City
have made redevelopment of any kind infeasible without tax increment assistance.
Although other projects could potentially be proposed, the City reasonably determines that
no other redevelopment of similar scope can be anticipated on this site without substantially
similar assistance being provided to the development.
Page 10 City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Establishment of the Elmwood Apartments Tax Increment Financing District
Therefore, the City concludes as follows:
a.The City's estimate of the amount by which the market value of the entire District
will increase without the use of tax increment financing is $0.
b.If the proposed development occurs, the total increase in market value will be
$15,061,000.
c.The present value of tax increments from the District for the maximum duration of
the district permitted by the TIF Plan is estimated to be $4,331,068.
d.Even if some development other than the proposed development were to occur, the
Council finds that no alternative would occur that would produce a market value
increase greater than $10,729,932 (the amount in clause b less the amount in clause
c) without tax increment assistance.
3.Finding that the TIF Plan for the District conforms to the general plan for the development
or redevelopment of the municipality as a whole.
The Planning Commission reviewed the TIF Plan and found that the TIF Plan conforms to
the general development plan of the City.
4.Finding that the TIF Plan for the District will afford maximum opportunity, consistent with
the sound needs of the City as a whole, for the development or redevelopment of
Redevelopment Project No. 1 by private enterprise.
The project to be assisted by the District will result in diversified housing opportunities
and increased employment in the City and the State of Minnesota, the renovation of a
substandard property, increased tax base of the State and the addition of a high-quality
development to the City.
Specifically, through the implementation of the TIF Plan, the EDA or City will increase
the availability of safe and decent life-cycle housing in the City.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Action Agenda Item: 8a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Inclusionary Housing Policy
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the amended Inclusionary Housing Policy
which would increase the required percentage of affordable housing units in new market rate multi-
unit residential developments receiving financial assistance from the City and add a requirement
that developments covered by the policy must not discriminate against tenants who pay their rent
with government provided Housing Choice Vouchers or other local rent subsidies.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Will the proposed amendments assist in meeting the strategic
priority of the Council of providing a well maintained and diverse housing stock?
SUMMARY: In June of 2015, the council adopted an Inclusionary Housing Policy that requires
the inclusion of affordable housing units for lower income households in new market rate multi-
unit residential developments receiving financial assistance from the city. The goal of the
Inclusionary Housing Policy is to increase the supply of affordable housing and to promote
economic and social integration. At the November 16, 2016 study session (SS), council expressed
an interest in increasing the affordable housing unit requirements under the current policy. At the
March 18, 2017 study session, staff presented a proposal to amend the Inclusionary Housing Policy
to increase the percentage of affordable housing units required per the policy and to add a
requirement that developments covered by the policy must not discriminate against tenants who
pay their rent with government provided Housing Choice Vouchers or other local rent subsidies.
The council indicated that they were in favor of amending the policy and instructed staff to return
to a future council meeting for approval of an amended policy.
The proposed increase of affordable dwelling units presented at the March 18 SS is as follows:
I. Rental Projects: At least ten fifteen percent (1015%) of the units shall be affordable for
households at sixty percent (60%) Area Median Income (AMI), or at least eight ten percent
(810%) of the units shall be at affordable for households at fifty percent (50%) AMI.
II. Ownership Projects: At least ten fifteen percent (10 15%) of units shall be affordable for
households at eighty (80%) AMI.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Inclusionary Housing Policy applies to
market rate housing developments receiving financial assistance from the city. The lower cash
flow from the affordable rents limit how much debt the residential project can carry. Raising the
required percentage of affordable units will have real economic impacts for the developer which
could result in a greater financial gap for the development.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Inclusionary Housing Policy with proposed Amendments
Prepared by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: At the March 18, 2017 council study session, staff presented a proposal to
council to increase the percentage of affordable units required in market rate residential
multifamily developments that receive financial assistance from the city. The current Inclusionary
Housing Policy was adopted by the council on June 1, 2015. Key components of the current Policy
include:
I. The Policy allows the income and affordability requirements to be fulfilled in the following
ways:
1. On-site development of units within the proposed market rate ownership or rental
residential development; or
2. Development of income and rent restricted rental units at another site approved by the
City.
II. Affordability Elements:
1. Affordability Level: Rental: 10% of units at 60% area median income (AMI), or
8% of units at 50% AMI,
Ownership: 10% of units at 80% AMI
2. Length of Affordability Requirement: A minimum of 25 years.
3. Bedroom Mix of Affordable Units: The bedroom unit type of the affordable units will
be reflective of the development’s market rate units and will be distributed throughout
the development.
4. Building Size: The Policy will be applicable to buildings that have 10 or more units.
5. Tenant Eligibility: Rental affordable dwelling units shall be rented only to income
eligible families during the period of affordability. An income eligible family may
remain in the rental inclusionary dwelling unit for additional rental periods as long as
the income of the family does not exceed one-hundred twenty percent (120%) of the
applicable AMI.
The Inclusionary Housing Policy has been in place for approaching two years (23 months) and
applied to four development projects. Two projects are under construction and two have been
approved. So far there has been cooperation and acceptance by applicants. Developments with
extraordinary development costs seem to view providing affordable housing as an economically
viable price to pay in exchange for EDA TIF assistance. Only one project that seemed likely to
seek EDA assistance chose to go forward without assistance and a fully market rate development.
