HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018/01/29 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
JANUARY 29, 2018
6:15 p.m. SAFETY TRAINING – Council Chambers
6:30 p.m. STUDY SESSION – Community Room
Discussion Items
1. 6:30 p.m. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – February 5 & 12, 2018
2. 6:35 p.m. Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion
3. 7:35 p.m. Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman
Associates
4. 8:20 p.m. Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda
8:50 p.m. Communications/Updates (Verbal)
8:55 p.m. Adjourn
Written Reports
5. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
6. Historic Walker-Lake Update
7. Update – Modification of Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7
8. Citywide Fiber Infrastructure Update
9. Via (PLACE) Project Update
10. Fourth Quarter Investment Report (Oct – Dec 2017)
11. Update on Charter Commission Study on Ranked Choice Voting
12. Parkshore Senior Campus – Minor PUD Amendment
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: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Future Study Session Agenda Planning February 5 & 12, 2018
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council and the City Manager to set the agenda for the
Special Study Session scheduled for February 5 and the Regular Study Session on February 12,
2018.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council agree with the agendas as proposed?
SUMMARY: This report summarizes the proposed agenda for the Special Study Session
scheduled for February 5 and the Regular Study Session on February 12, 2018. Also attached to
this report is the Study Session Prioritizaton & Tentative Discussion Timeline..
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Tentative Agenda – February 5 & 12, 2018
Study Session Prioritization & Projected Discussion Timeline
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
FEBRUARY 5, 2018
6:00 p.m. – Special Study Session – Community Room
Tentative Discussion Items
1. 2018 Legislative Priorities & Issues – Administrative Services (75 minutes)
In preparation for the upcoming legislative session City Council has had a practice of inviting
our state and county elected representatives and Met Council representative to a study session
to discuss the upcoming session and the City’s legislative agenda. Senator Ron Latz, Representative
Cheryl Youakim, Representative Peggy Flanagan, Hennepin County Commissioner Marion
Greene and Metropolitan Council representative Gail Dorfman have been invited to this meeting.
FEBRUARY 12, 2018
5:30 p.m. – Study Session – Community
Room Tentative Discussion Items
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
2. Draft Ordinance Affordable Housing – Community Development (60 minutes)
Staff will review a draft 90 Day Tenant Protection ordinance that will require new owners of
NOAH multi-family residential rental properties to pay relocation benefits to existing tenants
if they choose to increase rents, execute non-renewals of leases without cause or implement
new screening criteria within the 90 days following the ownership transfer of the property.
3.The Nest – Community Development ( 45 minutes)
Representatives of the Nest will be presenting their plan to create a teen-friendly space for
students to feel welcome and have unstructured time to themselves. The Nest will be
requesting assistance from the city in securing funding to enter into a lease agreement and to
make improvements to a space in which they will operate their program.
4.Louisiana Avenue Bridge / Road Reconstruction Project – Project 4018-1700 – Engineering
(30 minutes) In 2019, Louisiana Avenue between 500 feet north of Oxford Street and
Excelsior Boulevard is proposed to be rehabilitated. An inspection of the bridge over
Minnehaha Creek in 2017 indicated a need to replace the bridge by 2019. Staff will provide
the City Council with information regarding recommendations for this project and phasing.
5.Solid Waste Contract Discussion – Operations & Recreation (45 minutes)
Staff will bring back a recommendation on vendor selection, as well as program changes and
the costs associated.
6.Historic Walker Lake Design Study – Engineering (30 minutes)
In the 10 year Capital Improvement Plan, the City has dedicated funding to rehabilitate streets,
reconstruct alleys, and install bikeways in Historic Walker Lake District. The consultant has
completed the initial data collection for the study area and is working on design concepts. These
concepts will be shared at this meeting, prior to sharing them with stakeholders in March.
Communications/Meeting Check-In – Administrative Services (5 minutes)
Time for communications between staff and Council will be set aside on every study session
agenda for the purposes of information sharing.
Written Reports
7. Proposed Allocation of 2018 CDBG Funds
8.Platia Place TIF Request
End of Meeting: 9:10 p.m.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 1)
Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – February 5 & 12, 2018 Page 2
Study Session Prioritization & Projected Discussion Timeline
Priority Discussion Topic Comments Date Scheduled
4 Preserving the Walker Building Combined w/Walker Lake Branding
Discussion (held on 8/28, 11/20 & 12/2017)
Ongoing; Report
January 29, 2018
4 Climate Action Plan Consultant updating draft. Review by E&S
Commission & staff before Council
Council review -
January 29, 2018
4 Affordable Housing Preservation
Policies/Ordinance
Discussed 9/25/17; Work Group met and
meeting again in December.
Council review-
February 12, 2018
4 Race Equity Communication to HRC
on Outreach & Next Steps Most recently discussed on 9/11/17 Ongoing
4 Race Equity/Inclusion
Courageous Conversations Most recently discussed on 9/11/17 Ongoing
3 Revitalization of Walker/Lake Area Part of Preserving Walker Building report
(held on 8/28/17) (report also provided 9/25)
Ongoing; Report
January 29, 2018
3 The Nest Postponed to 2018 per their request February 12, 2018
3 Utilization of DBE Vendors Discussed on 9/11/17 Ongoing
3 Ranked Choice Voting Sent to Charter Commission; Meetings
held on 10/24/17, 12/6/17 & 1/10/18
Public Mtgs 2/2018
Comm Mtg 3/2018
3 Policy for Funding Non-Profits Part of 2018 Budget discussion on 10/9/17 Ongoing
3 Field Imprvmts/Girls Fastpitch Softball Design consultant hired Const. starts 2018
3 Historical Society Space Part of Walker Bldg discussions on 8/28/17
& 11/20/17 and 12/11/17
Ongoing
3 Living Streets Policy After Vision 3.0 work is completed 1st Qtr 2018
3 Develop a Youth Advisory Commission 1st Qtr 2018
2 Bird Friendly Glass
2 Dark Skies Ordinance (Light Pollution)
2 Community Center Project
? Overview of Crime Free Ordinance Priority not yet determined. ?
? SEED’s Community Green House /
Resiliant Cities Initiative Priority not yet determined ?
5 SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident
Planning Session 1 of 4 (held on 8/14/17) Completed/
Ongoing
5 SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident
Planning Session 2 of 4 (held on 9/25/17) Completed/
Ongoing
5 SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident
Planning Session 3 of 4 (held on 10/16/17) Completed/
Ongoing
5 SLP Policing Model/Critical Incident
Planning Session 4 of 4 (held on 11/27/17) Completed/
Ongoing
4 Flavored Tobacco Ordinance Second reading approved 12/4/17 Complete
TH 169 Mobility Study Direction provided on 9/11/17
3 Property Tax Relief for Seniors Part of 2018 Budget item (Councilmember
Brausen: "No further study needed.") October 9, 2017
2 Sidewalk Snow Removal Part of 2018 Budget item (Majority of council
determined no need to discuss further at this time.) October 9, 2017
2 Active Space Matching Grants w/
Multi- Family Communities
Part of 2018 Budget item (Will be included in
2018 Budget Proposal.) October 9, 2017
Priority Key
5 = High priority/discuss ASAP
4 = Discuss sooner than later
3 = Discuss when time allows
2 = Low priority/no rush
1 = No need to discuss
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 1)
Title: Future Study Session Agenda Planning – February 5 & 12, 2018 Page 3
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Discussion Item: 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No formal action needed at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are the goals and strategies in the draft Climate Action Plan in
keeping with Council expectations?
SUMMARY: The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the proposed draft Climate
Action Plan (CAP) for the City of St. Louis Park.
Climate action plans are comprehensive roadmaps that outline the specific activities that an agency
can undertake to reduce greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). The CAP will provide guiding
objectives and strategies to realize the city’s GHG reduction goals of sourcing 100% renew0ble
electricity by 2030 and achieving carbon neutrality by 2040, community-wide. The plan will
become the roadmap we will use to implement actions that can achieve the relatively greatest
emission reductions in the most cost effective manner.
Council passed a Climate Inheritance Resolution (No. 16-067) on May 16, 2016 stating, “Now
therefore be it resolved that the St. Louis Park City Council commits to working constructively,
using ingenuity, innovation, and courageous determination to create a St. Louis Park Climate
Action Plan for consideration that significantly reduces St. Louis Park’s greenhouse gas emissions
to levels that would protect our community’s children and grandchildren from the risk of climate
destruction.”
The draft CAP includes an overarching goal of the entire community of St. Louis Park to achieve
carbon neutrality by 2040 in order to meet the commitment stated in the resolution. A high level
explanation of the goals, strategies, and actions in the plan will be provided at the study session.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Once the plan is accepted by Council, plans
will be further developed along with budget and capital funding considerations.
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
Draft Climate Action Plan
Climate Inheritance Resolution
Prepared by: Shannon Pinc, Environment & Sustainability Coordinator
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Prior to the creation of the draft CAP, a community wide Energy Action Plan (EAP) had already
been developed using the Partners in Energy program offered by our electric utility, Xcel Energy.
The EAP was a community wide plan that focused primarily on electricity related emissions and
led to four key areas of focus: energy efficiency in business, renewable energy, partnership with
youth, and developing a climate action plan. This multi-stakeholder process, with facilitation help
from Xcel Energy, worked with members of the Environment & Sustainability Commission (ESC)
as well as representatives from the business community, residents, nonprofits, and youth from the
St. Louis Park High School Roots & Shoots Club to develop the goals, strategies, and actions in
the EAP. An overarching goal of carbon neutrality by 2040 was determined to be necessary in
order to combat the effects of climate change. Achieving 100% renewable electricity by 2025 was
determined to be an important mid-term goal. After the EAP was completed, an additional
partnership was made with iMatter, who helped guide the youth from the high school to use the
iMatter tools and resources to help them present to Council the importance of acting upon climate
change and to challenge them to pass a Climate Inheritance Resolution.
Many of the goals, strategies, and actions in the EAP were carried over to the CAP, most notably
the long-term 2040 carbon neutrality goal. The Climate Action Plan focus will be:
•Immediate, “Kick-Start” projects to get things moving in 2018
•Seven mid-term goals for 2030 with additional goals, strategies, and actions heavily
explained in the draft CAP.
•Lastly, “Advanced Strategies” have been identified and explained as a final “push” to
achieve the 2040 carbon neutrality goal.
•Along with this a comprehensive communication plan will need to be created for
education, information and overall information sharing.
•The Environment and Sustainability Commission will be key in assisting with
implementation of the CAP.
The Climate Action Plan may be updated periodically to reflect upon improvements in
technologies, adoption of new technologies, and costs associated with these technologies. These
can change as often as energy prices change. Also, periodic GHG inventories will need to be
conducted to compare our progress against our 2015 baseline emissions, showing progress toward
our goals.
NEXT STEPS:
1.Overview of the CAP at the January 22 study session
2.Formal acceptance of CAP at an upcoming council meeting, tentatively scheduled for
February 5, 2018.
3.Further development of communication plan along with more defined plan for funding and
implementation.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion
2040
St. Louis Park
Climate Action Plan
February 2018
Draft - January
Setting a course toward carbon neutrality
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 3
Acknowledgements
The St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan is the result of collaboration between representatives from community
members from various parts of the city, members of the Environment & Sustainability Commission, youth
members of the Roots & Shoot Environmental Club at St. Louis Park High School, and with iMatter — a nonprofit
supporting young people wanting to end the climate crisis. The City of St. Louis Park would like to thank all who
have contributed to this project, as it would not have been possible without your time, effort, and passion.
Elected Officials: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller,
Margaret Rog
Former Elected Officials: Gregg Lindberg, Sue Sanger
Youth Team: Larry Kraft, Executive Director & Chief Mentor at iMatter, Ethan Brown, Philip Djerf, Owen Geier,
Nathan Kempf, Meili Liss, Anya Lindell Paulson, Leila Raymond, Anna Roethler, Sofia Roloff, Sophia Skinner
Environment & Sustainability Commission: Susan Bloyer, Nicole Ciulla, Stefan Collinet, Terry Gips, Ryan Griffin,
Claire Lukens, Julie Rappaport, Keir Steigler, Lukas Wrede
Former Commissioners: Chris Anderson, Mark Eilers, Cindy Larson O’Neil, Nancy Rose, Jayne Stevenson, Judy
Voigt, Paul Zeigle
Prepared for the City of St. Louis Park by:
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 4
Letter from the Youth of St. Louis Park
Dear Neighbors,
We are St. Louis Park High School students from the Roots and Shoots Environmental Club. In March of 2016, in
partnership with iMatter, we presented a Youth Climate Report Card and asked the St. Louis Park City Council to
adopt a Climate Inheritance Resolution demonstrating the city's commitment to protect our future and the lives
of generations to come. That Climate Inheritance Resolution passed and has led to this Climate Action Plan.
The climate crisis will have a huge impact on our future. An inadequate response now will cause dangerous
economic and environmental disruptions, many of which are already being felt around the globe. But we see
this as an opportunity to rethink our current actions and imagine a better, more sustainable future.
By committing to reach net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2040, the city will be on a path to no longer
contribute to the climate crisis. St. Louis Park has an opportunity to be a leader in the movement to restore a
healthy climate and set the standard for the rest of the state and country.
We are proud of St. Louis Park and the City Council for this Climate Action Plan and for supporting
environmental stewardship – there is much left to
do! Accomplishing the goals of the Climate Action
Plan will require the participation of citizens,
businesses, and organizations throughout our
community. We envision St. Louis Park as a resilient
and healthy city for generations to come, and for
this to happen, all of us have to be involved.
So, St. Louis Park, we challenge you to have the
creativity and courage to imagine a new future with
us. A future with clean, renewable energy, non-
polluting forms of transportation, minimized waste,
and a renewed appreciation of our reliance on
nature.
Signed,
Lukas Wrede, on behalf of the SLP High School Roots and Shoots Club and iMatter
“The time to act is now… we shouldn’t have to be afraid of our future.”
–Jayne Stevenson, Class of 2017
“We believe in a better future for St. Louis Park.”
–Lukas Wrede, Class of 2018
“The time is now to come together as a united force, to insure a livable future for us, for your children, for your
grandchildren, and for the generations to come. The time is now to create a sustainable future.”
–Sophia Skinner, Class of 2017
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 5
Letter from the Environment and Sustainability Commission
To Our Neighbors,
The St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan is a critical element in our vision for a sustainable city. It is a tremendous
milestone for St. Louis Park and reflects the environmental leadership of our citizens, staff, and elected officials,
as well as our commitment to the youth of our community and planet. This plan is in full alignment with, and
builds upon, the many years of environmental and conservation leadership of the City of St. Louis Park. Through
the Environmental and Sustainability Commission’s four-year existence, we have worked to further build
consensus that climate change is a core challenge that we as a city must collectively address. This plan
represents many contributions from commission members and the broader community.
Global climate change is one of the most challenging problems we will face in the twenty-first century. The
urgency with which we must act decisively on this issue is unprecedented, and cities like ours will be the leaders
that can enact meaningful change. The fate of millions of people worldwide as well as an estimated half of the
plant and animal species on Earth could be determined by the speed at which governments of all sizes come
together to halt and reverse the current global temperature trend. We, as a city, embrace this plan as an
important step forward, understanding all the hard work that it will take to fulfill this plan over the next two
decades.
The Climate Action Plan acknowledges our city’s contribution to global climate change, the urgency of action,
and the steps we intend to take to lead the transition to a carbon-free economy. Equally important is realizing
that the pollution we emit and can control locally is only part of our overall contribution to climate change, with
food and goods produced outside of the city also playing a very significant, but much harder to measure role.
Finally, while climate change is the most significant risk to global sustainability, there are untold other risk
factors to the environment in addition to climate change that we must be mindful of and continue our work
toward fully addressing.
We, as the St. Louis Park Environment and Sustainability Commission, fully endorse the Climate Action Plan as a
critical first step toward achieving long-term sustainability for our city. We believe that this will become one
element of many in a holistic sustainability vision and action plan for the city. We also feel that it is important to
understand that while the Climate Action Plan represents the best strategies and forecasts that can currently be
projected, it must also be a living document, updated as new trends, technologies, and ways of measuring
evolve in this ever-advancing field. We must also keep in mind that it is up to us not to rest on our laurels, but to
continually stay current on the actions other leading cities around the world are taking to advance sustainability,
mitigate climate change, and improve the human condition.
We applaud the efforts of City Staff and City Council to take on this challenge and believe it is our collective
responsibility to act with urgency on executing the plans and strategies contained within this St. Louis Park
Climate Action Plan.