It is important to note that other factors besides city assistance influence whether and how much
affordable housing was included in the four projects. Two of the projects utilize Low Income
Housing Tax Credits, one project (4800 Excelsior) was granted higher density which made it easier
to incorporate affordable units and the fourth project was granted higher density and has land costs
which are much lower than the rest. Our experience to date shows that each project presents its
own unique set of opportunities and constraints; however, clearly to date our Policy has been
effective and successful.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
Review of Inclusionary Housing Policy to Date
Development Total Units Affordable Units Affordability Level
Required per Policy
Shoreham (leasing) 148 30 50% AMI
4800 Excelsior (under
construction)
164 18 60% AMI
Elmwood (PUD
approved)
85 17 60% AMI
PLACE (PUD
Approved)
299 200 60% AMI
Voluntary
Central Park West
(under construction)
363 11 60% AMI
Liv. Comm. Required
Arlington Row (PUD
approved)
61 6 80% AMI
Total Units 1,120 282
Adopted Policy Affordability Requirements:
Council has indicated an interest in increasing the percentage of affordable housing required per
the Inclusionary Housing Policy. There are many inclusionary housing policies throughout the
country that have affordable housing requirements both higher and lower than those adopted by
St. Louis Park. Although, development has continued at a robust level in St. Louis Park since the
adoption of the Inclusionary Policy, raising the required percentage of affordable housing will
result in some real economic impacts for developers.
The intent is to establish a policy that will result in the creation of affordable units in market rate
developments where it would not otherwise occur. The policy should not create a burden so
onerous that it becomes a deterrent or unreasonable constraint on residential development in SLP.
The goal is to create program terms that fulfill the City’s affordable housing objectives without
eliminating the developer’s economic benefit. In particular, the requirement should not create a
deterrent for developers of market rate residential housing with little or no experience in the
development of affordable housing.
Most communities with Inclusionary Housing policies offer incentives to developers to offset the
cost of providing affordable housing units. The most common incentive is to build with increased
density, but other common incentives include parking or design waivers, financial assistance,
zoning variances, tax abatement and fee waivers. Incentives are seen as a way to reduce but not
eliminate the economic impact on development. The incentive inherent in our policy is we will
provide financial assistance to help overcome obstacles to developing your property (poor soils,
demolition, etc.) if you will include affordable housing in your project.
Although we can’t predict if the financial impacts of increasing the affordability requirements will
in anyway deter new market rate development, adopting a modest incremental increase in the
affordability requirement provides a greater possibility that developers can absorb the cost
associated with the creation of affordable units through modest declines in land prices, reductions
in developer profits or modest additional funding subsidies or some combination of the three.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
Proposed Amendments to the Current Policy:
Increase in Required Percentage of Affordable Housing
Staff proposes that the council consider amending the Inclusionary Housing Policy to include a
modest increase in the percentage of affordable housing requirements for multi-family residential
market rate developments receiving financial assistance from the city. The proposed new
requirements are as follows:
Affordability Level: Rental: 10% 15% of units at 60%* area median income (AMI), or
8% 10% of units at 50%* AMI,
Ownership: 10% 15% of units at 80% AMI
*60% and 50% affordability for rental units is consistent with affordability level requirements for the federally funded
affordable housing Tax Credit Program.
Non-discrimination based on Rent Subsidies:
Staff also proposes that the policy be amended to add a requirement that developments covered by
the policy must not discriminate against tenants who would pay their rent with government
provided Housing Choice Vouchers or other local rent subsidies.
NEXT STEPS:
Based on council’s direction, staff will amend the Inclusionary Housing Policy and apply the new
requirements to future residential housing developments seeking financial assistance from the city.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
Inclusionary Housing Policy
This Policy promotes high quality housing located in the community for households with a variety
of income levels, ages and sizes in order to meet the City's goal of preserving and promoting
economically diverse housing options in our community.
The City recognizes the need to provide affordable housing to households of a broad range of
income levels in order to maintain a diverse population and to provide housing for those who live
or work in the City. Without intervention, the trend toward rising housing prices in new
developments will continue to increase. As a result, this Policy is being adopted to ensure that a
reasonable proportion of each new development receiving City financial assistance include units
affordable to low and moderate income households and working families.
The requirements set forth in this Policy further the City’s Housing Goals and the City’s
Comprehensive Plan to create and preserve affordable housing opportunities. These requirements
are intended to provide a structure for participation by both the public and private sectors in the
production of affordable housing.
I. Applicability and Minimum Project Size
Market Rate Multi-Unit Development Receiving City Financial Assistance
This Policy applies to market rate multi-unit residential developments that receive financial
assistance from the City and includes:
(1) new developments that create at least 10 multi-family dwelling units; or
(2) any mixed use building that creates at least 10 multi-family dwelling units; or
(3) renovation or reconstruction of an existing building that contains multi- family
dwelling units that includes at least 10 dwelling; or
(4) any change in use of all or part of an existing building from a non-residential use
to a residential use that includes at least 10 dwelling units.
II. Affordable Dwelling Units
General requirement
A development that is subject to this Policy shall provide a number of affordable dwelling units
equal to at least eight (8%) ten (10%) to ten percent (10%) fifteen (15%) of the total number of
dwelling units in the development. The units designated as affordable will be subject to the
requirements listed below.
Calculation of units required.
(1) For development of multi-family dwelling units:
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
A. The required number of Affordable Dwelling Units is based on the total
number of dwelling units that are approved by the City.
B. To calculate the number of Affordable Dwelling Units required in a
development the total number of approved Dwelling Units shall be
multiplied by eight ten percent (8%) (10%) or ten fifteen percent (10%)
(15%) depending on the affordability standard. If the final calculation
includes a fraction, the fraction of a unit shall be rounded to the nearest
whole number.
C. If an occupied property with existing dwelling units is remodeled and/or
expanded, the number of affordable Dwelling Units shall be based on the
total number of units following completion of renovation/expansion. At
least eight ten percent (8%) (10%) or ten fifteen percent (10%) (15%),
depending on the affordability standard.
Affordability Level
The required affordable dwelling units within a residential project subject to this policy shall meet
an income eligibility and rent affordability standard for the term of the restriction as follows:
(1) Rental Projects:
A. At least ten fifteen percent (10%) (15%) of the units shall be affordable for
households at sixty percent (60%) Area Median Income (AMI), or
B. At least eight ten percent (8%) (10%) of the units shall be at available
affordable for households at fifty percent (50%) Area Median Income.