Sincerely,
The St. Louis Park Environment and Sustainability Commission, 2017
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 6
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................................1
Letter from the Youth .................................................................................................................................................2
Letter from the Environment and Sustainability Commission ...................................................................................3
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................5
Background .................................................................................................................................................................7
Plan Development ......................................................................................................................................................8
Community-wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Profile ............................................................................................. 10
St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan ........................................................................................................................... 13
KICK-START PROJECTS ......................................................................................................................................... 14
Project 1: Youth-led initiative to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy in the community ............ 14
Project 2: Develop a climate action plan resource hub ...................................................................................... 14
Project 3: Install electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in public parking lots .......................................... 14
GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS .................................................................................................................... 15
Goal 1: Reduce energy consumption in large commercial and industrial (C/I) buildings by 30% by 2030, as
compared to the business-as-usual forecast....................................................................................................... 15
Goal 2: Reduce energy consumption in small to mid-size commercial buildings by 30% by 2030, as compared
to the business-as-usual forecast. ....................................................................................................................... 17
Goal 3: By 2030, design all new construction to be net-zero energy (NZE). ....................................................... 20
Goal 4: Reduce energy consumption in residential buildings by 35% by 2030, as compared to the business-as-
usual forecast. ..................................................................................................................................................... 22
Goal 5: Achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030 ......................................................................................... 24
Goal 6: Reduce vehicle emissions by 25% by 2030, as compared to the business-as-usual forecast................. 27
Goal 7: Achieve a 50% reduction in waste by 2030. ........................................................................................... 31
Advanced Strategies .............................................................................................................................................. 333
A.Identify opportunities for thermal energy grids ........................................................................................ 34
B.Explore opportunities for combined heat and power ................................................................................ 34
C.Anaerobic digesters for waste heat and compressed natural gas ............................................................. 34
D.Fuel switching ............................................................................................................................................. 34
E.Carbon offsets ............................................................................................................................................ 35
F.Emerging technologies ............................................................................................................................... 35
G.Scope 3 Emissions ....................................................................................................................................... 35
City Operations ........................................................................................................................................................ 37
Internal Team ...................................................................................................................................................... 43
Appendices: ............................................................................................................................................................. 44
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 7
Executive Summary
St. Louis Park is a leader in local clean energy initiatives, having passed the most ambitious municipal climate
goals in Minnesota. With its sights set on carbon neutrality by 2040, a bold yet achievable goal, the city must
continue to challenge status quo energy usage and associated greenhouse-gas emissions. The Climate Action
Plan (CAP) that follows begins with three kick-start projects to help spur clean energy changes in the community
and build momentum for the implementation of this plan. This is followed by seven climate goals, supporting
strategies, and specific initiatives and actions to help guide St. Louis Park toward intermediary progress by 2030.
The purpose of setting goals to 2030 rather than 2040 is to get the city on a trajectory toward its carbon neutral
goal and allow an interim point to exam progress and reassess its course of action. The CAP then outlines more
aggressive, advanced strategies that are necessary for the achievement of carbon neutrality by 2040. The CAP
concludes with guidance on how the city itself can strive to improve its climate impact to lead the community
toward its collective goals.
Recognizing the difficulty of transitioning into this plan, three kick-start projects are designed to catalyze
engagement with the community and build momentum for change. The first project is a youth-led initiative,
building on the city’s history of engaging its young residents. The second project aims to centralize information
about the plan and other climate action resources into one, easy-to-find hub for households and businesses to
reference. The third project is to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles by installing chargers in public
parking lots.
The next section states seven climate goals, with each accompanied by a series of strategies and specific
initiatives and actions. The following goals address the greatest areas for climate impact:
1.Reduce energy consumption in large commercial buildings 30% by 2030
2.Reduce energy consumption in small to mid-size commercial buildings 30% by 2030
3.Design and build all new construction to be net-zero energy (NZE) by 2030
4.Reduce energy consumption in residential buildings 35% by 2030
5.Achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030
6.Reduce vehicle emissions by 25% by 2030
7.Reduce solid waste 50% by 2030 from Business as Usual
Specific reduction targets are assigned to each strategy that were calculated using the wedge diagram tool
(Appendix F). The strategies are supported by initiatives and actions intended to help the city achieve these
targets. The impact of each of the listed initiatives is aggregated to demonstrate the total emissions reductions.
At the end of each section is a list of resources that are available to support the city in implementing these
actions. The seven mid-term goals will jointly accomplish a 55% reduction in emissions by 2030 and a 62%
reduction by 2040. The remaining emissions will come from fossil fuel use in buildings and travel, including
vehicle and air travel. The remaining sources of emissions will require the city to identify additional advanced
strategies (e.g., fuel switching, thermal solutions, and carbon offsets) to achieve carbon neutrality.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 8
Following the seven mid-term goals are examples of longer-term, deep decarbonization initiatives St. Louis Park
must begin to plan for in the next five to ten years in order to address the remaining 38% of emissions. The city
is encouraged to begin long-range planning for the following Advanced Strategies:
A.Identify opportunities for thermal energy grids
B.Explore opportunities for combined heat and power
C.Anaerobic digesters for waste heat and compressed natural gas
D.Fuel switching
E.Carbon offsets
F.Emerging technologies
G.Scope 3 emissions
The CAP concludes with recommendations for how city operations can be improved to help reach carbon
neutrality by 2040. While these operations only account for a small portion of overall carbon outputs, city
leaders serve as visible examples to demonstrate that achieving these goals is possible.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 9
Background
St. Louis Park is among Minnesota’s leading communities in addressing its climate change impact. The climate
and energy goals included in this CAP are among the most ambitious in the nation. Climate change is altering the
way communities think about their public and private sector infrastructure, operations, local resources, and
social norms. With this plan, St. Louis Park is leading the way in rethinking how local resources are used and how
to leverage new opportunities for residents and businesses to reduce their impact on climate change.
A long-time leader in its commitment to environmental stewardship, the city was among the first communities
to offer curbside compost pick-up and now has a Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance. In 2009, the city created an
urban reforestation program to enhance the health of the tree canopy. St. Louis Park is a Step 3 GreenStep City
and participated as one of the original pilot cities, helping to launch Minnesota’s most successful city
sustainability program.
In early 2015, the St. Louis Park Environment and Sustainability Commission (ESC) made the case to Council to
participate in the Partners in Energy (PiE) program offered by Xcel Energy in order to drive more action in
reducing energy use and ultimately citywide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Council approved participating in
PiE and by 2015 a community team was formed to develop an Energy Action Plan. Four priorities emerged as the
hallmark elements of the Energy Action Plan: 1) create a climate plan with the goal of achieving carbon
neutrality by 2040, 2) drive energy efficiency in business, 3) increase renewable energy purchases, and 4) create
a partnership with youth. The first was developed in consideration of what the city could do to help prevent a
global temperature rise of another 1.5° Celsius, as was agreed upon at the Paris Climate Agreement meetings in
2015.
The Energy Action Plan was presented to City Council in April 2016 and a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) for implementing the plan was presented to Council in September 2016. As instructed, the City Manager
signed the MOU in support of providing resources to implement the plan. Key components of the PiE plan
included climate action planning and a partnership with youth going forward. Youth involvement resulted in
high school students from the Roots and Shoot Environmental Club to partner with a nonprofit, iMatter, to
produce and present a report card, a petition, and a climate inheritance resolution to Council. Council adopted
the resolution in May 2016, stating:
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the St. Louis Park City Council commits to working constructively, using
ingenuity, innovation, and courageous determination to create a St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan for
consideration that significantly reduces St. Louis Park’s greenhouse gas emissions to levels that would protect
our community’s children and grandchildren from the risk of climate destruction.
The plan that follows is a direct result of the Climate Inheritance Resolution (Appendix B), offering a roadmap for
the city to work toward its ambitious goals. Actions and technologies included in this plan exist today and are
ready for implementation. Leveraging existing programs and expanding collaboration will be key to successful
implementation.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 10
Plan Development
The Climate Inheritance Resolution, passed by the City Council in May 2016, included a commitment to creating
a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that significantly reduces greenhouse gas levels to protect the community’s children
and grandchildren from the risk of climate destruction. The development of the CAP was spearheaded by the
city’s Environment and Sustainability Coordinator and the Climate Action Plan Advisory Committee. The advisory
committee was formed to develop goals and to be the citizen-led decision-making body. The advisory
committee was made up of several residents — many of whom participated in the PiE process — and one staff
member. Members of the Roots and Shoots Program at St. Louis Park High School were invited to review the
plan and develop ideas for how the youth can be a part of implementation.
Greenhouse gas assessments were completed for both city operations and community-wide energy use.
Preparation of the Greenhouse Gas Assessment for City Operations (Appendix E) involved data collection for
building, fleet, contractor, and personnel-related travel, consistent with the Local Government Operations
Protocol for the Quantification and Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories, produced by ICLEI. This
information was used to develop recommendations for city operations to guide the city’s efforts in leading the
community toward carbon neutrality.
As a Regional Indicator Initiative (RII) participant, the city had already completed and established a benchmark
from which it could set targets toward achieving its goals. RII is a program that measures annual performance
metrics (including energy, water, travel, waste, and GHG emissions) to help cities meet their environmental
goals. This data was updated to include the most recent years and provide a better picture for how the city has
used energy the previous ten years.
The city is also a participant in the Local Government Planning for Energy Project (LoGoPEP), a new program
designed to help local governments achieve energy goals. As part of LoGoPEP, a wedge diagram tool was
created for energy and greenhouse gas reduction planning (See Appendix F for methodology). The wedge tool
analysis reflects the specific energy use and GHG generation pattern in St. Louis Park, helping to identify the
most impactful strategies.
Utilizing the wedge diagram tool, specific strategies were identified to reduce emissions. This information
informed the decisions of the advisory committee as it developed goals across seven action areas to move the
city toward its 2040 carbon neutral goal. The action areas with the greatest potential for impact are:
1.Large Commercial Efficiency
2.Small Commercial Efficiency
3.Net Zero Construction
4.Residential Efficiency
5.Renewable Electricity
6.Transportation Emissions Reduction
7.Waste Reduction and Diversion
The CAP is organized by Goals, Strategies, Initiatives, and Actions. The goals were set for 2030 as midway point
for the city to assess its progress toward becoming carbon neutral by 2040. The strategies were determined
through the development of the wedge diagram tool and illustrate targets for potential emissions reductions.
Specific initiatives and actions were designed to support implementation of the plan and produce significant
emissions reductions across sectors, both now and into the future.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 11
Implementation of the strategies under all goals will result in a 55% reduction of GHG emissions from business
as usual by 2030, and 62% by 2040. Because the actions will not achieve carbon neutrality by 2040, it is
necessary to implement more aggressive measures to further reduce emissions from natural gas and vehicles.
The CAP identifies advanced strategies for the city to explore and implement both in the immediate future and
in the long-term.
The final section was developed specifically for city operations, which include city buildings and facilities, fleets,
streetlights, and water and wastewater processes. These functions only make-up 1.5% of total community-wide
GHG emissions, but represent a significant opportunity for the city to lead on emissions reduction efforts. The
Greenhouse Gas Assessment for City Operations provided the energy use and associated emissions data that
was used to make recommendations for these reductions.
Implementation of this CAP will take tremendous effort from city personnel, residents, and the business
community. The Climate Action Plan is designed as a guiding document that balances flexibility in
implementation with specific actions that will result in emissions reductions. Beyond reducing GHG emissions,
there are important co-benefits to be gained through implementation of this plan. Energy-saving and clean
energy measures have important economic benefits, including reduced energy costs and job opportunities. Land
use changes can improve physical and mental health, as well as improve individual behavior to be more
sustainable. Equitable implementation of this plan should support small businesses and low-income residents
through direct engagement and incentives, and should ensure job creation opportunities for underemployed
residents.
The city continues to advance race equity and inclusion through activities, outreach, programs, policies, projects,
initiatives, contracting, budgeting, hiring, and all other areas of work and service delivery. The Climate Action
Plan will impact everyone in the community and it is important that racial equity considerations are made and
used as part of achieving the targets and goals outlined in the document.
Implementation of this ambitious plan will support the city in its efforts to reduce the risks associated with
climate change while creating a more resilient community.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 12
Community-wide Greenhouse Gas Emissions Profile
St. Louis Park has participated in the Regional Indicators Initiative (RII) since 2009. RII has completed a
greenhouse gas inventory for the city for all years between 2007 and 2016, and has made projections for
“businesses-as-usual” emissions looking out to 2040. Business-as-usual shows the anticipated emissions if the
city were to take no action to reduce its emissions. This information was captured using a wedge diagram tool,
which divides the emissions by sector (building energy, transportation, waste, and wastewater), as seen in
Figure 1. This graph illustrates that if the city were to do nothing to actively reduce emissions, there would be a
slight rise in emissions overtime.
The greatest emissions sources are from buildings and transportation. The building sector includes emissions
from all commercial, industrial, and residential buildings. This includes electricity, which is primarily used for
lighting, appliances, and other electronic devices, but can be used for space and water heating as well. Natural
gas is the main fuel for space and water heating,
cooking, and many industrial processes.
Emissions from buildings make up 58% of all
emissions in St. Louis Park (Figure 2).
Transportation makes up 39% of total emissions
within the community. Emissions from
transportation are attributable to car and truck
travel, and are estimated by vehicle miles
traveled within the city boundaries (regardless
of through traffic or with an origin or destination
in the city). The remaining emissions come from
waste and waste water treatment, which make
up less than 3% of total emissions.
Building emissions can be broken down further
into two sectors: residential and commercial.
58%
39%
2%1%
ALL EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
Total Building
Transportation
Solid Waste
Wastewater
Treatment
Figure 3 Building Emissions by sector; Source: Regional Indicators Initiative
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
1,000,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
tonnes CO2e BUSINESS-AS-USUAL EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
Waste and Wastewater
Vehicle and Air Travel
Residential Natural Gas
Residential Electricity
C/I Natural Gas
C/I Electricity
Figure 1 Business as usual emissions by sector. Data from the Regional Indicators Initiative.
Figure 2 Percent of emissions by sector. Source: Regional Indicators
Initiative
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 13
Emissions from the commercial sector are nearly double the emissions of the residential sector. Commercial
buildings offer greater opportunity for deep efficiency improvements as they use significantly more energy per
building as compared to residential. There are nearly 630 commercial buildings in St. Louis Park, 157 of which
that are greater than 20,000 square feet. While larger buildings do not necessarily use more energy, size can be
a good indicator of potential opportunities for energy savings.
There are more than 23,000 households in the city; 11,400 are single family, the remaining are multi-family.
Emissions from multi-family buildings are found in both the commercial and residential sector: CenterPoint
Energy typically includes multi-family in commercial, while Xcel Energy includes it in residential. This is important
to consider when tracking emissions reductions by sector as improvements in multi-family buildings will result in
emissions reductions in both the commercial and residential sector.
Transportation emissions are measured by the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) within the city’s boundaries. The
VMT includes commercial and freight vehicles, personal cars, and mass transit vehicles. In 2016, more than
436,500,000 miles were driven within St. Louis Park, 65.9% were from light duty passenger vehicles. Of the light
duty vehicles, 89% are fueled by gasoline and flex fuel (e85) is the next most common fuel (Figure 4).
Gasoline
89%
UnknownHybrid
Diesel/Biodiesel
Flex Fuel
Other
11%
ST. LOUIS PARK LIGHT DUTY PASSENGER VEHICLES
BY FUEL TYPE
Figure 3 Source: U.S. Department of Energy, State & Local Energy Data
Figure 4 Light Duty Vehicles Fuel Type, Data Source: Department of Energy State and Local Energy Data
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 14
Understanding the baseline emissions from each sector allows targets to be set to decrease emissions over time.
Using the wedge diagram tool, emissions reductions can be visualized to see which strategies have the greatest
impact. The planned emissions graph (Figure 5) shows businesses-as-usual emissions to demonstrate the
emissions reductions that result from the actions in this plan. The gray line across the top of the wedges depicts
the business-as-usual (BAU) emissions; the wedges beneath the BAU line represent carbon emissions reduction
by sector over time. The CAP focuses on strategies that can be implemented by 2030 (orange dashed line) to set
the city on a trajectory toward its ultimate goal of being carbon neutral by 2040. The two gray and dark gray
wedges at the bottom represent the remaining emissions that will need to be met through implementation of
the advanced strategies. In other words, realizing the targets of every strategy of the seven action areas will not
get the city to carbon neutral. The remaining emissions come from transportation (especially heavy-duty
vehicles), and natural gas consumption in buildings that have exhausted efficiency measures. The city will need
to evaluate its progress and make adjustments along the way to ensure that it continues to reduce emissions.
Figure 5 Total emissions reductions resulting from CAP implementation
The Advanced Strategies section of the CAP offers suggestions for various technologies that, while more
complicated to implement and require long-range planning, will have significant impact on reducing the city’s
carbon emissions. Advances in technologies may be available in the future to help further reduce those
emissions. For instance, there are companies that are working on electric heavy-duty trucks; electric buses are
increasingly being integrated into public fleets; and building efficiency and renewable technologies continue to
show promise to displace emissions from natural gas.
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
1,000,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
tonnes CO2e
PLANNED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS BY SECTOR
Commercial/Industrial Efficiency
Residential Efficiency
Electric Grid Mix
Renewable Energy
Travel Strategies
Waste Strategies
Advanced Thermal Strategies & Offsets
Advanced Travel Strategies & Offsets
Business-As-Usual Goal
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 15
St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan
The City of St. Louis Park has committed to a bold, yet achievable goal to become carbon neutral by 2040. This
will require aggressive action on the part of the city, its residents, and its businesses. The following lays out a
Climate Action Plan (CAP) that will set the city in motion to achieve its ambitious climate goals. The CAP is
designed to guide the city through various strategies and initiatives to achieve seven broad goals to reduce
energy consumption, increase renewable energy, and transform travel.
The CAP is broken into four sections that will help the city make continuous progress toward achieving carbon
neutrality. The plan begins with three kick-start projects. These projects are designed to help city staff,
residents, and businesses hit the ground running upon the launch of the plan. These tangible projects will allow
the city to claim early success and generate momentum to continue buildings its efforts to implement this plan.
The three projects are:
Project 1: Youth-led initiative to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy in the community
Project 2: Develop a climate action plan resource hub
Project 3: Install electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in public parking lots
The second section includes seven goals to reduce energy consumption in the commercial and residential
sectors, achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030, reduce transportation emissions by 25%, and accomplish
the city’s waste reduction goal. These goals and their supporting strategies will help the city reduce emissions
55% by 2030, and 62% by 2040.
Impact Goals
Building Energy
Efficiency
21.7%
Reduce energy consumption n large commercial buildings 30%
Reduce energy consumption in small to mid-size commercial buildings
Design all new construction to be net-zero energy
Reduce energy consumption in residential buildings by 35%
Renewable Electricity
23.3%Achieve 100% renewable electricity
Travel
8.4%Reduce vehicle emissions 25%
Solid Waste
1.1%Reduce solid waste 50%
The third section of the CAP identifies opportunities for Advanced Strategies the city will need to explore in
more depth to meet the final 38% reduction in emissions. Of the remaining emissions, 36% are from natural gas
used in buildings and industrial processes, 44% are from vehicle travel, and 19% are from air travel. These will
need to be met using the acceleration of existing technologies, carbon offsets, and taking advantage of
technological innovations.
The final section of the CAP focuses on city operations emissions reductions. By implementing deep energy
efficiency practices, increasing renewable energy installations, and cleaning its fleet, the city can set an example
for residents and businesses to support and follow.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 16
KICK-START PROJECTS
Three projects, described herein, have been identified to help launch the city’s CAP. The intention of these
projects is to provide initial focus for the city and its partners to implement specific actions that will provide
momentum for implementing the CAP.
PROJECT 1: Youth-led initiative to increase energy efficiency and renewable energy in the community
St. Louis Park’s youth have been instrumental in working with the city to advance its efforts to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions, and it will be critical to maintain the involvement of students to accomplish the goals
of the plan. The Roots and Shoots Club, supported by iMatter, at St. Louis Park High School will initiate a
student-led project to increase the adoption of green power purchases, clean energy, and/or energy efficiency
actions in the city. This may involve working directly with the school district to help it adopt and achieve goals
consistent with the city’s goals; an outreach effort to get fellow students to encourage their families to sign-up
for green power and decrease energy use; or an educational campaign for residents and small businesses to
understand their solar resource and guide them toward installing solar on their rooftops.
While it is important for this project to be initiated and implemented by the youth, the city should support
efforts, identify big-impact opportunities, and maintain an active relationship as the project advances.
PROJECT 2: Develop a climate action plan resource hub
This effort will require city staff, residents, and businesses to move together to achieve deep emissions
reduction by 2040. Through branding, communication, and outreach, the city can make it clear what it needs
from the community and provide resources to help people participate in energy saving and clean energy
initiatives. A CAP Resource Hub (see Seattle) will serve as a one-stop destination for businesses and residents to
find information to improve efficiency, install solar, purchase green power, participate in a bulk purchase of
electric vehicles, and more. The hub should be easily accessible on the city’s website and have clearly identified
resources for residents and businesses to take advantage of multiple opportunities.
City staff will be responsible for developing the CAP Resource Hub. There are several recommendations and
resources throughout this document to include in this project (Appendix D).
PROJECT 3: Install electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure in public parking lots
Transforming how people move within the city will be one of the biggest challenges for St. Louis Park. There are
several options the city can consider to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. While the biggest
impact will come from reducing vehicle miles traveled, there will still be people who need and want to drive. In
recognition of this limitation, the city should encourage residents to choose electric vehicles (EVs) and
accelerate the adoption of zero emission vehicles.
For this project, the city will provide charging infrastructure for EVs in public parking lots. This will include
parking lots associated with city-owned buildings, city parks, and school buildings. The charging stations should
be highly visible, educational, and incorporate any branding the city develops as part of its climate action efforts.
The city already has a charger in the City Hall parking lot and has included an additional electric vehicle charger
in its 2019 Capital Improvement Plan; this should be expanded to include public locations listed above, as well as
educational material.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 17
GOALS, STRATEGIES, INITIATIVES, AND ACTIONS
The following goals were developed in coordination with the Climate Action Plan Advisory Committee. The goals
look at GHG emissions out to the year 2030 and put the city on a trajectory to reduce emissions 55% by that
time. The year 2030 was selected to serve as mid-point where the city could reassess the CAP to determine how
to accomplish the remaining emissions reductions. While some of the remaining emissions can be reduced
through the continuation of these strategies, it will take more aggressive action to get to zero emissions.
Advanced technologies and practices that will drive down the remaining emissions are included in the next
section.
GOAL 1: Reduce energy consumption in large commercial and industrial (C/I) buildings by 30% by 2030, as
compared to the business-as-usual forecast.
Large commercial buildings are defined here as 20,000 square feet or larger. These buildings currently comprise
25% of the total number of commercial buildings in St. Louis Park (157 out of 626), and are estimated to make
up 64% of commercial energy consumption.
STRATEGIES:
•Building Retrofits: 79 buildings complete retrofits by 2030, saving an average of 18% (1.5% of total
building emissions).
•Appliance Equipment and Fixture Efficiency: 79 buildings replace equipment with high efficiency
models by 2030, saving an average of 25% (3.3% of total building emissions).
•Efficient Building Operations: By 2030, 143 buildings are actively engaged in building operations best
management practices (BMPs), saving an average of 15% (7.7% of total building emissions).
•Behavior Change: By 2030, occupants of 52 buildings are engaged in sustained behavior change
strategies, saving an average of 8% (0.7% of total building emissions).
IMPACT: By reducing energy consumption in large commercial buildings by 30% from the business-as-usual
forecast, these strategies are estimated to result in a 13.2% reduction in total buildings emissions in 2030, which
equates to an 7.8% reduction in community-wide emissions.
GOAL 1 INITIATIVES AND ACTIONS
1.1. Create an internal team to lead large commercial energy efficiency efforts
The city has limited control over the energy decisions made by building operators of large commercial and
industrial (C/I) facilities. It can, however, enable and advance energy efficiency through efforts to encourage,
incentivize, and support more aggressive energy action. This team will be largely responsible for
implementing the following actions.
1.1.1. Appoint specific staff to lead and organize the internal large commercial building energy
efficiency team
1.1.2. Determine who should participate on the large commercial building energy efficiency team
1.1.3. Establish goals and milestones to complete the actions to achieve the large commercial
buildings goals
1.1.4. Hold regular check-in meetings to track milestones and identify next steps
1.1.5. Engage and recruit large commercial business stakeholders to support this effort; identify
companies with energy/climate goals to be leaders
1.1.6. Institutionalize large commercial energy efficiency as a normal function of this team
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 18
1.2. Adopt a building energy disclosure ordinance for all public buildings and all commercial buildings
greater than 20,000 square feet.
A building energy disclosure ordinance is a policy tool that uses market forces to increase building energy
performance and motivate building owners and operators to invest in energy efficiency improvements.
Adopting such an ordinance will allow the city to see how energy is used among its largest buildings, lead to
accelerated energy reductions, and strengthen relationships between the city and the business community
through more active engagement.
1.2.1. Designate a project lead among city staff; coordinate with Initiative 1.1
1.2.2. Participate in energy disclosure pilot program through Hennepin County
1.2.3. Hold stakeholder meetings with managers of largest buildings to explain the goals of an
ordinance, minimize barriers, and gain input
1.2.4. Host a “data jam” session where building managers can enter energy with technical assistance
providers present
1.2.5. Communicate to businesses that the city needs their help to achieve climate goals
1.2.6. Identify businesses in the community that have climate goals and highlight as leaders
1.2.7. Determine who will manage the program at the city, what the budget will be, how much staff
time will be needed, and what resources are available
1.2.8. Work with stakeholders to draft a building energy disclosure ordinance
1.2.9. Present draft ordinance language to City Council
1.2.10. Adopt the building energy disclosure ordinance
1.2.11. Manage the program: track progress, share resources, and promote successes
1.2.12. Provide on-going individualized technical assistance for benchmarking to help drive participation
1.3. Support energy efficiency and clean energy projects
Utilize, promote, and encourage existing tools, programs, and incentives to support C/I energy projects.
1.3.1. Encourage Energy Star certification for eligible facilities
o Establish an annual goal of new certifications
o Designate a section of the CAP Resource Hub to large C/I and include a link to Energy Star
Portfolio Manager, which is a free resource available for all buildings
o Track and promote certifications each year
o Explore city’s legal authority to require disclosure of EPA Energy Star rating at the time of
sale or lease in commercial buildings
1.3.2. Continue to encourage participation in other certification programs like U.S. Green Building
Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) for existing buildings
1.3.3. Continue to provide information about financing options such as commercial PACE (Property
Assessed Clean Energy), Trillion BTU, and Rev It Up loan program in CAP Resource Hub
1.3.4. Provide opportunities for existing building operators to participate in training, including training
for new and emerging building technologies such as net zero energy
1.4. Communicate and market project progress, results, and success
Continue to market the success of the CAP, make it a part of regular city communications.
1.4.1. Implement Partners in Energy (PiE) strategies for top 100 largest businesses
o Provide a call to action for large business leaders from the mayor/city council
o Setup a public website to track business participation and results
o Provide ongoing mayoral/city council recognition of energy leaders
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 19
o Publicize individual accomplishments using case studies
1.4.2. Create business-facing energy use cases/company spotlights
1.4.3. Develop business-specific outreach materials on opportunities, incentives, and tangible and
intangible benefits
1.4.4. Launch a public-private energy efficiency campaign to catalyze action in large businesses
1.4.5. Identify large commercial entities with climate goals to act as community leaders, coordinate
with Action 1.1.5
1.4.6. Expand use of behavioral strategies (e.g. turning off electronics, programming thermostats, etc.)
to drive energy reductions
RESOURCES
•Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) – The Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program allows
home and business owners to finance efficiency projects through a voluntary assessment on their
property.
•Saint Paul Port Authority (Trillion BTU) – The Trillion BTU program, administered by Saint Paul Port
Authority, provides rebates and loans to businesses to complete energy improvements
•MN Department of Commerce (Rev It Up) – Commerce annually solicits a request for proposals (RFP)
from units of local government seeking low-cost, long-term capital to finance community energy
efficiency and renewable energy system projects that are financed via energy savings and/or projected
revenues created by the systems.
•Xcel Energy – Offers a variety of rebates and efficiency programs to customers.
•CenterPoint – Offers a variety of rebates and efficiency programs to customers.
•Institute for Market Transformation – Provides more rationale behind this type of policy, along with case
study examples and a tool to compare policies across the country.
•American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy – The State and Local Policy database includes many
cities’ building energy disclosure policies and their requirements.
•Minneapolis – The City of Minneapolis has passed a Building Rating & Disclosure Policy. This document
lays out the rationale of the policy, how it is designed, its benefits, and how it will be enforced.
GOAL 2: Reduce energy consumption in small to mid-size commercial buildings by 30% by 2030, as
compared to the business-as-usual forecast.
Small and mid-sized commercial buildings are defined here as less than 20,000 square feet. These buildings
currently comprise 75% of the total number of commercial buildings in St. Louis Park (460 of 626), but are
estimated to consume only 36% of the commercial energy; an effective engagement strategy will be necessary
to reduce the burden on time and staff resources and achieve high participation.
Strategies:
•Building Retrofits: 117 small and mid-sized buildings complete retrofits by 2030, resulting in an average
energy savings of 18% (0.7% of total building emissions).
•Appliance Equipment and Fixture Efficiency: 188 buildings replace equipment with high efficiency
models, resulting in an average energy savings of 17% (2.6% of total building emissions).
•Efficient Building Operations: By 2030, 235 buildings are actively engaged in building operations BMPs,
saving an average of 23% (3.0% of total building emissions).
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 20
•Behavior Change: By 2030, occupants of 155 buildings are engaged in sustained behavior change
strategies, saving an average of 5% (0.4% of total building emissions).
IMPACT: By reducing energy consumption in small to mid-size commercial buildings by 30% from the
business-as-usual forecast, these strategies are estimated to result in a 6.7% reduction in total building
emissions in 2030, which equates to a 4.0% reduction in community-wide emissions.
GOAL 2 INITIATIVES AND ACTIONS
2.1. Develop an outreach strategy to engage small and mid-size businesses
There are more than 600 commercial properties in St. Louis Park. Most of these businesses will need to
engage in energy improvements by 2030, and all will need to by 2040.
2.1.1. Determine who will lead outreach efforts to engage small and mid-size business (e.g.
Environment & Sustainability Commission (ESC) workgroup)
2.1.2. Designate a staff person to serve as city liaison to the outreach efforts
2.1.3. Establish goals for the number of properties reached each year
o The city would need to reach an average of 38 businesses each year between now and 2030,
or
o Target market segments (grocery stores, restaurants), or specific geographies (small business
districts)
2.1.4. Engage local business associations (e.g., TwinWest Chamber of Commerce/St. Louis Park
Business Council) to develop strategies for small to mid-sized business energy efficiency
programs
2.1.5. Integrate energy efficiency technical assistance into existing economic development programs
and partnerships with local business associations
2.1.6. Utilize the ‘small business coach’ model (see Resources) to educate business owners on energy
savings opportunities and benefits
2.2. Support energy efficiency and clean energy projects
Utilize, promote, and encourage existing tools, programs, and incentives to support small to mid-sized C/I
energy projects.
2.2.1. Encourage Energy Star certification for eligible facilities, in coordination with Initiative 1.3
o Establish an annual goal of new buildings achieving certification
o Include a link to Energy Star Portfolio Manager on city’s Small Business Resources page, and
include information on the CAP Resource Hub.
o Track and promote certifications each year
o Explore requiring disclosure of EPA Energy Star rating at the time of sale or lease in
commercial buildings
o Help businesses promote themselves as an environmentally friendly company
2.2.2. Promote behavioral energy efficiency strategies
o Expand use of behavioral strategies to drive energy reductions (Clean Energy Resource
Teams (CERTs) and Center for Energy and Environment (CEE) have multiple resources for
behavior change strategies)
2.2.3. Set up a public website to track business participation and results – this should be a part of the
CAP Resource Hub
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 21
2.2.4. Include educational and promotional material in building permit processes to increase greater
awareness and adoption of energy efficiency, clean energy, and water conservation
improvements
2.2.5. Continue to promote financing and rebate opportunities, such as PACE and utility efficiency
rebate programs; add to CAP Resource Hub
2.2.6. Encourage or require improvements to a building’s energy or water performance during major
renovation, sale, or certain types of improvements
o Incentivize private investment into energy efficiency with a cost-share program (see
Minneapolis example under Resources)
2.2.7. Incorporate city climate goals into the 2036 contract renewal for utility franchise agreements
2.3. Ensure small business efficiency programs are implemented equitably
Some small businesses may need additional financial and technical assistance to take advantage of available
programs. Ensure that these businesses have equitable and affordable access to energy efficiency programs.