(2) For-Sale Projects:
A. At least ten fifteen percent (10%) (15%) of the units shall be affordable for
households at eighty percent (80%) Area Median Income (AMI).
Rent and Sale Price Level
Rental Unit: The monthly rental price for affordable dwelling units shall include rent and utility
costs and shall be based on fifty percent (50%) and/or sixty percent (60%) for the metropolitan
area that includes St. Louis Park adjusted for bedroom size and calculated annually by Minnesota
Housing for establishing rent limits for the Housing Tax Credit Program.
For-Sale Projects: The qualifying sale price for an owner-occupied affordable dwelling unit shall
include property taxes, homeowner’s insurance, principal payment and interest, private mortgage
insurance, monthly ground lease, and shall be based on eighty percent (80%) AMI for the
metropolitan area that includes St. Louis Park adjusted for bedroom size and calculated annually
by the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Period of Affordability
In developments subject to this Policy, the period of affordability for the affordable dwelling units
shall be at least twenty-five (25) years.
Location of Affordable Dwelling Units
Except as otherwise specifically authorized by this Policy, the Affordable Dwelling Units
shall be located within the development.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 7
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
III. Standards for Inclusionary Rental Units
Size and Design of Affordable Units
The size and design of the affordable dwelling units should be consistent and comparable with the
market rate units in the rest of the project and is subject to the approval of the City. The interior
of affordable dwelling units do not need to be identical to the market rate units but if units are
smaller than the other units with the same number of bedrooms in the development, City approval
must be obtained.
Exterior/Interior appearance.
The exterior materials and design of the affordable dwelling units in any development subject to
these regulations shall be indistinguishable in style and quality with the market rate units in the
development. The interior finish and quality of construction of the affordable dwelling units shall
at a minimum be comparable to entry level rental or ownership housing in the City. Construction
of the affordable dwelling units shall be concurrent with construction of market rate dwelling
units
IV. Integration of Affordable Dwelling Units
Distribution of affordable housing units.
The affordable dwelling units shall be incorporated into the overall project unless expressly
allowed to be located in a separate building or a different location approved by the City Council.
Affordable dwelling units shall be distributed throughout the building.
Number of bedrooms in the affordable units.
The affordable dwelling units shall have a number of bedrooms in the approximate proportion as
the market rate units. The mix of unit types, both bedroom and accessible units, of the affordable
dwelling units shall be approved by the City.
Tenants
Rental affordable dwelling units shall be rented only to income eligible families during the period
of affordability. An income eligible family may remain in the affordable dwelling unit for
additional rental periods as long as the income of the family does not exceed one-hundred twenty
percent (120%) of the applicable AMI.
V. Alternatives to On-Site Development of Affordable Dwelling Units
This section provides alternatives to the construction of affordable dwelling units onsite as
a way to comply with this Policy. The alternatives are listed in subsection (3), below.
(1) The alternatives must be:
A. Approved by the City Council, and
B. Agreed to by the applicant in an Affordable Housing Performance
Agreement.
C. Applicant must show evidence acceptable to the City that a formal
commitment to the proposed alternative is in place.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 8
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
(2) This Section does not apply unless the applicant demonstrates:
A. The alternative provides an equivalent or greater amount of Affordable
Dwelling Units in a way that the City determines better achieves the
goals, objectives and policies of the city’s Housing Goals and
Comprehensive Plan than providing them onsite; and
B. Will not cause the City to incur any net cost as a result of the alternative
compliance mechanism.
(3) If the conditions in (2) are met, the City may approve one or more of the following
options to providing Affordable Dwelling Units that are required by this Policy.
A. Dedication of Existing Units: Restricting existing dwelling units which are
approved by the City as suitable affordable housing dwelling units through
covenants, contractual arrangements, or resale restrictions. The City shall
determine whether the form and content of the restrictions comply with this
Policy. Off-site units shall be located within the City of St. Louis Park. The
restriction of such existing units must result in the creation of units that are
of equivalent quality, and size of the permanently Affordable Dwelling
Units which would have been constructed on-site if this alternative had not
been utilized.
B. Offsite construction of affordable dwelling units within the City. Offsite
construction of units should be located in proximity to public transit service
at a site approved by the City.
C. Participation in the construction of affordable dwelling units by another
developer on a different site within the City.
D. An alternative proposed by the applicant that directly provides or enables
the provision of affordable housing units within the City. The alternative
must be approved by the City and made a condition of approval of the
Affordable Housing Performance Agreement.
VI. NON-DISCRIMINATION BASED ON RENT SUBSIDIES:
Developments covered by the policy must not discriminate against tenants who would pay their
rent with federal, state or local public assistance, including tenant based federal, state or local
subsidies, including, but not limited to rental assistance, rent supplements, and Housing Choice
Vouchers.
VII. Affordable Housing Plan
(1) Applicability
Developments that are subject to this Policy shall include an Affordable Housing Plan as
described below. An Affordable Housing Plan describes how the developer complies
with each of the applicable requirements of this Policy.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 9
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
(2) Approval
A. The Affordable Housing Plan shall be approved by the City.
B. Minor modifications to the plan are subject to approval by the City
Manager. Major modifications are subject to approval by the City Council.
Items that are considered major and minor will be designated in the
Affordable Housing Plan.
(3) Contents.
The Affordable Housing Plan shall include at least the following:
A. General information about the nature and scope of the development subject
to these regulations.
B. For requests to an alternative to on-site provision of affordable housing,
evidence that the proposed alternative will further affordable housing
opportunities in the City to an equivalent or greater extent than compliance
with the otherwise applicable on-site requirements of this Policy.
C. The total number of market rate units and affordable dwelling units in the
development.
D. The floor plans for the affordable dwelling units showing the number of
bedrooms and bathrooms in each Unit.
E. The approximate square footage of each affordable dwelling unit and
average square foot of market rate unit by types.
F. Building floor plans and site plans showing the location of each affordable
dwelling unit.
G. The pricing for each affordable ownership dwelling unit. The pricing of
each unit shall be determined at time of approval. At time of sale this price
may be adjusted if there has been a change in the median income or a change
in the formulas used in this ordinance.
H. The order of completion of market rate and affordable dwelling units.
I. Documentation and specifications regarding the exterior appearance,
materials and finishes of the development for each of the affordable
dwelling units illustrating that the appearance of affordable units are
comparable to the appearance of the market-rate units.
J. An Affordable Dwelling Unit Management Plan documenting policies and
procedures for administering the affordable dwelling units in accordance
with the Affordable Housing Performance Agreement.
K. Any and all other information that the City Manager may require that is
needed to achieve the Council’s affordable housing goals.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 10
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
VIII. Recorded Agreements, Conditions and Restrictions
(1) An Affordable Housing Performance Agreement shall be executed between the City and a
Developer, in a form approved by the City Attorney, based on the Affordable Housing Plan
described in Section VII, which formally sets forth development approval and
requirements to achieve Affordable Housing in accordance with this policy and location
criteria. The Agreement shall identify:
a. the location, number, type, and size of affordable housing units to be constructed;
b. sales and/or rental terms; occupancy requirements;
c. a timetable for completion of the units; and
d. restrictions to be placed on the units to ensure their affordability and any terms
contained in the approval resolution by the City as applicable.
(2) The applicant or owner shall execute any and all documents deemed necessary by the City
Manager, including, without limitation, restrictive covenants and other related instruments,
to ensure the affordability of the affordable housing units in accordance with this Policy.
(3) The applicant or owner must prepare and record all documents, restrictions, easements,
covenants, and/or agreements that are specified by the City as conditions of approval of
the application prior to issuance of a Zoning Compliance Permit for any development
subject to this Policy.
(4) Documents described above shall be recorded in the Hennepin County
a. Registry of Deeds as appropriate.
IX. Definitions
Affordable Dwelling Unit: The required affordable dwelling units within a residential project
subject to this policy shall meet an income eligibility and rent affordability standard for the
term of the restriction as follows:
(1) Rental Projects:
A. At least ten fifteen percent (10%) (15%) of the units shall be affordable for
households at sixty percent (60%) Area Median Income (AMI), or
B. At least eight ten percent (8%) (10%) of the units shall be at available
affordable for households at fifty percent (50%) Area Median Income.
(2) For-Sale Projects:
A. At least ten fifteen percent (10%) (15%) of the units shall be affordable for
households at eighty percent (80%) Area Median Income (AMI).
Financial Assistance: The Inclusionary Affordable Housing Policy applies to all new and
renovated multifamily residential buildings receiving City financial assistance.
(1) Financial Assistance is defined as funds derived from the City and includes but is not
limited to the following:
A. City of St. Louis Park
B. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
C. Housing Rehabilitation Fund
D. Reinvestment Assistance Program
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8a) Page 11
Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy
E. Revenue Bonds (private activity bonds are negotiable)
F. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) & Tax Abatement
G. Housing Authority (HA) Funds
H. Land Write-downs
Affordable Housing Plan: A plan that documents policies and procedures for administering
the affordable dwelling units in accordance with the Affordable Housing Performance
Agreement.
Affordable Housing Performance Agreement: Agreement between the City and the developer
which formally sets forth development approval and requirements to achieve Affordable
Housing in accordance with this policy.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Action Agenda Item: 8b
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a Conditional Use Permit
to allow SNAP Fitness to operate 24 hours, seven days a week with conditions.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Do the proposed hours of operation meet the criteria of the
zoning ordinance?
SUMMARY: The Applicant, Mr. Cherney, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to
operate a Snap Fitness 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Snap Fitness is currently operating
in the commercial multi-tenant building located at 7210 Minnetonka Blvd, however, it closes at
midnight and opens at 6am. The Applicant maintains these hours because the property is zoned
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial, and in this district, a business can operate between the hours of
6am and midnight without a CUP. The CUP is required if a business wants to operate outside
these hours.
While SNAP is requesting to be open 24 hours, the typical customer is expected as early as 4am
to work out before work, or as late as 11pm.
The Applicant does not propose any changes to the building or property as a result of the request.
Planning Commission Review: The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on April
19, 2017. No comments were received. The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend
approval.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Resolution
Aerial Photo
Survey
Excerpt of Planning Commission Minutes
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor/Deputy CD Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The applicant, Mr. Cherney, is requesting a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) to
operate a Snap Fitness 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The Snap Fitness is located in a small
commercial multi-tenant building located at 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
Comprehensive Plan: Commercial
Zoning: C-1 Neighborhood Commercial
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: Snap Fitness currently operates at 7210 Minnetonka Blvd. It
is one of four tenants in the building, and it occupies the most westerly tenant space, which is
directly adjacent to the mall parking lot.
The Applicant opened the Snap Fitness at this location in August of 2016. The hours, however,
are limited to 6am to midnight, seven days per week, which is the maximum allowed without a
CUP in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial zoning district. If the CUP is approved, the Applicant
will operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 3
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
The applicant relocated the Snap Fitness from its previous location at 5101 Minnetonka Blvd,
which is the mixed-use building located to the west of city hall. When Snap Fitness first opened
at this location, they were operating 24 hours. During this time, they had a few customers that
came in as early as 4am, and customers that stayed as late as 11pm. Very rarely did they have
customers between 11pm and 4am. The applicant had to relocate to the current location because
the noise and vibration from the use traveled through the structure to the residents above and was
a nuisance to the residents not just during the early and late hours, but also during the daytime
hours. The applicant moved to the new location as a remedy to that problem.