2.3.1. Be intentional about engaging small businesses in low-income communities
2.3.2. Target minority-owned small businesses and share benefits and energy efficiency and resources
2.4. Communication and Marketing
The city should continue to promote its goals, projects, and successes among small and mid-sized businesses
in the community.
2.4.1. Provide ongoing mayoral/city council recognition of energy leaders
2.4.2. Partner with private, public, or non-profit organizations (Local companies, CERTs, GreenStep
Cities, TwinWest) to publicize individual accomplishments using case studies
2.4.3. Create an intra-city energy competition among small businesses
RESOURCES
•Lake Street Small Business Energy Coaching Pilot Program – Lake Street Council did extensive outreach
to small businesses on energy efficiency and documented their strategies and lessons learned.
•Minnesota Center for Energy and Environment – offers a range of programs targeted at commercial
energy efficiency, including lighting HVAC, financing, and more.
•Minnesota Clean Energy Resource Teams – provides resources, tools, and engagement efforts to
implement local energy projects.
•Minneapolis green business cost-share program – This is an example of an incentive program
implemented by the City of Minneapolis.
•Energy Star for Small Business – Energy Star provides resources and recognition for small and medium
sized businesses.
•Xcel Energy Rebates – Offers rebates for efficiency improvements
•CenterPoint Small Commercial Efficiency Program – Offers rebates for high-efficiency equipment.
•ACEEE – Successful Practices of Small Commercial Energy Efficiency Programs
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 22
GOAL 3: By 2030, design all new construction to be net-zero energy (NZE).
Strategies:
•Energy Code Enforcement: Continue to ensure all new and renovated buildings meet the current energy
code, reducing energy use by 35% from the baseline building for new construction and 17% for
renovations (1.2% of total building emissions).
•Stretch Energy Code: By 2030, all new and renovated buildings are constructed to green building
standards (NZE), reducing emissions by 67-100% from the baseline buildings for new construction and
34-50% for renovations, depending on the year designed (3.3% of total building emissions).
IMPACT: These strategies are estimated to result in a 4.5% reduction in total building emissions in 2030 over the
business-as-usual forecast, which equates to a 2.7% reduction in community-wide emissions.
GOAL 3 INITIATIVES AND ACTIONS
3.1. Strengthen the city’s green building policy
The city has a green building policy that requires development projects that receive city financial assistance
to use green building or LEED standards in the design of the buildings. Expanding this policy to the extent
possible will have long-term impacts on future development.
3.1.1. Include a voluntary element of this policy to reach development projects that are below the
required size or do not receive city funds
3.1.2. Incentivize and promote development projects that voluntarily comply with this code
3.1.3. Expand community outreach efforts to ensure developers and new residents are aware of the
policy and the city’s climate goals
3.1.4. Consider how the voluntary element (3.1.1) of the Green Building policy may be integrated into
the city’s zoning code
3.2. Support the State’s adoption of a green building stretch code
The city cannot currently exceed the State’s energy code. However, if the State were to add a green building
code as an appendix (stretch) code, local authorities would be able to adopt it to increase their standards.
3.2.1. Collaborate with other communities, industry, and state agencies to support the State through
legislation or rule-making in adopting a green building stretch code
3.3. Adopt the green building stretch code as soon as it becomes available
It is unclear if or when the State will adopt a green building code. The city should prepare for how the code
will be integrated into its practices.
3.3.1. Track the progress of any potential legislation that includes a stretch code
3.3.2. Educate local government staff and building officials about the appendix building code so they
are ready to enforce it once the city is able to adopt it
3.3.3. Update website and educational materials to include the new green building code
3.4. Encourage existing energy code to ensure development meets the highest standards
Some buildings in the State do not perform to the designed standards. Education and stricter enforcement
of the energy code can help improve the energy performance of new development.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 23
3.4.1. Continue to educate building designers and contractors of the Minnesota Code requirement and
ensure 100% compliance with the existing energy code for all new and renovated building.
3.4.2. Provide educational materials to homeowners and businesses who are completing their own
construction projects to ensure they are aware of energy standards
RESOURCES
•Maplewood – The City of Maplewood has adopted a strong Green Building Program.
•SB 2030 – Sustainable building energy standards that achieve net zero development by 2030.
•St. Louis Park Green Building Policy - Requires building construction projects that receive or use city
financial assistance to incorporate sustainable development practices.
Figure 6 Total building emission reductions from all commercial/industrial energy efficiency strategies.
The strategies included in Goals 1-3 will have a significant impact on emissions reduction in the Commercial and
Industrial sector, illustrated by the wedges in Figure 6. In 2030, the total impact of Goal 1-3 strategies is a 41.0%
reduction in commercial/industrial emissions. This results in a 24.4% reduction in building energy emissions and
a 14.5% reduction in community-wide emissions.
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
tonnes CO2e
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY STRATEGIES
Energy Code Enforcement
Stretch Energy Code
Building Retrofit
Appliance, Equipment, and Fixture Efficiency
Efficient Building Operations
Behavior Change
Business-As-Usual Strategic Plan Goal
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 24
GOAL 4: Reduce energy consumption in residential buildings by 35% by 2030, as compared to the
business-as-usual forecast.
Strategies:
•Energy Code Enforcement: Continue to ensure all new and renovated residential buildings meet the
current energy code, reducing energy use by 39% from the baseline building for new construction and
19% for renovations (0.8% of total building emissions).
•Stretch Energy Code: By 2030, all new residential buildings are built to net zero energy (NZE) standards
reducing emissions by 67-100% from the baseline building, depending on the year designed (0.5% of
total building emissions).
•Building Retrofits/Weatherization: 9,000 single- family households complete retrofits/weatherization
by 2030, saving an average of 37% for natural gas and 6% for electricity (4.9% of total building
emissions).
•Appliance, Equipment, and Fixture Efficiency: 17,820 (75%) households replace electrical equipment
with high efficiency models, and 7,200 households replace natural gas equipment with high efficiency
models by 2030, saving an average of 13% (2.9% of total building emissions).
•Behavior Change: By 2030, 90% of households will be engaged in sustained behavior change strategies,
saving an average of 10% (3.0% of total building emissions).
IMPACT: By reducing energy consumption in residential buildings by 35% from the business-as-usual forecast,
these strategies are estimated to result in a 12.1% reduction in total building emissions in 2030, which equates
to a 7.2% reduction in community-wide emissions.
GOAL 4 INITIATIVES AND ACTIONS
4.1. Establish a residential outreach team through Sustainable St. Louis Park
The city has more than 23,000 households; just over 50% are single-family homes. Actions must be tailored
to different household types.
4.1.1. Through the Environment and Sustainability Commission and the Roots and Shoots Club, create
a residential outreach team
o Establish annual targets of households to reach (use average kWh use per premise by
neighborhood maps created for the PiE Energy Action Plan to target high users)
o Collect communication materials to share with residents
o Develop a plan to drive residents to action
o Identify other community groups that can build capacity for effective outreach
o Track annual progress
o Combine efforts with increased renewable energy purchases and installations
4.1.2. Utilize existing outreach programs such as Home Energy Squad visits
4.1.3. Identify opportunities to promote energy efficiency action at existing and future city events
4.2. Use city policy tools to encourage energy efficiency
The city has policy and regulatory tools that it could use to encourage energy efficiency action at the time of
sale, or when a lease changes hands.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 25
4.2.1. Include educational and promotional material in building permit processes to increase greater
awareness and adoption of energy efficiency, clean energy, and water conservation
improvements
4.2.2. Encourage home energy performance report at the time of sale or a new lease agreement in
order to promote better understanding of home comfort, indoor air quality, and utility costs
4.2.3. Include information about energy efficient mortgages on CAP Resource Hub
4.3. Provide energy efficiency programs and resources to residents
Numerous programs exist to help residents finance and complete energy efficiency projects.
4.3.1. Work with Xcel Energy to pilot and deploy smart meters in homes. Smart meters two-way
communication between the meter and the utility, supporting better energy management
4.3.2. Connect residents to Home Energy Squad to receive energy audits, ensure equitable outreach to
all residents
4.3.3. Regularly host utility bill clinics offered by Minnesota Citizens Utility Board to help residents
understand their bills, discuss energy savings options, and hear about rebate availability and
clean energy options
4.3.4. Provide low-income residents information on weatherization programs that may be available to
them through the Minnesota Weatherization Assistance Program or Hennepin County
Community Action Partnership
4.3.5. Adopt residential PACE if it becomes available in Minnesota
4.3.6. Promote the usage of smart home devices that help save energy (e.g. smart thermostats)
4.3.7. Promote and help market on-bill financing by the utility companies as it becomes available
4.3.8. Connect residents to lending options through CEE and Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
4.4. Communication and marketing
Maintain regular communication with residents through direct outreach and normal communications,
4.4.1. Ensure energy efficiency rebate opportunities are listed on the CAP Resource Hub
4.4.2. Create a welcome packet for new businesses and residents, which will provide information on
all the resources and opportunities listed above
4.4.3. Share success of efforts to encourage more residents to act
RESOURCES
•Center for Energy and Environment – CEE provides a range of services including home energy audits,
home energy squad visits, financing, and assistance implementing energy saving measures.
•Energy Fit Homes – CEE has developed an Energy Fitness Score for residential buildings that allows home
owners to see the relative efficiency of their homes.
•Xcel Energy – Offers energy audits and a variety of rebates to customers.
•CenterPoint Energy – Offers energy audits and a variety of rebates to customers.
•Minnesota Weatherization Assistance Program – Provides free home energy upgrades to low-income
homeowners and renters to help save energy and protect against harsh weather.
•Hennepin County CAP – The Community Action Partnership provides free energy related repairs and
heating bill assistance to low income residents.
•Minnesota CUB – Minnesota Citizens Utility Board is a consumer advocacy organization that offers
assistance to utility customers.
•Fix-up Program – Financing program offered by Minnesota Housing Finance Agency.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 26
Figure 7 Total building emission reductions from residential energy efficiency strategies.
Figure 7 depicts 12.11% emissions reductions from residential energy efficiency strategies. Although there are
more residential buildings in the community, these strategies result in relatively smaller emissions reductions
than the more energy-intensive commercial industrial sector. This means that the city will have to consider how
to best balance its efforts against the impact and avoid burdening resources for a smaller result. The city should
focus its outreach efforts both on high energy users (as identified in the PiE Energy Action Plan) and low-income
households. High energy users will have greater opportunities for efficiencies, and low-income households may
be burdened by unnecessarily high energy bills.
GOAL 5: Achieve 100% renewable electricity by 2030
Strategies
•Commercial/Industrial Green power purchase Commercial:
o 40% of businesses (~920) purchase all their electricity from green power by 2020
o All businesses purchase all their electricity from green power by 2030 (36.3% of total building
emissions in 2030)
•Residential Green power purchase Commercial:
o 40% of households (~9,840) purchase 100% of their electricity from green power by 2020
o All households purchase 100% of their electricity from green power by 2030 (14.1% of total
building emissions in 2030)
•On-site solar photovoltaic (PV): Meet 10% of building electricity consumption with rooftop solar by
2030 (5.6% of total building emissions in 2030)
IMPACT: By achieving 100% renewable electricity by 2030, these strategies are estimated to result in a 56.0%
reduction in total building emissions in 2030, which equates to a 33.3% reduction in community-wide emissions.
These savings do not account for changes in electricity use due to efficiency, electric vehicles, or fuel switching
from natural gas to electricity.
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
tonnes CO2e
RESIDENTIAL EFFICIENCY STRATEGIES
Energy Code Enforcement
Stretch Energy Code
Retrofit/Weatherization
Appliance, Equipment, and Fixture Efficiency
Behavior Change
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 27
GOAL 5 INITIATIVES AND ACTIONS
5.1. Encourage the purchase of renewable energy credits by all businesses and residents
Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) can be purchased through utility programs like WindSource® and
Renewable*Connect. By purchasing credits, utility customers can offset carbon emissions from the
generation mix with clean energy from wind and solar.
5.1.1. Implement renewable energy strategies from the PiE Energy Action Plan
o Create a near-term web presence on the SLP website for nonprofits, local government,
faith-based organizations, and businesses to learn more and have access to relevant
resources such as financing (integrate with CAP Resource Hub)
o Conduct direct outreach to businesses and residents
o Create materials for neighborhood associations to distribute
5.1.2. Increase participation in green power purchase programs like WindSource® and
Renewable*Connect that are offered by Xcel Energy
o Include links to these programs on the CAP Resource Hub
o Encourage sign-ups through regular communication channels (newsletters, social media,
etc.)
o Charge ESC with developing an outreach strategy that includes annual goals and
engagement tactics
o Engage youth in outreach efforts
o Track annual participation using the community energy report from Xcel
5.2. Encourage participation in community solar
Many residents and business owners are unable to install solar on their rooftop because they don’t have a
good solar resource, are renters, or cannot afford to. Community solar allows utility customers to subscribe
to a solar garden that is sited in another location.
5.2.1. Provide resources to help residents and businesses make informed decisions about community
solar
o Include information and resources on the CAP Resource Hub
5.2.2. Host a community solar garden site that allows residents and businesses to participate
5.2.3. Stipulate in the contract that the project will maintain the RECs
5.2.4. Reserve a portion of the project for low-income residents at a discounted rate
5.2.5. Engage community members throughout the project
5.2.6. Request technical assistance from objective entities like CERTs
5.3. Support and accelerate installation of on-site solar
More than half of the city’s energy consumption can be met by rooftop solar generation within the
community. Investment in on-site solar keeps energy dollars local, and helps the community meet its
climate goals.
5.3.1. Encourage and educate residents on the benefits of on-site solar
o Post the state solar resource map on city’s CAP Resource Hub
o Provide a link the Clean Energy Project Builder
o Provide a link to Energy Sage, an online marketplace that helps reduce the cost of solar
energy installations for business and residential consumers
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 28
o Include a link to the National Renewable Energy Lab’s solar calculator, PVWatts®
5.3.2. Organize a bulk purchase of solar installations through programs like Solarize and the Solar
Power Hour
o Promote and host workshops to offer residents the opportunity to receive discounted prices
on solar installations
o Coordinate with Roots and Shoots Club to expand outreach efforts to residents, businesses,
and the school district
5.3.3. Over time, continue to encourage more residents and businesses to shift from purchasing green
power to on-site generation to capture co-benefits like property investment, job creation, or
resilient grid infrastructure
5.3.4. Achieve SolSmart certification by implementing prescribed best practices
5.3.5. Encourage solar plus storage (and EV) ready homes
5.3.6. Include solar plus storage-installed in homes as an eligible amenity in PUD ordinance
5.4. Install solar on all public facilities with an adequate solar resource
The city can lead by example with public installations of solar energy systems.
5.4.1. Complete a solar resource assessment to determine optimal public sites for solar installation
o Use available mapping tools to identify potential sites for solar installations
o Use public facility solar installations as demonstration projects
o Share production data and cost savings with the community
5.4.2. Determine whether any sites are suitable for community solar gardens
RESOURCES
•Minnesota Solar Suitability App – allows users to enter their address and see an estimate of their solar
resource and production.
•Google Project Sunroof – similarly allows users to see an estimate of solar resource and production.
•CERTs - The Clean Energy Resource Teams have a wide variety of resource on solar energy, particularly
community solar gardens.
•Clean Energy Project Builder - This site aims to bring together all the information you need to plan a
clean energy project, including a search function for installers and funding sources.
•SolSmart Certification - SolSmart provides recognition and no-cost technical assistance to help local
governments reduce barriers to solar energy growth.
•Solarize - The Solarize approach allows groups of homeowners or businesses to work together to
collectively negotiate rates, competitively select an installer, and increase demand through a creative
limited-time offer to join the campaign.
•Solar Power Hour – One hour seminars on how solar PV systems work, financial benefits, and an
explanation of the installation process.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 29
Figure 8 Total building electric emissions reductions from renewable energy.
Achieving 100% renewable electricity by 2030 will have the greatest impact on carbon emissions in St. Louis
Park, reducing total emissions by nearly 33%. The emissions reduction calculation assumes the building
efficiency goals are met through 2030. The total rooftop generation potential was using a GIS mapping tool. The
rooftop resource is estimated to be equal to approximately 44% of the total electricity used St. Louis Park. The
rooftop estimate does not consider various impediments to solar energy systems, like air handling units, vents,
green roofs, or patios, and therefore may overestimate the available resource. However, it serves as an indicator
of how much solar electricity could be generated within the city boundary. This number is significantly greater
when ground mount applications are considered, particularly where there is underutilized land, such as large
surface parking lots or brownfields.
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
tonnes CO2e
RENEWABLE ENERGY STRATEGIES
Green Power Purchase - Commercial/Industrial
Green Power Purchase - Residential
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 30
GOAL 6: Reduce vehicle emissions by 25% by 2030, as compared to the business-as-usual forecast.
Strategies
•Reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): By 2030, VMT per person in St. Louis Park will be reduced by 12%
from 2014. (11.6% of total vehicle emissions)
•Vehicle Efficiency: By 2030, 24% of the existing car stock and 40% of the existing light truck stock will be
replaced with models that comply with CAFE Standards (federal fuel economy regulations), resulting in
39% savings for cars and 43% savings for light trucks. (7.2% of total vehicle emissions)
•Increase Adoption of Electric Vehicles (7.5% of total vehicle emissions)
o For city residents: By 2030, 100% of new car and 10% of new truck purchases by St. Louis Park
residents are electric vehicles, such that EVs comprise 28% of total car ownership and 1% of all
truck ownership in SLP. Assuming these vehicles are charged within St. Louis Park with carbon-
neutral electricity, they will achieve savings of 100%.
o For non-city residents: By 2030, 57% of new car and 5% of new truck purchases by non-SLP
residents are electric vehicles. EVs will make-up 14% of total non-resident cars and 1% of the
non-resident trucks that drive in SLP. Assuming these vehicles are charged within Xcel service
territory, they are estimated to achieve savings of 71%.
•Fuel Switching for Heavy Duty Vehicles: By 2030, 10% of heavy duty vehicles will use alternatives to
conventional fuels (i.e. electric, hybrid, and/or soybean-based BD20), achieving an average emissions
reduction of 39%. (0.7% of total vehicle emissions)
IMPACT: These strategies are estimated to result in a 27.0% emissions reduction in vehicle travel emissions by
2030, which equates to an 8.4% reduction in community-wide emissions.
GOAL 6 INITIATIVES AND ACTIONS
6.1. Expand infrastructure for electric vehicle charging
Electric vehicles have a lower carbon emissions rate than in Xcel Energy territory combustion engine vehicles. As
the grid gets cleaner, the emissions rate will decline.
6.1.1. Expand public infrastructure for electric vehicle charging
o Implement Kick-start Project 3 of this Plan within one year of Plan adoption
o Identify priority locations for EV charging stations
o Engage Drive Electric Minnesota to help determine charger type (Level 1, 2, or Fast Charger)
and appropriate rate structure for charging
o Ensure EV parking spaces have high visibility and educational signage
6.1.2. Expand private EV charging infrastructure
o Encourage private businesses to offer charging stations for EVs
o Increase access to workplace charging stations (PlugIn Connect, businesses, utilities)
o Include EV parking spaces in parking standards for new development
6.2. Promote and encourage accelerated adoption of EVs
The normal adoption rate for new vehicles types will not be fast enough to have the impact necessary to achieve
the city’s goals.
6.2.1. Promote benefits of and opportunities for EVs on CAP Resource Hub
o Educate on green power options, time-of-day pricing
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 31
o Promote state, local, and other incentives for purchasers of new EVs (tax credits, preferential
parking, reduced fees)
6.2.2. Work with Drive Electric Minnesota to coordinate a bulk discount program or public awareness
campaign
6.2.3. Work with businesses to increase the number of EVs that are a part of commercial fleets
6.2.4. Host Ride and Drive electric vehicle events
6.2.5. Support electrification of Metro Transit buses
6.3. Encourage alternative low-carbon fuels and fuel-efficient vehicles
Alternative fuels include E85 (ethanol blend), biodiesel, and hydrogen fuel cells. Both vehicles that accept these
fuels, and efficient vehicles emit less carbon than gasoline vehicles.
6.3.1. Provide educational materials on the benefits of fuel efficient vehicles
6.3.2. Promote alternative low-carbon fueling stations (e85, biodiesel)
6.3.3. Encourage alternative fuel for commercial fleets (e.g., delivery vehicles)
6.3.4. Look into anaerobic digestion to produce bio-based natural gas for heavy-duty vehicles
6.4. Enable reduction of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) from single-occupancy vehicles
The biggest impact on transportation emission reductions is from reducing VMT, which requires an increase in
the use of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles.
6.4.1. Continue to modify land use to encourage alternative modes of transportation, consistent with
the city’s complete streets policy and any future living streets policy
o Accelerate investment in alternative transportation infrastructure
o Continue to implement Active Living Sidewalks and Trails Plan to increase commuter
bicycling and pedestrian opportunities
o Install roundabouts to reduce vehicle fuel consumption
o Implement transit-oriented development (TOD) near anticipated LRT stops
o Allow building owners to unbundle parking to be rented separately from the building space
6.4.2. Encourage reduced vehicle ownership (there are currently 1.4 vehicles per household) through
education and incentives
6.4.3. Support and enable car sharing services such as HOURCAR®, Zipcar®, car2go, or any future
reputable service
6.4.4. Review current parking ordinance that contains minimum parking requirements, and modify to
use national best practices that set appropriate parking standards to encourage multi-modal
alternatives
6.4.5. Consider instituting flexible parking requirements for future transit-oriented development that
provides services, infrastructure and/or mitigations to reduce parking demand, such as:
o Access to electric, autonomous car-sharing and bicycle sharing programs to increase mobility
options for all residents
o Dedicated parking for low carbon fuel vehicles
o Resident and/or employee transit incentives
o Higher-than-required bicycle parking
6.4.6. Develop a wayfinding signage program to promote use of pedestrian trails and stairs, especially
to improve pedestrian access to schools (e.g. Safe Routes to School) and transit
6.4.7. Consider GHG emissions in planning, resource allocation, and right-of-way management
decisions
6.4.8. Improve the city’s average Walk Score from 47 to 60 by 2030
o Implement the city’s Complete Streets Policy for all transportation projects
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 32
6.4.9. Participate as a community in the National Bike Challenge, a nationwide event uniting bicyclists
and encouraging new riders
o Promote the National Bike Challenge on the CAP Resource Hub
o Share progress and success of the challenge
o Award top riders twice a year (winter and summer)
RESOURCES:
•Drive Electric Minnesota: Partnership to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles in Minnesota.
•Metropolitan Area Planning Council, example of flexible parking standards and national examples.
Figure 9 Total vehicle travel emission reductions through efficiency and decarbonization strategies.
Figure 9 shows the reduction in emissions from the transportation strategies. Strategies that reduce VMT will
have the greatest impact, followed by switching to EVs. Many of the EV strategies will rely, to some extent, on
market forces and the grid mix. The city will need to consider alternatives to offsetting remaining travel
emissions. Overall, these strategies will result in a 27% reduction in vehicle emissions and 8.4% reduction in
overall emissions.
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
tonnes CO2e
VEHICLE TRAVEL STRATEGIES
Reduce VMT
Vehicle Efficiency (CAFE standards)
Electric Vehicles
Fuel Switching for Heavy Duty Vehicles
Business-As-Usual Strategic Plan Goal
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 33
GOAL 7: Achieve a 50% reduction in waste by 2030, as compared to the business-as-usual forecast
IMPACT: Reducing emissions from municipal solid waste 50% by 2030 is estimated to result in a 1.1%
reduction in community-wide emissions.
Emissions from solid waste accounts for 1.7% of total community emissions and are generated from landfills and
incinerators (Note: this does not include lifecycle emissions). While this is relatively small, it is nevertheless
important to address to achieve 2040 goals. The city has a history of working to reduce waste through its long-
standing curbside composting and recycling programs and the more recent Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance.
The Zero Waste Packaging Ordinance went into effect on January 1st, 2017 and requires that all licensed food
establishments use packaging that is reusable, recyclable, or compostable when serving food and beverages that
are intended for immediate consumption.
GOAL 7 INITIATIVES AND ACTIONS
7.1. Adopt a waste reduction plan to achieve a 50% reduction in garbage by 2050 from BAU
7.1.1. Conduct a review of existing waste sort data to determine where more outreach and
information is needed to reduce waste
7.1.2. Work to increase participation in curbside organics recycling to achieve 50% participation by
2030
7.1.3. Implement expand recycling requirements at multi-family and commercial buildings
7.1.4. Close the loop on organics recycling; require that compost be used as a soil amendment for
public and private construction projects that disturb the soil cover by a set amount
7.2. Continue to improve and enforce the city’s Zero Waste Packaging ordinance
7.2.1. Continue to work with businesses to ensure compliant packaging, as well as proper collection
for recyclable and compostable items
7.2.2. Research lifecycle impacts of acceptable packaging materials; encourage the use of lower
carbon intense products
7.2.3. Continue to require that city-hosted events comply with the Zero Wastes Packaging Ordinance
and relevant environmental purchasing policies; expand to require that outside users of certain
city facilities also use compostable, reusable, or recyclable food service items
7.3. Communication and Marketing
7.3.1. Include resources on city’s website and through social media to inform residents of recycling
and organics programs, and waste reduction opportunities
7.3.2. Include resources on city’s website and through social media to inform residents about how to
opt-out of phone book and junk mail deliveries
7.3.3. Expand outreach and education on recycling and organics programs and waste reduction
opportunities (e.g. community chat forums for recycling, reusable shipping materials, waste
reduction, and reuse mobile apps)
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 34
Plan Impact
The Goals, Strategies, and Initiatives outlined above are estimated to achieve a 55% reduction in total GHG
emissions from business as usual in 2030. Most of these savings are achieved through strategies associated with
the energy used in buildings. Figure 10 represents the carbon reductions across each sector. The wedges
denoted by shades of red indicate buildings emissions reductions. The blue shading indicates reductions from an
increase in renewable electricity, the green and purple wedges represent travel and waste emissions reductions,
respectively. Building energy efficiency reduces energy consumption, resulting in a 21.7% reduction in
community-wide emissions. Increasing the use of renewable electricity results in an additional 23.0% emissions
reduction. Vehicle travel efficiency and decarbonization strategies provide 8.4% emissions reduction, and the
elimination of emissions from solid waste contributes the final 1.1% savings. By 2040, many of the implemented
actions will continue to reduce emissions such that the city will achieve an estimated 62% reduction in emissions
by 2040, as compared to business as usual. The light gray space between the dotted and dashed lines represents
the 38% of emissions that remain if city is successful in achieving the 2030 goal. Achieving carbon neutrality by
2040 will require the city to explore and implement the advanced strategies that are described in the next
section.
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
1,000,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
tonnes CO2e
PLANNED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS BY SECTOR
Commercial/Industrial Efficiency
Residential Efficiency
Electric Grid Mix
Renewable Energy
Travel Strategies
Waste Strategies
Business-As-Usual Strategic Plan Goal
Figure 10 Planned emissions reductions by sector through 2030.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 35
Advanced Strategies
The Goals, Strategies, Initiatives, and Actions outlined above will continue to reduce GHG emissions from 2030
to 2040 – achieving an estimated 62% reduction from business-as-usual by 2040, leaving 38% that will need to
be addressed with deeper, more long-term strategies. Of the remaining emissions, 36% are from natural gas
used in buildings and industrial processes, 45% are from vehicle travel, and 19% are from air travel (Figure 10).
These sources and activities will not get the city to carbon neutrality without deep decarbonization efforts and
carbon offsets. Buildings depend on natural gas primarily for space and water heating, and industrial processes.
Efficiency alone cannot reduce natural gas consumption enough to achieve carbon neutrality and biogas is not
currently commercially available to replace this energy resource. Technologies that capture waste heat (e.g.
heat from data centers), or can generate heat and/or power have the potential to dramatically reduce natural
gas consumption and move the city closer to its goal. Similarly, there are limitations to achieving a carbon-
neutral transportation system, particularly among heavy-duty vehicles and airplanes. There will likely be some
technological innovations that will be available to address some of the remaining emissions. For the emissions
that cannot be reduced through any of the identified strategies, the city should look to carbon offsets to capture
and store carbon long-term.
Finally, this plan only addresses GHGs that are either emitted within the boundary of the city (Scope 1) or are
emitted indirectly through the purchase of electricity or other energy sources (Scope 2). These are emissions
that can be directly impacted by residents and businesses in the community. Scope 3 emissions include those
that come from the supply chain, such as emissions from food production and distribution. These make up a
substantial amount of global emissions and should be considered for future action plans.
The advanced strategies identified below are long-term strategies that need to begin in the near-term.
Vehicle Travel
45%
Natural Gas
36%
Air Travel
19%
REMAINING EMISSIONS AFTER 2030
Figure 11 By 2030, the city will have reduced its emissions 62% from BAU; this graph shows the
breakdown of the remaining 38% that will need to be reduced through advanced strategies.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 36
A.IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES FOR THERMAL ENERGY GRIDS
District heating is an underutilized technology that makes use of thermal energy grids. Wherever there is waste
heat, there may be an opportunity to use the heat to meet demands of a nearby thermal load (i.e. heating and
cooling needs). Waste heat can come from sewer mains, anaerobic digestion processes, data centers, or
processing facilities, among others. Opportunities for district heating should be considered for new
developments and in the early planning stages of infrastructure projects to make projects the most cost
effective.
Identify facilities in the community with excess waste heat
Identify facilities with high thermal demand
Determine locations with opportunities to pair waste heat with large thermal loads
Explore recommendations made in the Minnesota 2025 Energy Action Plan
B.EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES FOR COMBINED HEAT AND POWER
Combined heat and power (CHP) systems simultaneously generate electricity and thermal energy within a single
system. By using the thermal energy, CHP systems achieve much greater efficiency than conventional power
generating systems. While this system is well established in Minnesota, there is still great potential to harness
this resource. Work with the Minnesota Department of Commerce, Division of Energy Resources to explore
opportunities for combined heat and power.
C.ANAEROBIC DIGESTERS FOR WASTE HEAT AND COMPRESSED NATURAL GAS
Anaerobic digestion is a process that uses captured biogas (methane and carbon dioxide) from the
decomposition of organic material to generate heat and/or electricity. Biogas generated from this process can
also be cleaned to remove carbon dioxide and other impurities to produce a renewable product equivalent to
conventional natural gas, referred to as renewable natural gas. Renewable natural gas can serve as a
replacement for any natural gas application and can also be compressed to provide a source of transportation
fuel in place of conventional natural gas. Biogas can also be used to generate electricity in a process called
combined heat and power (mentioned above). Organic materials may include waste from crop residue, manure,
food processing residues, urban yard waste, or organic waste collected from businesses and residents.
Coordinate with Minneapolis, Hennepin County, and the State to explore opportunities for regional
anaerobic digester from organics collection
Identify opportunities to purchase compressed natural gas from methane capture at closed landfill sites
(e.g. Eden Prairie)
Promote development projects like the Eco-Village and Creative Center that uses anaerobic digestion to
supply electricity
D.FUEL SWITCHING
Deep decarbonization efforts may require shifting end-uses to low or no-carbon energy sources. By 2040, to be
carbon neutral, many appliances that currently use natural gas will need to be switched to an alternative fuel
(e.g. electricity, biomass, or renewable gas). For instance, many water heaters, boilers and furnaces, gas ranges,
and dryers use natural gas to operate. Implementing energy efficiency actions alone will not get these systems
to carbon neutral. They will either need to be offset through additional renewable energy credit purchases, or
be replaced by an alternative clean fuel. There may also be opportunity to use energy saving technologies like
ground-source heat pumps for new construction, or air-to-air heat pumps for existing buildings.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 37
Because these types of appliances are long-term investments (e.g. a new boiler can have a 20 to 30-year life-
cycle), there are few opportunities within the 2040 timeframe to replace them with electric options. The shift to
alternative fuels would need to begin to occur in the early 2020s, and ramp up toward the end of the decade. A
challenge to achieving widespread fuel switching is that in many cases natural gas is cheaper than electricity and
it may not make economic sense for people to switch to electricity. However, there may be opportunities to
combine fuel switching with solar energy systems and storage to minimize or eliminate the cost difference.
Pathways to Deep Decarbonization - This report, completed by the Sustainable Development Solutions Network
(SDSN) and the Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations (IDDRI) examines the technical
and economic feasibility of such a transition in the United States, evaluating the infrastructure and technology
changes required to reduce U.S. GHG emissions in the year 2050 by 80% below 1990 levels, consistent with a
global emissions trajectory that limits the anthropogenic increase in earth’s mean surface temperature to less
than 2°C.