While the applicant is requesting to be open 24 hours, he is expecting the same traffic patterns as
experienced at the previous location. Customers will stay as late as 11pm and show up as early as
4am. The 4am customers are typically working out before going to work. The request for the full
24 hours is mostly to satisfy the expectation that a Snap Fitness franchise is open 24 hours as
advertised. The applicant expects very little use between the hours of 11pm and 4am as
demonstrated at the previous location.
With regards to the noise and vibration potentially being a nuisance to the tenants in the building,
the owner of the property also owns Rose Fashion Optical, which is the only tenant that shares a
common wall with Snap Fitness. Snap Fitness has been operating several months at this location,
and the city has not received a complaint regarding the noise and vibration. Additionally, the
owner signed the CUP application authorizing the applicant’s request to extend the operating hours
to 24 hours, seven days a week.
Site Plan: A survey is attached that shows the location of Snap Fitness in relation to the property
lines. No changes are proposed to the building or site as a result of this application.
Zoning Regulations: Snap Fitness falls under the “Private Entertainment (Indoor)” land use
category, which includes fitness centers (see below).
Private entertainment (indoor) means entertainment services provided entirely within an
enclosed building. It includes theaters, health or fitness centers, bowling alleys, arcades,
roller rinks, and pool halls. Characteristics may include late operating hours, outdoor
lighting, noise, and traffic.
Snap Fitness was permitted to open in 2016 because the use is permitted with conditions in the C-
1 district, meaning, it can be administratively approved as long as it meets conditions specific to
the use. The conditions state that the use is required to be at least 60 feet from a parcel zoned
residential, and if beer/wine is served, then a separate bar is prohibited. In this case, the portion
of the building Snap Fitness is located in is 68 feet from the adjacent parcel which is zoned R-2
Single-Family Residence. Also, beer/wine is not served, so that condition is not applicable.
Conditional Use Permit – Hours of Operation. Snap Fitness, however, was not allowed to operate
between midnight and 6am because a CUP is required to be open during these hours in the C-1
district. When considering a CUP, the following conditions are required to be met:
1.The business shall have access to a roadway identified as a collector or arterial.
2.Buildings shall be located at least 25 feet from a parcel that is zoned residential.
3. The use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 4
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
Snap Fitness complies with the conditions as explained below:
1.The business shall have access to a roadway identified as a collector or arterial. Snap
Fitness has access to both Louisiana Avenue and Minnetonka Boulevard, both of which
are designated as arterials, and meet this requirement.
2.Buildings shall be located at least 25 feet from a parcel that is zoned Residential. As noted
above, the portion of the building that Snap Fitness is located in is 68 feet from the adjacent
parcel zoned R-2 Single-Family Residence. The remaining section of the building is located
45 feet from the same residential parcels.
3.The use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The property is designated as
commercial in the Comprehensive Plan, and a fitness center is consistent with that
designation.
Conditional Use Permit – General Standards and Conditions. City code includes the following
general standards and conditions for the city to consider while reviewing a CUP application:
1.Consistency with plans. It is consistent with and supportive of principles, goals, objectives,
land use designations, redevelopment plans, neighborhood objectives, and implementation
strategies of the comprehensive plan.
The Minnetonka Blvd / Louisiana Ave intersection is identified in the Comprehensive Plan
as a neighborhood commercial node. As such, it is an area that provides commercial
conveniences to the immediate neighborhood. It is conveniently located so that residents
can walk, bike or drive to the businesses.
The Comprehensive Plan has goals to be considered in the commercial areas, including the
neighborhood commercial nodes. The goal for neighborhood commercial nodes is:
Preserve and revitalize neighborhood commercial nodes that provide essential
neighborhood commercial services, unique neighborhood identity, and neighborhood
gathering opportunities.
Part of preserving and revitalizing neighborhood commercial nodes includes granting
the opportunity for businesses to thrive in an environment that is sensitive to the impacts
to the adjacent residential neighborhoods. Snap Fitness is conveniently located for the
neighborhood, giving them the opportunity to walk and bike to a fitness center instead
of having to drive to a commercial center such as Life Time Fitness located at West End.
The request to operate 24 hours per day is the standard model for a Snap Fitness. Staff
believes it can operate all night at this location without impacting the neighborhood
because the noise generated by the business is contained within the building.
Additionally the convenient parking for the use which is located closest to the entrance
is also located approximately 100 feet away from the closest residents. There is also a
privacy fence located between the parking lot and the residents to address noise and
vehicle headlights.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 5
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
2.Nuisance. It is not detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the
community as a whole. It will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of
properties, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, parking facilities on adjacent
streets, and values of properties in close proximity to the conditional use.
Snap Fitness provides an opportunity for residents to improve their health through exercise.
It is a small fitness facility oriented to a smaller neighborhood, as opposed to a large fitness
center such as Life Time Fitness that draws from a regional customer base. Therefore, the
use generates very little traffic compared to the larger fitness centers. It may be possible
that customers may occasionally choose to talk outside the building before or after working
out. This noise could become a nuisance if the conversation is prolonged and in a loud
voice. As noted above, the residents are approximately 100 feet away from the parking
spaces that are most conveniently located to the entrance of the fitness center, and there is
a privacy fence between the parking lot and the adjacent residents. So the distance and
fence should mitigate most conversations that occur. As noted above, history has shown
at the previous location that there is very little activity from 11pm to 4am and typically no
activity.
3.Compliance with code. It is consistent with the regulations, intent and purpose of City Code
and the zoning district in which the conditional use is located.
As noted above, staff believes the Snap Fitness can operate within the conditions required
for a CUP to operate 24 hours.
C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District - General Conditions. The stated purpose and effect of
the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial district is to provide for low-intensity, service-oriented
commercial uses for surrounding residential neighborhoods. Limits are placed on the type, size,
and intensity of commercial uses in this district to ensure and protect compatibility with adjacent
residential areas.