E.CARBON OFFSETS
The city may wish to consider carbon offsets to meet its goals. Carbon offsets can include the purchase of
renewable energy credits or the promise of carbon sequestration (i.e., the storing of carbon dioxide) through
tree planting. The city has a goal to receive 100% of its energy from renewable sources by 2025; it may wish to
expand that goal to produce more electricity
than is consumed and set a goal to achieve 120%
of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030.
The additional electricity can be used to offset
travel emissions or natural gas consumption.
Renewable Energy Credits can be purchased
through utility programs or through a RECs
broker.
The city is planning to implement an aggressive
tree planting project. The city can use iTree to
inventory trees in its urban forest and calculate
current and future carbon sequestration.
F.EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES
It is in an exciting time for advances in energy technologies. Tesla continues to advance the EV market, storage,
and integrated rooftop solar. New companies start up with frequency, and bring innovation to the market that
can transform the way we use energy in impactful ways. The city should continue to be aware of technologies as
they emerge, pilot innovations, and encourage further deployment.
G.SCOPE 3 EMISSIONS
Carbon accounting is measured across three categories of emissions which are referred to as “scopes”. Scope 1
emissions are those that occur within the boundary of a city. For example, all transportation emissions,
industrial processes, or cooking with a gas range within a city are Scope 1. Scope 2 emissions include all grid-
supplied energy. Electricity is used in homes and businesses, but the emissions are often outside a city’s
boundary at a centralized power plant. Scope 1 and 2 emissions are included in this plan. A consideration for the
city in future, is to study its impact on Scope 3 emissions — indirect, out-of-boundary emissions — and
determine if and how it wants to address them. These emissions include travel by residents and businesses
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 38
outside the city boundary, emissions of goods brought into the community, etc. They are often more
complicated to accurately capture, however they have a big impact on global emissions.
Successful implementation of the advanced strategies will help the city become carbon neutral by 2040. The
darker gray wedges in Figure 12 represent how the advanced strategies help the city achieve its goal. In this
graph, much of these emissions reductions occur after 2030. However, for these strategies to be successful, the
city will need to start planning for implementation in the next five to ten years as many will require considerable
time for study, development, and deployment.
Figure 12 Greenhouse gas emissions by sector, City of St. Louis Park, City Operations. 2015.
-
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
1,000,000
2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040
tonnes CO2e
PLANNED EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS BY SECTOR
Commercial/Industrial Efficiency
Residential Efficiency
Electric Grid Mix
Renewable Energy
Travel Strategies
Waste Strategies
Advanced Thermal Strategies & Offsets
Advanced Travel Strategies & Offsets
Business-As-Usual Goal
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 39
City Operations
While city operations comprise just 1.5% of total city emissions, it is important for city leaders to track and
demonstrate how goals in the Climate Action Plan can be achieved. The following provides recommended
actions to guide city leaders and staff as they set internal targets to achieve emissions reductions.
A greenhouse gas assessment was completed for St. Louis Park City Operations and involved a thorough review
of energy consumption and associated emissions. The report identified the largest energy users and breaks
down GHG emissions by source. This assessment serves as the basis for informed decision-making to reduce
emissions, supporting the city’s goal of being carbon neutral by 2040. Using this information, city staff can set
annual targets to achieve emissions reduction through efficiency, conservation, and to make plans for
renewable energy procurement, through on-site installations, community solar subscriptions, or the purchase of
renewable energy credits.
Figure 13 below illustrates GHG emissions by sector from the city’s various operations. The largest emitter of
GHG emissions is the building and facilities sector, making up over half of total emissions. Pumping water,
transportation fuels, and streetlights are also significant sources of GHG emissions. The data contained in this
assessment may be used by city staff to develop targets and track progress.
Buildings and
facilities
53%
Streetlights and
signals
6%
Potable water
24%
Sewers
4%
Liquid fuels
13%
GHG EMISSIONS BY SOURCE CATEGORY, 2015
Figure 13 Data source: City Operations GHG assessment
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 40
CITY BUILDINGS AND FACILITIES
The city operations greenhouse gas inventory identified the largest energy users among public buildings. These
buildings have the greatest opportunity to achieve carbon reductions. The Rec Center stands out as the largest
emitter of GHGs, while the Westwood Hills Nature Center is the lowest.
Figure 14 CO 2 Emissions for largest users in buildings and facilities sector.
Table 2, below, illustrates how the potential solar resource compares to the electricity consumed by each of the
largest users. It also includes an estimate of the solar availability for each building as a percent of consumption.
A GIS mapping tool was used to estimate the rooftop solar resource and does not account for mechanical
equipment, structural integrity of rooftops, or other barriers that may reduce access to the solar resource and
may overestimate potential. Site assessments should be completed to understand the true generation potential.
Building Capacity
(KW)
Potential
Generation (KWh)
Electricity
Consumption (KWh)
Solar as percent of
consumption
Rec Center 629.42 818,234 3,006,300 27%
Municipal Service Center 816.51 1,061,466 619,999 171%
Hamilton House 1 149.56 194,432 631,869 31%
City Hall 88.34 114,836 514,400 22%
Police Department 196.63 255,613 496,640 51%
Fire Station 1 146.34 190,243 302,990 63%
Fire Station 2 103.32 134,320 140,894 95%
Westwood Hills Nature Center 22.11 28,738 70,050 41%
Total 2130.12 2,769,144 5,713,092 48%
Table 2 Solar energy potential as percent of electricity consumption.
1 The Hamilton House is a Public Housing building that is owned and operated by the Housing Authority, not the City of St.
Louis Park. It is included in this list because the city tracks its energy and water use through the B3 benchmarking program.
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
C
O
2
e
t
o
n
n
e
s
CO2e for
Major Buildings
Dual normalized CO2e
Total CO2e
Rec Center
Municipal Service
Center
Hamilton House
City Hall
Police Dept.
Fire Station #1
Fire Station #2
Westwood Hills Nature
Center
Linear (Total CO2e)
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 41
St. Louis Park has several opportunities to use its public sector solar resources. The city’s rooftop solar resources
are substantial and may, in some cases, meet a significant portion of on-site electric energy use in the same
building. Most sites have the potential to receive at least 25% of energy consumption from rooftop solar. The
Municipal Service Center may be able to capture up to 171% from solar, which exceeds the benefits of net
metering (net metering is limited to 120% of customer’s on-site annual electric consumption). To capture the full
benefit of solar on this roof space, the city should explore community solar.
City Action:
The city has a goal to achieve 100% of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030. This can be achieved at the
city operations level through a combination of actions.
•Set an internal goal to receive at least 10% of the city’s electricity from on-site solar
•Use the solar mapping to prioritize which buildings the city intends to install solar on
•Explore solar carport opportunities for parking areas (see Mill Valley Rec Center)
•Complete solar site assessments with a solar installer for priority buildings
•Complete a structural analysis and electrical service evaluation of rooftops
•Maximize rooftop solar on all public buildings with a good solar resource
•Ensure there is an element for storage plus solar, or storage-ready solar in any RFP issued by the city
•Use the city’s sustainable purchasing policy to purchase on-site solar installations and/or renewable
energy credits for the remaining electricity (the electricity that is not covered by on-site solar)
•Identify financing and incentive opportunities (rebates, production incentives, third-party financing)
•Explore opportunities for ground-mount systems to increase the amount of local generation
•Track progress and share success
The city can maximize building energy efficiency by implementing the following:
•Ensure all buildings and facilities are benchmarked and kept up-to-date in B3
o Work to have all utility bills automatically uploaded to B3 database
o Consider Portfolio Manager as an additional or alternative benchmarking tool (B3 and Xcel allow
for automatic uploads to Portfolio Manager), buildings may be eligible to achieve ENERGY STAR
certification
•Participate in State financing programs like the Guaranteed Energy Savings Program (GESP) or Local
Energy Efficiency Program (LEEP)
•Prioritize improving the efficiency of the city’s largest energy user (i.e. the Rec Center)
o Consider solar thermal heating for the pool
o Explore opportunities for ground-source heat-pumps for the ice arenas
o Expand white roof to the entire rooftop
•Require green building or net-zero energy standards for all new public buildings, and for major
renovations of existing buildings
•Encourage energy efficient behavior changes by all staff (e.g. turn computers off at night, eliminate any
personal space heaters or refrigerators)
The following measures can be tracked using GreenStep Cities Step 4:
•Number of city-owned and private renewable energy generation sites
•Generation capacity at city and at private renewable energy generation sites
•Annual renewable energy purchases
•Percent of total energy use that is generated and purchased renewable energy
•Percent of total city energy use that is purchased from a community solar garden
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 42
POTABLE WATER AND SEWERS
The potable water production sector (wells, pumps, reservoirs, and the water treatment plant facilities) is
second largest emitter of GHGs. Potable water accounts for about a quarter of the GHG emissions from city
operations. Emissions from this sector have been declining over the past several years, in part due to Xcel
Energy’s cleaner grid mix, and to an increase in efficiency of variable drive motors.
Many of the water treatment plants and pumps have seen a decrease in energy use in the 10-year period of the
analysis. However, there are a few plants and pumps that have increased energy consumption, including Water
Treatment Plants 1 and 10, and Well 10 Pump House.
The major source of emissions from potable water production comes from electricity.
Figure 13 GHG emissions from electricity and natural gas consumption for potable water
City Action
Identify opportunities to improve efficiency and increase renewable energy production and consumption.
•Continue efforts to improve the efficiency of potable water delivery
•Enter energy use data into B3
•Identify possible sites for ground mount solar and storage
o Ground mount solar and storage have the added benefit of increasing the resilience of the water
supply system by providing electricity to the system in the event of a power disruption
•Purchase RECs for the remaining electricity usage
•Encourage residents and businesses to reduce water consumption through conservation
•Reduce water consumed by city operations
o Increase native, drought resistant plant coverage
o Collect and use rainwater as an alternative to pumped water for landscape irrigation
The following measures can be tracked using GreenStep Cities Step 4:
•Residential gallons used per person per day
•Business gallons used per job per day
•Annual city operations’ gallons
•Annual energy used per million gallons of water
GHG Emissions by Energy Type for
Potable Water
Electricity Natural Gas
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 43
CITY FLEET
Liquid fuels consumption is controlled by the Public Works Department, which includes the Parks, Police, and
Fire departments. The liquid fuels sector is the third largest source of GHG emissions for city operations. This
sector includes fuel (gasoline, diesel, etc.) consumed by city vehicles. Both the emissions and consumption levels
decreased between 2005 and 2015, in part due to an increase of in the use of alternative low carbon fuels (E-
85).
City Actions
Actions the city can take to further reduce emissions include:
•Set annual targets to reduce GHG emissions through efficiency, conservation, and renewable energy
o Record daily miles traveled by vehicle
o Identify vehicles that travel fewer than 110 miles (range of a Nissan Leaf) or are idle long enough
between use to be sufficiently charged for longer distances
o As low mileage vehicles are replaced, replace with electric vehicles; EV range will increase as
technology improves (Chevy Bolts have a range of 280 miles)
o For vehicles driven longer distances, purchase fuel efficient, and/or Flex Fuel vehicles that use
low carbon alternative fuels (E-85)
o Identify vehicles that are over-sized for their purpose, replace with right-sized, more efficient
vehicles
o Identify opportunities to reduce VMT through more efficient routes
•Consider GHG emissions in the purchase of new vehicles
o Purchase fuel efficient vehicles when EVs are not available or practical
•Study the feasibility of replacing combustion vehicles with electric vehicles
•Participate in a bulk purchase for fleet vehicles with the State of Minnesota Department of
Administration, or other partnership (Drive Electric Minnesota)
•Install EV charging stations at public facilities for city fleets and personal employee vehicles
•Improve efficiency of routes to reduce vehicle miles traveled
•Convert heavy-duty vehicles to compressed natural gas or biodiesel
•Encourage or incentivize employees to take transit, bike or walk, or telecommute at least once a week
The following measures can be tracked using GreenStep Cities Step 4:
•Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) for gasoline and diesel fleets
•Average miles per gallon (MPG) for gasoline and diesel fleets
•Number of electric vehicles in city fleet
•City employee VMT per day
STREETLIGHTS AND SIGNAL
The Community Energy Report developed by Xcel Energy, suggests the city maintains approximately 1,800 of its
own streetlights. Between 2010 and 2015, the city has replaced 40 to 60 lights each year. At this rate, if the city
were to replace 60 lights each year, all lights would not be replaced for 25 years. To achieve 2040 goals, lights
will need to be replaced at a rate of at least 75 lights each year.
City Action:
•Create a plan to accelerate the rate of replacing streetlights with LED fixtures
•Enter energy use data from streetlights into B3
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 44
•Consider different lighting options, such as lights combined with solar and storage, motion-sensor lights,
moon-sensor lights, or removing lights in areas that are over lit to maximize energy savings
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE
Critical infrastructure includes buildings like hospitals, schools, community centers, and emergency responder
centers. These are places where it is necessary to maintain operations in the event of an emergency or a public
health crisis like a prolonged heatwave. Disruption of power to these facilities limits the ability to effectively
respond to the needs of residents. Many of these facilities have back-up generators, which are often fueled by
diesel or natural gas. Advances in solar and storage technologies are increasing the feasibility of replacing fossil
fuel generators with cleaner, more reliable alternatives.
City Action
The city can pair clean energy and storage to provide renewable energy and reliable back-up power to critical
facilities.
•Use the table below to identify critical infrastructure and current back-up power types
•Research opportunities to install solar and storage for daily power supply as well back-up power
•Ensure any solar and storage installation can function safely as a microgrid in case of a power disruption
•Install solar storage systems above water lines from any potential flooding
Back-up Power for Critical Infrastructure / Facilities
Facility 1 Police Station Facility 2 Fire Station 1
Type Emergency Response Type Emergency Response
Address Address
Generator Yes/No Generator Yes/No
Generator Type Back-up power type:
Resources:
•National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL): Distributed Solar PV For Electricity System Resilience
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 45
INTERNAL TEAM
Execution of these actions will require staff to be strategic and intentional about reducing emissions through
efficiency, conservation, and clean energy. The creation of an internal team that sets targets and develops a
schedule of action will help drive operations toward achieving city-wide goals.
The team should include:
•Staff across departments
•A designated point-person to keep group on track
•Regular meetings to report progress and advance goals
•Regular updates to council, at least twice per year
There are different methods the city can utilize to achieve the goals of this plan and minimize the additional
pressure it may have on staff and resources. The city is already completing actions that are directly or indirectly
related to the actions outlined in the CAP. By identifying how the CAP can be integrated into the normal
functions of the city, available resources will be better able to absorb the change. For instance, how the city
spends its money each year has a GHG impact. If the budget is designed to consider greenhouse gas emissions,
additional spending can be avoided in several instances. Further Leveraging existing programs and working with
partners can help externalize some of the burden and distribute the additional load. Additional dedicated
funding will be necessary to achieve the goal of this plan. The city should consider funding mechanisms to
support implementation of emissions reductions action. One option to consider is increasing utility franchise fee
and dedicating any additional revenue to drive efficiency action in the residential, commercial, and industrial
sectors.
Lead – Influence – Inspire
The city has enormous influence over how the community functions. The greatest impact the city has is in areas
where it has decision-making authority. This includes existing policies and regulations that may enhance or
restrict the implementation of carbon reducing strategies. Several of these polices have been identified
throughout this CAP as tools that can be leveraged to support strategies and demonstrate the city’s leadership.
In areas where the city has less control, it should use its influence to support the decision-making entities that
have direct impact on the actions included in the CAP. One example from this plan is that the city is not able to
set its own building code, so it should support legislation or rule-making at the state level that would enable
cities to increase energy standards for all new buildings.
When the city does not have control or influence, but is interested in driving change, it can utilize its platform to
provide information, inspiration, and incentives that support GHG reduction actions. The CAP Resource Hub is a
good example of how the city can centralize much of this plan and create a go-to destination for action. There
are many existing resources from Minnesota energy non-profits that can be adapted to fit the needs of the city.
Specific steps the Internal Team can take are to identify those areas where the city has existing tools that can be
leveraged to achieve action; provide budget and capital improvement recommendations that consider the GHG
impact; integrate support for climate action into regular city communications, where appropriate. Outside of
city functions, the Internal Team can direct action by aligning interests, highlighting success, and inspiring its
businesses and residents to be leaders.
Implementation of this Plan is no small task. It will require a shift in the way city functions to make climate
action part of normal operations. The city has dedication, ingenuity, and community support to be successful.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 46
Appendix A – Glossary of Terms
•Advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) – an integrated system of smart meters, communications
networks, and data management systems that allows communication between customers and
utilities
•Anaerobic digestion – a series of biological processes in which microorganisms break down
biodegradable material in the absence of oxygen; by-product is combustible biogas, which can be
used to generate electricity or heat, or can be processed into renewable natural gas and
transportation fuels
•Building Benchmarking and Beyond (B3) – benchmarking program for public buildings in Minnesota
to measure and monitor energy consumption, costs, and carbon emission through month and
annual reports
•Carbon Offset – a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions achieved in order to compensate for
emissions somewhere else
•Combined Heat and Power (CHP) – cogeneration of useful thermal and electrical energy
•E-85 – high-level ethanol-gasoline blends containing 51%-85% ethanol.
•Electric Vehicles (EVs) – vehicles that are powered by an electric powertrain
•Fuel Switching – replacement of non-renewable fossil fuels with clean, renewable fuels
•Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) – gases that contribute to the greenhouse effect by absorbing infrared
radiation, including carbon dioxide, methane and chlorofluorocarbons
•Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) – rating system designed by the United
States Green Buildings Council (USGBC) to evaluate the performance of a building and encourage
market transformation toward sustainable design.
•Million British Thermal Units (MMBtu) – a measure of the heat content of fuels or energy sources.
•Net Zero Energy (NZE) – an energy-efficient building where, on a source energy basis, the actual
annual delivered energy is less than or equal to the on-site renewable exported energy
•Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) – energy saving measures receive project financing and are
repaid as a separate item on the property tax assessment for a set time period
•Renewable Energy Credits (RECs) – a market-based instrument that represents the property rights
to the environmental, social and other non-power attributes of renewable electricity generation
•Renewable*Connect – clean energy pricing program available to Xcel Energy residential and
commercial customers, includes both solar and wind
•Stretch Energy Code – an optional energy code that municipalities can adopt to meet a higher
standard than the state’s base energy code
•Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) – multiple of centerline mileage and number of motorized vehicles
that travel past a certain location during a specific period of time
•WindSource® – a clean energy pricing program that allows Xcel Energy customers to pay a premium
each month to get some or all electricity from wind energy
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 47
Appendix B – Climate Resolution
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 48
Appendix C – Action Schedule Worksheet
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 49
Appendix D - Resources
•Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) – The Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) program allows
home and business owners to finance efficiency projects through a voluntary assessment on their
property.
•Saint Paul Port Authority (Trillion BTU) – The Trillion BTU program, administered by Saint Paul Port
Authority, provides rebates and loans to businesses to complete energy improvements
•MN Department of Commerce (Rev It Up) – Commerce annually solicits a request for proposals (RFP)
from units of local government seeking low-cost, long-term capital to finance community energy
efficiency and renewable energy system projects that are financed via energy savings and/or projected
revenues created by the systems.
•Xcel Energy – Offers a variety of rebates and efficiency programs to customers.
•CenterPoint – Offers a variety of rebates and efficiency programs to customers.
•Institute for Market Transformation – Provides more rationale behind this type of policy, along with case
study examples and a tool to compare policies across the country.
•American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy – The State and Local Policy database includes many
cities’ building energy disclosure policies and their requirements.
•Minneapolis – The City of Minneapolis has passed a Building Rating & Disclosure Policy. This document
lays out the rationale of the policy, how it is designed, its benefits, and how it will be enforced.
•Lake Street Small Business Energy Coaching Pilot Program – Lake Street Council did extensive outreach
to small businesses on energy efficiency and documented their strategies and lessons learned.
•Minnesota Center for Energy and Environment – offers a range of programs targeted at commercial
energy efficiency, including lighting HVAC, financing, and more.
•Minnesota Clean Energy Resource Teams – provides resources, tools, and engagement efforts to
implement local energy projects.
•Minneapolis green business cost-share program – This is an example of an incentive program
implemented by the City of Minneapolis.
•Energy Star for Small Business – Energy Star provides resources and recognition for small and medium
sized businesses.
•Xcel Energy Rebates – Offers rebates for efficiency improvements
•CenterPoint Small Commercial Efficiency Program – Offers rebates for high-efficiency equipment.
•ACEEE – Successful Practices of Small Commercial Energy Efficiency Programs
•Maplewood – The City of Maplewood has adopted a strong Green Building Program.
•SB 2030 – Sustainable building energy standards that achieve net zero development by 2030.
•St. Louis Park Green Building Policy - Requires building construction projects that receive or use city
financial assistance to incorporate sustainable development practices.
•Center for Energy and Environment – CEE provides a range of services including home energy audits,
home energy squad visits, financing, and assistance implementing energy saving measures.
•Energy Fit Homes – CEE has developed an Energy Fitness Score for residential buildings that allows home
owners to see the relative efficiency of their homes.
•Xcel Energy – Offers energy audits and a variety of rebates to customers.
•CenterPoint Energy – Offers energy audits and a variety of rebates to customers.
•Minnesota Weatherization Assistance Program – Provides free home energy upgrades to low-income
homeowners and renters to help save energy and protect against harsh weather.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 50
•Hennepin County CAP – The Community Action Partnership provides free energy related repairs and
heating bill assistance to low income residents.
•Minnesota CUB – Minnesota Citizens Utility Board is a consumer advocacy organization that offers
assistance to utility customers.
•Fix-up Program – Financing program offered by Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
•Energy Efficient Mortgage Homeowner Guide: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
•Minnesota Solar Suitability App – allows users to enter their address and see an estimate of their solar
resource and production.
•Google Project Sunroof – similarly allows users to see an estimate of solar resource and production.
•CERTs - The Clean Energy Resource Teams have a wide variety of resource on solar energy, particularly
community solar gardens.
•Clean Energy Project Builder - This site aims to bring together all the information you need to plan a
clean energy project, including a search function for installers and funding sources.
•SolSmart Certification - SolSmart provides recognition and no-cost technical assistance to help local
governments reduce barriers to solar energy growth.
•Solarize - The Solarize approach allows groups of homeowners or businesses to work together to
collectively negotiate rates, competitively select an installer, and increase demand through a creative
limited-time offer to join the campaign.
•Solar Power Hour – One hour seminars on how solar PV systems work, financial benefits, and an
explanation of the installation process
•Drive Electric Minnesota: Partnership to accelerate the adoption of electric vehicles in Minnesota.
•Metropolitan Area Planning Council, example of flexible parking standards and national examples
•Explore recommendations made in the Minnesota 2025 Energy Action Plan
•Pathways to Deep Decarbonization –
•National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL): Distributed Solar PV For Electricity System Resilience
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 51
Appendix E – GHG Report Summary for City Operations
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 52
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 53
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 54
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 55
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 56
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 57
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 58
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 59
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 60
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 61
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 62
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 63
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 64
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 65
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 66
Appendix F – Wedge Diagram Methodology
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 67
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 68
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 69
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 70
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 71
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 72
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 73
To see the completed methodology,
visit: https://www.regionalindicatorsmn.com/customer_media/WedgeToolMethodology_September2017.pdf
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 74
RESOLUTION NO. 16-067
RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE COMMITMENT OF
THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL
TO PROTECT THE CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN OF THIS COMMUNITY
FROM THE RISKS OF CLIMATE DESTRUCTION
WHEREAS, 195 countries, including the United States and every country that is a member
of the United Nations, reached an agreement in Paris, France on December 12, 2015 that
recognizes the risk to our children's and grandchildren's future from climate change;
WHEREAS, the greatest burden resulting from an inadequate response to the climate crisis
will be carried by the youngest generation, and all who follow;
WHEREAS, the risks from an inadequate response are potentially devastating, and include
economic and environmental disruptions, many of which are already being felt such as more severe
storms, longer and hotter heat waves, worsening flood and drought cycles, growing invasive
species and insect problems, accelerated species extinction rates, rising sea levels, increased
wildfires, and a dramatic increase in refugees from climate impacted lands;
WHEREAS, leading climate scientists have indicated that further delay in significantly
reducing greenhouse gas emissions will rapidly push humanity past the point where disastrous
consequences can be avoided;
WHEREAS, numerous governmental and non-governmental bodies across the nation and
the world have already adopted climate action plans to immediately and rapidly reduce greenhouse
gas emissions while also stopping them entirely within 25 years;
WHEREAS, youth of St. Louis Park have brought to Council a Youth Climate Report
Card highlighting the gap between what we are doing today and actions that would be necessary
to protect their. future;
WHEREAS, youth of St. Louis Park have indicated a willingness to work with City
Council on such actions;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the St. Louis Park City Council commits
to working constructively, using ingenuity, innovation, and courageous determination to create a
St. Louis Park Climate Action Plan for consideration that significantly reduces St. Louis Park's
greenhouse gas emissions to levels that would protect our community's children and grandchildren
from the risk of climate destruction.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that City Council commits to start the St. Louis Park
Climate Action Plan creation process within 30 days, and to complete it as soon as possible.
actions.
IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a mechanism will be created for the ongoing
young people in the process of creating and executing climate related policies and
City Manager
Attest:
atLJ. l !
Melis a Kenned , Ci Clerk
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 2)
Title: Climate Action Plan (CAP) Discussion Page 75
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Discussion Item: 3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Council is asked to review and discuss Sherman Associates’
conceptual plans for the Beltline Blvd. Station Redevelopment Site and provide direction on the
proposed Preliminary Development Agreement.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA support the proposed Preliminary Development
Agreement with Sherman Associates which formalizes the respective parties’ obligations relative
to preparing a mixed-use development plan for the Beltline Blvd. Station Site?
SUMMARY: At the November 20, 2017 Special Study Session, the EDA selected Sherman
Associates as the development team with which it wishes to partner to redevelop the SWLRT
Beltline Blvd. Station Site. As a result, staff was directed to prepare a Preliminary Development
Agreement between the EDA, the City and Sherman. The purpose of the agreement is to formalize
the respective parties’ obligations under the SWLRT Funding Agreements with the Metropolitan
Council and the Congestion Mitigation Air Quality (CMAQ) federal grant for the structured public
parking at the SWLRT Beltline Station. The agreement also outlines the parties’ respective
responsibilities for further defining the Beltline Station Redevelopment project consistent with the
parties’ mutual objectives. Sherman Associates also needs formal permission to access the
property in order to conduct its due diligence. Further included in the agreement is an outline for
applying for land use and zoning changes as well as tax increment financing assistance. During
the term of the agreement, Sherman would be provided with exclusive rights to negotiate
acquisition of the subject properties with the EDA and the City. This is to provide Sherman with
assurance of its ability to secure the subject properties for the proposed development. The Agreement
would terminate if the EDA and City have not approved a formal Purchase and Redevelopment
Contract with the developer by June 30, 2019. A draft of the proposed Preliminary Development
Agreement is attached for review and comment. The agreement will be presented for formal
consideration at the Feb 5th EDA and City Council meetings.
Sherman Associates’ development team will present its general vision and proposed development
program for the Beltline Blvd. Station Redevelopment Site at Monday night’s Study Session.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The precise purchase price of the EDA and
City-owned parcels as well as the amount of financial assistance necessary to bring the desired
mixed-use project to fruition at the Beltline Station Site will require further discussion with the
developer once the project’s actual components are fully defined. Implementation of both public
and private redevelopment plans for the Beltline Site will likely require TIF assistance.
VISION CONSIDERATION: This project is intended to meet all the city’s Vision objectives.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Preliminary Development Agreement
Staff Report of November 20, 2017
Sherman Beltline Station Project Summary
Sherman Associates Company Profile
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Page 2 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
DRAFT, January 18, 2018
PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
THIS PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”), dated as of
_________, 2018, by and between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public
body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota (the “Authority”), the City of St.
Louis Park, a Minnesota municipal corporation (the “City”), and Sherman Associates Development
LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the “Developer”);
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority and the City desire to promote development of certain property
within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”) in the City as follows: Parcel A, located at 4601
Highway 7; Parcel B, located at 3130 Monterey Avenue South; Parcel C, consisting of certain
right-of-way along Highway 7 and Monterey Avenue South (together, the “City and Authority
Property”); and Parcel D, located at 4725 Highway 7 (the “Council Property” and together with
the City and Authority Property, the “Property”), all as depicted and described in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, the City and Authority Property is owned by the City or the Authority, and the
Council Property is in the process of being acquired by the Metropolitan Council; and
WHEREAS, the City and Authority have determined that it is in the best interests of the City
that the Developer be designated as the sole developer of the City and Authority Property during the
term of this Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City has entered into a Master Funding Agreement with the Metropolitan
Council, dated as of February 3, 2015 to fund certain activities by the City or Developer in
connection with the Developer’s desire to develop the City and Authority Property (the “Master
Funding Agreement”), and has received a CMAQ grant from the Federal Transit Administration
to partially fund structured public parking in connection with such development (the “CMAQ
Grant,” and together with any funds awarded pursuant to Subordinate Funding Agreements
executed in connection with the Master Funding Agreement and/or any future grants awarded to
the City or Authority in relation to the City and Authority Property, the “Grants”); and
WHEREAS, the Developer desires to acquire the City and Authority Property for purposes
of constructing a mixed-use (multi-family residential and commercial), mixed-income development
on the City and Authority Property incorporating renewable energy sources, including without
limitation clean energy generated from an offsite solar garden, and related parking (the
“Development”); and
WHEREAS, the Developer has requested the Authority and City to explore the use of tax
increment financing under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended (the “Tax
Increment Act”), or other public financial assistance to offset a portion of the public costs of the
Development; and
Page 3 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
WHEREAS, the Authority, the City and the Developer are willing and desirous to undertake
the Development if (i) a satisfactory agreement can be reached regarding the City’s and/or Authority's
commitment for public costs necessary for the Development; (ii) satisfactory mortgage and equity
financing, or adequate cash resources, for the Development can be secured by Developer; (iii) the
parties reach a satisfactory resolution of zoning, land use, public infrastructure, and site design issues;
and (iv) the economic feasibility and soundness of the Development and other necessary
preconditions have been determined to the satisfaction of the parties; and
WHEREAS, the parties wish to enter into this Agreement setting forth their respective
responsibilities in connection with the Property.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of the mutual covenants and
obligations set forth herein, the Authority, the City and the Developer hereby agree as follows:
1.During the term of this Agreement, the Authority and the City agree to designate the
Developer as the sole developer of the City and Authority Property and to negotiate solely with the
Developer relative to the acquisition and development of the City and Authority Property. As
consideration for this designation, the Developer shall pay a nonrefundable deposit of $25,000 (the
“Development Deposit”) to the City upon execution of this Agreement, with additional Development
Deposit amounts due and payable under the following terms and conditions:
(a)If the Developer does not submit a completed application for preliminary plat and
PUD approvals within six months after the date on which the parties agree on the Timeline (as defined
in paragraph 2 hereof), the Developer shall pay the City an additional nonrefundable Development
Deposit of $25,000.
(b)If the Developer does not receive final plat and PUD approvals and approval of the
definitive Contract (as defined in paragraph 2 hereof) by June 30, 2019, which approvals shall not be
unreasonably withheld, the date of termination of this Agreement as described in paragraph 17 hereof,
but the parties wish to continue toward final approvals and execution of the Contract, the parties shall
negotiate an amendment extending the date of this Agreement and the Developer shall pay the City
an additional nonrefundable Development Deposit of $25,000.
(c)If the parties execute the Contract and proceed to closing on the conveyance of all or
a portion of the City and Authority Property by August 31, 2019, all Development Deposit amounts
paid to the City by the Developer shall be applied to the purchase price of such property.
2.The parties agree to work cooperatively towards defining the Development and its
components (including but not limited to site design, building plans and specifications, number of
market-rate and affordable residential units, commercial square footage, building stories and height,
sustainable and Transit Oriented Development (TOD) components and structured parking,
stormwater management, streets and sidewalks, and all other necessary public infrastructure
improvements), determining its financial feasibility, the infrastructure necessary to service it, and the
approvals necessary to bring it to fruition, as well as to negotiate in good faith toward a definitive
Purchase and Redevelopment Contract (the “Contract”), a related planning development contract
regarding the Development, and a timeline for the Development that takes into account the acquisition
of the Council Property and the timing of necessary public infrastructure improvements (the
“Timeline”).
Page 4 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
3.Developer shall prepare a project pro forma (including a detailed list of various revenue
sources and respective amounts necessary to bring the Development to fruition) and submit it to the
Authority for its review.
4. Developer shall work to secure satisfactory mortgage and equity financing, and any additional
forms of financing necessary to bring the Development to fruition.