As noted above, operating 24 hours in the C-1 district is permitted by CUP as long as it meets
conditions specific to this request with the intent of addressing the stated purpose and effect of the
C-1 district. The conditions and staffs responses are restated below.
1.The business shall have access to a roadway identified as a collector or arterial. Snap
Fitness has access to both Louisiana Avenue and Minnetonka Boulevard, both of which
are designated as arterials, and meet this requirement.
2.Buildings shall be located at least 25 feet from a parcel that is zoned Residential. As noted
above, the portion of the building that Snap Fitness is located in is 68 feet from the adjacent
parcel zoned R-2 Single-Family Residence. The remaining section of the building is
located 45 feet from the same residential parcels.
3.The use is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The property is designated as
commercial in the Comprehensive Plan, and a fitness center is consistent with that
designation.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 6
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
In addition to the conditions specific to the CUP request to operate 24 hours, the C-1 district also
has general considerations that need to be addressed during the review of the application. They
are as follows:
1.Consistency with service capacity. It will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental
facilities, services or improvements which are either existing or proposed.
The applicant relocated to this site to address numerous complaints regarding noise and
vibration traveling to the residential condominiums located in the floors above the fitness
facility. The new location has dramatically reduced the impact on government resources
by addressing the nuisances generated at the previous location.
Utility services are adequate to handle the request.
2.Site design. It is consistent with the design and other requirements of site and landscape
plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional landscape architect or civil
engineer registered in the state and adopted as part of the conditions imposed on the use by
the city council.
No changes are proposed to the site.
3.Consistency with utilities. It is consistent with the City’s stormwater, sanitary sewer, and
water plans.
The request does not impact the City’s stormwater, sanitary sewer, and water plans.
4.Conditions specific to site. It complies with all conditions imposed by the City Council and
listed within the conditional use permit.
Staff is recommending approval of the requested CUP with conditions. The conditions are listed
below, and it is expected that the applicant will abide by them if they are approved by the council.
A summary of the conditions recommended by staff follows:
a. Only the fitness center may operate up to 24 hours per day, seven days per week.
The CUP needs to be clear that the 24 hour approval is for the fitness center only. If another
tenant in the building wishes to extend its hours, then it will have to apply for a separate
CUP.
b. The fitness center is limited to 2,500 square feet in size, and to the tenant space located at
the western end of the building.
This condition is intended to address concerns that a large fitness center may generate more
traffic in the overnight hours, and therefore, become a nuisance to the neighborhood.
c.Customers shall not be allowed to loiter outside the building between the hours of 10pm
and 7am. Complaints regarding noise emanating from vehicles or talking between these
hours shall be a violation of this conditional use permit.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 7
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
The intent of this condition is to clarify that the city expects the business owner to address
complaints resulting from late night/early morning activities occurring outside the building
by its customers. It also establishes that the noise is a violation to the CUP, and is therefore,
subject to the $750 fine and grounds for revoking the CUP.
Noise generated from the Snap Fitness is not discernable from outside the building. The
use has been operating at this location since 2016. Complaints have not been registered
with the city regarding noise or any other aspect of the business. Nonetheless, staff is
recommending a condition of approval that prohibits loitering outside the building between
the hours of 10pm and 7am. If the city receives complaints regarding noise within these
hours, and the business owner and property owner seem unable or unwilling to address it,
then the city may issue administrative citations. The fine for the citation will begin at $750
and double with each violation to a maximum of $2,000 per violation. If a problem persists,
then the city can follow the CUP revocation process outlined in city code. Revoking the
CUP would reduce the hours of operation back to 6am to midnight.
d.In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee
of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval.
This condition is standard of all CUPs, and when coupled with condition “c”, it enables the
city to pursue violations to noise and other violations.
e.Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or
structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed.
This is another standard condition of all CUPs. It states a city code provision that calls for
the CUP to be revoked and cancelled if the building is removed.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 8
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-
193(d)(2) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO
PERMIT SNAP FITNESS TO OPERATE 24 HOURS PER DAY, SEVEN DAYS A WEEK
FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT
LOCATED AT 7210 MINNETONKA BOULEVARD
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Steven Cheney made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit under
Section 36-193(d)(2) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of allowing his
business, SNAP Fitness, to operate 24 hours per day, seven days a week within a C-1
Neighborhood Commercial District located at 7210 Minnetonka Boulevard for the legal
description as follows, to-wit:
Lots 11 and 12, Block 8, “High Holborn”
2. The City Council considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission
(Case No. 17-11-CUP) and the effect of the proposed hours of operation on the health, safety and
welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the
effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive
Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The Council determined that the proposed hours of operation will not be detrimental to the
health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor
hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed hours of
operation are in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. The contents of Planning Case File 17-11-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the
public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The Conditional Use Permit to allow a use to operate 24 hours, seven days a week at the location
described is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions:
1. Only the fitness center may operate up to 24 hours per day, seven days per week.
2.The fitness center is limited to 2,500 square feet in size, and to the tenant space located at
the western end of the building.
3.Customers shall not be allowed to loiter outside the building between the hours of 10pm
and 7am. Complaints regarding noise emanating from vehicles or other outdoor activity
between these hours shall be a violation of this conditional use permit.
4.In addition to any other remedies, the owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per
violation of any condition of this approval.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 9
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
5.Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the
building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed.
The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the
Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
__________________________________ ____________________________________
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
__________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 10
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
Aerial Photo
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 11
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
Survey
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8b) Page 12
Title: SNAP Fitness CUP - 7210 Minnetonka Blvd.
EXCERPT OF OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
APRIL 19, 2017 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne,
Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson,
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Tatalovich, Ethan Rickert (youth member)
STAFF PRESENT: Greg Hunt, Jennifer Monson, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther
4.Hearings
B.Conditional Use Permit – Snap Fitness
Location: 7210 Minnetonka Boulevard
Applicant: Steven Cherney
Case No.: 17-11-CUP
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He explained that the
request is a CUP to operate a Snap Fitness 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Without the CUP
the hours are limited to 6 am to midnight. He reviewed the zoning regulations and the conditions
of approval.
Steve Cherney, Snap Fitness, said he appreciated the Commission’s consideration.
The Chair opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak she closed the
public hearing.
Commissioner Carper made a motion recommending approval of a Conditional Use Permit to
allow the Snap Fitness located at 7210 Minnetonka Blvd. to operate 24 hours, 7 days a week with
conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the
motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Action Agenda Item: 8c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2017 International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Local #993 Labor Agreement
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a labor agreement
between the City and the IAFF Local #993, establishing terms and conditions of employment for
one year, from 1/1/17 – 12/31/17.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to approve the labor agreement between the
City and the Local #993 Union?
SUMMARY: Staff is pleased to bring to Council the details of this contract agreement between
the City and Union for 2017. The City and Local 993 Union had a number of negotiation sessions
and have come to agreement on the following changes to the contract:
• Duration of 1 year (1/1/17 – 12/31/17).
• Wage increase of 2.75% for 2017. This group declined the City’s proposal to increase pay to
the 85th percentile target pay with a statement in the contract that required above average
performance in order to move through the step progression.
• Employer contribution for benefits same as other groups for 2017.
• Increase to supplemental pay for employees assigned to work as Fire Prevention Specialists by
2.75%.
• Adding language regarding “tramp pay” when an employee is assigned to work at a station
other than their regular station.
• Clarifying/housekeeping language on clothing allowance and definition of day employee.
Staff recommends approval. The proposed contract is on file with the City Clerk. More detail is
available upon request.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The amount recommended has been
included in the 2017 budget.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR Manager
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8c) Page 2
Title: 2017 International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) Local #993 Labor Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
AND
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIREFIGHTERS,
LOCAL #993
JANUARY 1, 2017 – DECEMBER 31, 2017
WHEREAS, the City and the Union have reached a negotiated settlement covering the
terms and conditions of a labor agreement as permitted by the State of Minnesota Public
Employees Labor Relations Act, and
WHEREAS, the City Council may enter into such agreements as authorized by its Charter;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute a Collective Bargaining
Agreement, City Contract #______ between the City of St. Louis Park and International
Association of Firefighters (IAFF), Local #993, effective January 1, 2017 – December 31, 2017.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Action Agenda Item: 8d
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2016 - 2018 International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local #49 (Maintenance
Employees) Labor Agreement
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving a revised labor agreement
between the City and Local 49 Union, establishing terms and conditions of employment for three
years, from 1/1/16 – 12/31/18.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to approve the revised labor agreement
between the City and the IUOE Local 49 Union?
SUMMARY: The City and Union had previously agreed to a two year contract for 2016 and
2017. After Council approval of a new compensation plan that sets target pay for employees at
the 85th percentile of the market, the City and Union have engaged in discussions about re-opening
the contract. The City and Union agreed that in order for the bargaining group to achieve the 85th
percentile target pay, step increases would occur over the course of two years (2017 and 2018) and
a statement would be added to the contract that required above average performance in order to
advance to the next step in pay. This pay philosophy matches the implementation of the non-union
compensation plan that was implemented January 1, 2017. After productive negotiation sessions,
staff is pleased to bring the summary of changes to this contract:
• Duration has been modified to three years (1/1/16 – 12/31/18).
• A step has been added at the top for each position for 2017 that is equal to a double 2.75%
(i.e., 5.5%) increase for those at the top step. Note: This is consistent with how non-union
pay is applied for employees who have not yet achieved the 85th percentile target pay.
• Language has been added that requires above average performance as determined by the
Superintendent and Department Head in order to advance to the next step in pay.
• General wage increase to all steps of 3% effective 1/1/18. Note: This is our first group to
have a wage agreement in place for 2018.
• An additional step has been added at the top for each position in 2018 that is equal to a double
3% (i.e., 6%) increase for those at the top step. Note: This is consistent with how non-union
pay is applied for employees who have not yet achieved the 85th percentile target pay.
• Effective 1/1/18, the employer contribution for benefits shall be set at the same rate as
provided to other employees and eligible to participate in the Wellness Program.
The proposed contract is on file with the City Clerk. More detail is available upon request.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Items are included in the 2017 budget and
will be included in 2018 budget planning.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution
Prepared by: Ali Timpone, HR Manager
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8d) Page 2
Title: 2016 - 2018 International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE) Local #49 Labor Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 17-____
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE LABOR AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
AND
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS (IUOE),
LOCAL 49
JANUARY 1, 2016 – DECEMBER 31, 2018
WHEREAS, the City and the Union have reached a negotiated settlement covering the
terms and conditions of a labor agreement as permitted by the State of Minnesota Public
Employees Labor Relations Act, and
WHEREAS, the City Council may enter into such agreements as authorized by its Charter;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute a Collective Bargaining
Agreement, City Contract #______ between the City of St. Louis Park and IUOE Local 49,
effective January 1, 2016 – December 31, 2018.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 15, 2017
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City Council
Meeting Date: May 15, 2017
Discussion Item: 8e
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Bid Tabulation: Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Project (4014-
4001)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to designate Peterson Companies, Inc. the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of
$1,753,460.49 for the 2017 Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Project - Project
No. 4014-4001.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: The proposed improvements are consistent with the City’s goals
of surface water quality.
SUMMARY: This project has increased in cost from what was originally expected due to the
findings of a detailed geotechnical evaluation. As a result of recommended soil remediation, the
estimated construction costs rose from the CIP estimate of $1,025,000.00 to $1,630,097.50. Staff
believes that the benefits of this project still outweigh this increased cost and are recommending
the award of the project to the apparent low bidder, Peterson Companies.
A total of one (1) bid was received for this project. A summary of the bid results is as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Peterson Companies **$1,753,460.49
Revised Engineer’s Estimate $1,630,097.50
**Denotes corrected amount
While they were the only contractor to submit a bid, Peterson Companies, Inc. is a reputable
contractor, who has extensive experience in constructing underground vault systems such as this
project. We have also contacted the contractor and they will work with the Engineering staff to
value engineer the foundation to investigate lower cost alternatives. Staff recommends that a
contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $1,753,460.49.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: This project was planned for and included in
the City’s adopted Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2017. The low bid is higher than the
programmed cost. There are available funds in the Stormwater Utility to pay for this increased cost
without jeopardizing other projects.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in environmental
stewardship. We will increase environmental consciousness and responsibility in all areas of city
business.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation: Award Bid for Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Project (4014-4001)
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: While reviewing the final plans and specifications for the project, additional
geotechnical soils analysis was undertaken to verify soil bearing capacity for the proposed
stormwater treatment structure. After reviewing this new information, the recommendations were
to increase the quantity of excavation and increase the backfill with structural soils to stabilize the
underground vault. The addition of subsurface soil correction resulted in a $571,297 increase to
the construction cost of the treatment system. While there were other modifications to the design
which increased costs, this was the single biggest change to the project expense.
Once it was clear that additional soil corrections were necessary, the Engineering staff began to
investigate alternative methods as a way to mitigate the costs. These alternatives included using
different pipe material, re-locating the vault configuration and identifying an area on site with
better soils. The original “StormTrap” design remained the most cost effective approach.
Although the project costs have increased from what was originally expected, staff is still
recommending undertaking this project due to the benefits outweighing the additional costs. The
project provides critical storm water credits for the redevelopment of the Beltline Station area as
well as serve as a stable base for the skate park. There will also be a reduction in phosphorus
discharged to the basin in the Bass Lake Preserve.
While there was only one bidder for the project, the contractor is the most experienced with this
type of project on the plan holder’s list. Peterson Companies is currently finishing up a similar
project in a Burnsville park.
In addition to looking at ways to reduce the construction costs of this project, Staff has also taken
into consideration the impact of rejecting the bids and re-bidding along with the impact of not
moving forward with the project.
This year has been a particularly good year for construction bids on City projects. There has been
a higher than average number of plan set holders, project bidders, and most all projects have
received favorable bids. Since the core of the increased costs are associated with poor soils,
delaying the project to re-bid may not necessarily result in a lower bid and could have a less
experienced contractors bidding on the project.
Carpenter Park Skate Park
With the construction of the subsurface vault, this project would provide the skate park a stable
foundation which would support the proposed concrete slab. Removing the structure will require
the skate park to incur more costs, including soil removal, geotextile fabric and sub-surface
drainage systems. The estimated cost of this work would be $230,000.
In addition to these costs, there is the permitting requirements for Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District (MCWD). The addition of the impervious skate park at Carpenter Park will require
phosphorus reduction, volume reduction and rate control for the entire 4 acre park, not just the
disturbed area. Without the ability to utilize this sub-surface stormwater management for this
treatment, the project would require using park land for above ground stormwater management
facilities. The estimated cost for this would be $35,000
This stormwater project’s contract has a substantial completion date of August 31, 2017.
Awarding the project at this time allows for the skate park to be built yet this year.
City Council Meeting of May 15, 2017 (Item No. 8e) Page 3
Title: Bid Tabulation: Award Bid for Carpenter Park Regional Stormwater Improvement Project (4014-4001)
Beltline Station Area Redevelopment
Another benefit of constructing this project is that the project would mitigate the storm water
management requirements for the future redevelopment of the Beltline Station area. This project
will allow this area to develop up to 80% impervious surface without losing developable land to
on-site stormwater management. If this project were not to move forward, a similar underground
system would need to be constructed somewhere in the Beltline station area. The soils in that area
are similar to the soils at Carpenter Park, requiring excavation to ensure structural stability, and
remove contamination. There would not likely be a cost savings.
Since this is a benefit to this redevelopment site, we recommend having future development
contribute to or reimburse some of the construction costs of this project based on the land area
treated.
Bidding details
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on April 13, 2017. In
addition, plans and specifications are noticed on the City Website and are made available
electronically via the internet by our vendor QuestCDN.com. Email notification was provided to
four minority associations and final printed plans were available for viewing at Dodge Data,
Construct Connect, Minnesota Builders Exchange, and at City Hall.
Forty Four (44) contractors/vendors purchased plan sets with one (1) Disadvantaged Business
Enterprises (DBE) identifying themselves as subcontractors.
Funding
Staff has analyzed the bids and determined that Peterson Companies, Inc. is a qualified contractor
that can complete this work. Peterson has extensive experience in constructing these types of
projects and is currently finishing construction of a similar project in the City of Burnsville. Based
on the low bid received, cost details are as follows:
CIP Estimate Low Bid
Construction Cost $1,025,000.00 $1,753,460.00
Contingency (10%) $116,470.00 $175,346.00
Engineering & Administration* $232,500.00 $232,500.00
Total $1,373,970.00 $2,161,306.00
*Since the increase in project costs are associated with excavating an importing soil, the Engineering &
Administration cost is projected to remain the same.
Funding Sources
CIP Estimate
Low Bid
Storm Water Utility Fund $1,373,970.00 $1,695,306.00
Environmental Response Funds (ERF) NA $166,000.00
Estimated Future Redevelopment reimbursement NA $300,000.00
Project Total $1,373,970.00 $2,161,306.00
Since the addition of this project to the CIP, the City has received the ERF grant funds and
identified the redevelopment reimbursement note above as additional funding sources.
There is adequate fund balance in the Storm water utility to cover the additional $321,336.00 cost.
Construction Timeline:
Construction is anticipated to begin in June and substantial completed by late August 2017. Skate
Park construction would follow directly after.