5.Developer understands the Development will be subject to the City’s Green Building Policy
adopted February 16, 2010, as amended, and the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy adopted May
17, 2017, as amended, and agrees to abide by the requirements of these documents if the parties enter
into the Contract. In addition, the Developer shall comply with the provisions of the City’s Climate
Action Plan if and when approved by the City Council.
6. In connection with this Agreement, the City and Authority hereby grant to the Developer, its
agents, employees, officers, and contractors (the “Authorized Parties”) a right of entry on the City
and Authority Property for the purpose of performing all due diligence work and inspections deemed
necessary by the Developer to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement (the “Permitted Activities”).
The Authorized Parties shall have access to the City and Authority Property Mondays through Fridays
between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m., and Saturdays between the hours of 9 a.m. and 7 p.m.
Developer hereby agrees to be responsible for any and all costs related to the Permitted Activities
conducted on the City and Authority Property by the Authorized Parties, and to restore the City and
Authority Property to its original condition upon completion of the Permitted Activities. Developer
agrees to indemnify, save harmless, and defend the City, the Authority, and their officers and
employees, from and against any and all claims, actions, damages, liability and expense in connection
with personal injury and/or damage to the City and Authority Property arising from or out of any
occurrence in, upon or at the City and Authority Property caused by the act or omission of the
Authorized Parties in conducting the Permitted Activities on the City and Authority Property, except
(a) to the extent caused by the negligence, gross negligence, willful misrepresentation or any willful
or wanton misconduct by the City or Authority, their officers, employees, agents or contractors; and
(b) to the extent caused by a “Pre-Existing Condition” as defined in this paragraph 6. “Pre-Existing
Condition” shall mean any condition caused by the existence of hazardous substances or materials in,
on, or under the City and Authority Property, including without limitation hazardous substances
released or discharged into the drainage systems, soils, groundwater, waters or atmosphere, which
condition existed as of the date of this Agreement and became known or was otherwise disclosed or
discovered by reason of the Authorized Parties’ entry onto the City and Authority Property.
7.The City will determine the municipal regulatory approvals required for the Development
including, but not limited to, land use amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, zoning changes,
permits, and any other necessary municipal approvals.
8.The City agrees to provide guidance to the Developer on its applications for any approvals or
land use guidance and zoning changes as may be required in connection with the Development.
However, the City makes no guarantees as to any approvals or land use guidance and zoning changes
as may be required in connection with the Development.
Page 5 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
9. The City will review existing traffic studies pertinent to the Development and undertake any
additional traffic studies deemed necessary by the City in its sole discretion, and the Developer agrees
to place sufficient funds in escrow to pay for any such studies, upon request by the City.
10.The Developer agrees to complete an Application for Tax Increment Finance Assistance (the
“Application”), and pay the required application fee of $3,000 plus an administrative deposit of
$50,000 for the Authority’s costs described in paragraph 14 (the “Administrative Deposit”) to the
Authority.
11.The Authority agrees to direct its staff and legal and financial consultants to review and
analyze the Application and the Development’s pro forma and help determine the terms of tax
increment or other financial assistance required for the Development.
12.The Authority agrees to undertake an analysis to determine the feasibility of creating a tax
increment financing district in connection with the Development and Property, and Developer agrees
that the Administrative Deposit shall be used, in part, to pay for any such analysis. The Developer
will cooperate with the Authority’s review and analysis, and provide to the Authority all documents
and information requested by the Authority in connection with that effort.
13.If, in the Authority’s sole discretion, the Development is feasible and public financial
assistance is indicated, the Authority, the City, and the Developer will negotiate towards a definitive
Contract providing generally for (a) purchase of the Property by the Developer; (b) pay-as-you-go tax
increment assistance in an amount determined by the Authority to be necessary to make the
Development financially feasible; and (c) timely construction of the Development by Developer. Any
definitive Contract is subject to approval by the Authority’s board of commissioners. It is expressly
understood that the Contract, when executed, will supersede this Agreement in all respects. Execution
and implementation of the Contract shall be subject to:
(a)A determination by the Authority in its sole discretion that its undertakings are
feasible based on (i) the projected tax increment revenues and any other revenues designated
by the Authority or City, including any Grants; (ii) the purposes and objectives of any tax
increment, development, or other plan created or proposed for the purpose of providing
financial assistance for the Development; and (iii) the best interests of the City and Authority.
(b)A determination by the Authority that any financial assistance is reasonably
necessary in order to make the Development financially feasible, and that any such assistance
is limited to the amount necessary to achieve financial feasibility based on Developer’s pro
forma and review of all the facts and circumstances.
(c)A determination by the Developer that the Development is both market and
economically feasible and in the best interests of the Developer, and that the Developer is able
to meet all the requirements of the Contract.
Page 6 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
14.The Developer will reimburse the Authority for all reasonable out-of-pocket costs incurred
by the Authority in connection with review and analysis of the Development, if such costs exceed the
amount of the Administrative Deposit described in paragraph 10. Such costs include fees paid to
attorneys, the Authority’s financial advisor, and any planning and engineering consultants retained
by the Authority in connection with review of the Development. The Developer must pay such costs
to the Authority within 30 days after receipt of a written invoice from the Authority describing the
amount and nature of the costs to be reimbursed.
15.This Agreement may be terminated (a) by the Developer at any time upon 10 day’s written
notice to the Authority; (b) by mutual written agreement of all parties hereto; or (c) pursuant to
paragraph 17 hereof. Upon such termination, no party shall have any further obligations to the others
under this Agreement, except that Developer remains obligated to pay any costs payable under
paragraph 14 that were incurred by the Authority before the date on which the Developer gave written
notice of termination. The Developer acknowledges that all Development Deposit amounts are
nonrefundable if this Agreement is terminated pursuant to this paragraph.
16.In expansion and not in limitation of paragraph 15 hereof, Developer agrees to notify the
Authority and City and to terminate this Agreement as soon as reasonably practicable if the Developer
determines that the proposed Development is not market and economically feasible, or if the
Developer is unable to secure the financing necessary for the Development, or if the Developer for
any reason is unable to bring the Development to fruition.
17.This Agreement shall terminate by its terms if the governing bodies of the Authority and City
have not approved the Contract by June 30, 2019, subject to the parties’ agreement to extend this
Agreement as described in paragraph 1(b) hereof. Upon such termination, the Developer remains
obligated to pay any costs payable under paragraph 14 that were incurred by the Authority and the
City prior to such date. The Developer acknowledges that all Development Deposit amounts are
nonrefundable if this Agreement terminates pursuant to this paragraph.
18.Notice or demand or other communication between or among the parties shall be sufficiently
given if sent by overnight mail or delivered personally:
(a)As to the City:
City of St. Louis Park
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
(b)As to the Authority:
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, MN 55416
Page 7 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
(c)As to the Developer:
Sherman Associates Development LLC
233 Park Avenue South, Suite 201
Minneapolis, MN 55415
19.This Agreement may be executed simultaneously in any number of counterparts, all
of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
20.This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of Minnesota. Any disputes, controversies, or claims arising out of this Agreement shall be
heard in the state or federal courts of Minnesota, and all parties to this Agreement waive any objection
to the jurisdiction of these courts, whether based on convenience or otherwise.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Page 8 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Authority have caused this Agreement to be duly
executed in their name and behalf and their seal to be duly affixed hereto and the Developer has
caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the date and year first above written.
SHERMAN ASSOCIATES
DEVELOPMENT LLC
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By: By: _____________________________
Its ___________________________ Its President
By: _____________________________
Its Executive Director
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By: ______________________________
Its Mayor
By: ______________________________
Its City Manager
Page 9 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
PROPERTY
Meeting: Special Study Session
Meeting Date: November 20, 2017
Discussion Item: 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Developer for SWLRT Beltline Blvd. Station Redevelopment Site
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Review and discuss the proposals received for the Southwest
Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) Beltline Blvd. Station Redevelopment Site and provide staff
direction.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the EDA wish to pursue entering into a Preliminary
Development Agreement with Sherman Associates for the Beltline Blvd. Station Redevelopment
Site?
SUMMARY: In July a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the SWLRT Beltline Blvd. Station
Redevelopment Site (located at the southeast quadrant of CSAH 25 and Beltline Blvd.) was
distributed to the development community. Three development teams, Kraus Anderson, Flaherty
& Collins, and Sherman Associates, ultimately submitted proposals. A summary of each proposal
can be found in the Discussion section of this report and a more detailed Metrics of Developer
Responses is attached. Staff evaluated and scored the proposals based on the criteria outlined in
the RFP. The development teams with the two top scoring proposals were then asked to present
their proposed projects to a team of six staff members and a representative from Ehlers (the EDA’s
financial advisor). Following the development teams’ presentations, staff determined Sherman
Associates’ proposal most closely aligned with the city’s vision, development objectives and
preferred programming for the site. As such, staff is recommending that Sherman Associates be
selected as the development team with which the EDA should partner to redevelop the SWLRT
Beltline Blvd. Station Site. Sherman Associates is a Minneapolis-based, fully integrated
development company with an extensive portfolio of successful urban/suburban mixed-use,
mixed-income, TOD projects, substantial affordable housing experience, and the financial capacity
to develop a project of the scale envisioned by the city.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The precise purchase price of the EDA and
City-owned parcels as well as the amount of financial assistance necessary to bring the desired
project to fruition at the Beltline site will require further discussion with the developer once the
project’s actual components are more fully defined. Implementation of both public and private
redevelopment plans for the Beltline Blvd. Station Site will likely require TIF assistance.
VISION CONSIDERATION: This project is intended to meet all the city’s Vision objectives.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Summary Metrics of Developer Responses
Summary of Sherman Associates’ Proposal
Sherman Associates’ Profile
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates Page 10
DISCUSSION
Property Description
The Beltline Blvd. Station Redevelopment Site is located at the southeast quadrant of the CSAH
25 (an extension of State Highway 7) and Beltline Blvd. intersection; less than ½ mile east of
Highway 100. The site is bounded by CSAH 25 on the north, Beltline Blvd. on the west and the
Cedar Lake Regional Trail and the future SWLRT line (with its Beltline Blvd. Station) on the
south as shown in the illustration below. The site consists of four parcels: 4601 Highway 7, 3130
Monterey Ave S, road right of way, and 4725 Highway 7 referenced respectively as Parcels A,
B,C, and D. Parcels A and B are owned by the city’s EDA. Parcel C is former right-of-way (for
which the city is in the process of clearing title). Parcel D is being acquired by the Metropolitan
Council for the SWLRT project.
The Development Objectives for the site listed in the Request for Proposals are as follows:
•Construct a signature, transit-oriented development (TOD),
•Transform the SWLRT Beltline Blvd. Station Redevelopment Site into an active, TOD-
focused place with:
-Mixed use development (including multi-family residential, office and small
commercial components),
-Housing density to support transit ridership,
-Mixed income housing (both market rate and affordable),
-High-quality shared site amenities,
•Optimize the site’s development and employment potential,
•Integrate development with the adjacent SWLRT Beltline Blvd. Station and connect with
the surrounding areas,
•Build a parking structure for required park-and-ride purposes,
•Demonstrate high standards for environmental sustainability.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
Page 3 - Report from Special Study Session Meeting of November 20, 2017
Page 11
The preferred Development Program for the site described in the Request for Proposals
includes:
•Multi-story, multi-family, mixed-use (commercial and residential), mixed-income,
residential buildings. The concept plan considers more than 180 multi-family dwelling
units. See city’s Inclusionary Housing Policy (Attachment F) for city’s affordable housing
requirements.
•At least 8,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space.
•Adequate parking to serve the needs of the proposed redevelopment, primarily located
below buildings or in structures.
•A multi-story office building of at least 80,000 square feet containing ground floor
retail/service spaces. Structured underground parking may be included but is not required.
•Multi-story parking structure to accommodate the Metropolitan Council’s required 268-
park-and-ride stalls. Requires hazardous materials removal and soil remediation.
•Design of the parking structure must be coordinated with the city, SWLRT project and the
Southwest LRT Project Office (SPO) to ensure park-and-ride and site requirements are
met.
•The parking structure may be designed to accommodate the required parking for the
adjacent office building.
Summary of Developer Proposals
The city received development proposals from the following development teams as summarized
below:
Flaherty & Collins (Indianapolis) proposal included one, square-shaped, 5-story apartment
building with a total of 297 apartment units of which 20% would be affordable at an unspecified
percentage of AMI, a one story 29,150 SF grocery on the corner of Beltline and CSAH 25 with
potentially 2 to 4 stories of office above (upwards of 65,850 SF) as determined by market demand
along with the required public parking ramp with architectural treatments to blend with other
project elements. It featured a large courtyard in the middle of the apartment building, solar
components above the parking ramp and a public plaza with public gathering elements and public
art across from the station. It offered $5,000,000 for the land and estimated the project’s financing
gap at more than $29 million.
Kraus Anderson (Minneapolis) proposed two, 5-story mixed use buildings with a total of 190
apartment units of which 10% would be affordable at an unspecified percentage of AMI, a one
story (with mezzanine) 49,575 SF grocery on the corner of Beltline and CSAH 25 with an
abundance of surface parking, 23,000 SF of additional retail and restaurant space, and a possible
2-level, 50,000 SF office building above the required parking ramp. It featured one large level of
underground parking, numerous sustainable features (including a strong solar component and
green roofs) as well as 16,130 SF plaza with public gathering elements and public art. It offered
$1,600,000 for the land and estimated the project’s financing gap at more than $7.5 million not
including the parking ramp.
Sherman Associates’ (Minneapolis) proposal included two, 6-story apartment buildings each with
120 units of which 20% would be affordable to households at 50% AMI, a 3 to 4-story, 72,000 SF
Class A office building that anchors the corner of the Beltline & CSAH 25 intersection, 8,000+ SF
of neighborhood commercial, a 500+ stall parking garage adjacent to the future SWLRT station as
well as a variety of well-planned and integrated multi-purpose green spaces and public gathering
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates
Page 3 - Report from Special Study Session Meeting of November 20, 2017
Page 12
Page 4 - Report from Special Study Session Meeting of November 20, 2017
areas (including one across from the station) that feature native landscaping and public art.
Sherman Associates’ off-site 4- megawatt solar garden would offset nearly all of the Beltline
redevelopment’s energy impact. It offered $5,800,000 for the land and estimated the project’s
financing gap at nearly $11 million not including the parking ramp.
Developer Selection
Staff evaluated and scored the proposals according to the criteria outlined in the RFP:
I.Site and Building Plans: Degree to which proposal meets or exceeds city’s TOD vision,
development objectives, and Beltline Area Framework & Design Guidelines; integrates
with the station area, pedestrian and neighborhood connections; and exhibits site
synergies as well as creative and efficient design (up to 20 points).
II.Project Program: Proposed commercial and housing components, square footages and
mix as well as number of affordable housing units above city requirements (up to 20
points).
III.Development Team: Overall experience of company and project principals with similar
projects and the type of development being proposed; financial and team member
capacity to implement proposal; previous experience of development team working
together; and ability of development team to meet regularly with city staff to refine
project plans (up to 15 points).
IV.Economic Impact: Proposed property purchase price, estimated taxable market value of
completed project, hiring of minority contractors and workers, and project’s overall
employment potential (up to 20 points).
V.Community Benefits: Connectivity of proposed project to the surrounding area; quality
of public spaces, including gathering areas/plazas, green space, landscaping, public art
(up to 10 points).
VI.Sustainability: Inclusion of green building elements that meet and exceed city
requirements, on-site energy generation, waste reduction, measures to reduce trip
generation and degree to which project meets city’s Net Zero Energy/Emissions goals
(up to 15 points).
The development teams with the two top scoring proposals were then asked to present their
proposed projects to a team of six staff members and a representative from Ehlers (the EDA’s
financial advisor). Following the development teams’ presentations, staff determined Sherman
Associates’ proposal most closely aligned with the city’s vision, development objectives and
preferred programming for the site. As such, staff is recommending that Sherman Associates be
selected as the development team with which the EDA should partner to redevelop the SWLRT
Beltline Blvd. Station Site. Sherman Associates is a Minneapolis-based, fully integrated
development company with an extensive portfolio of successful urban/suburban mixed-use,
mixed-income, TOD projects, substantial affordable housing experience, and the financial capacity
to develop a project of the scale envisioned by the city.
Next Steps: Staff seeks direction relative to its recommendation of Sherman Associates as the
developer for the Beltline Station Site. If the Council/EDA wishes to move forward with Sherman,
staff will prepare a Preliminary Development Agreement for consideration at an upcoming Study
Session.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates Page 13
BELTLINE STATION PROJECT SUMMARY
January 22, 2018
Sherman Associates proposes a vibrant, mixed-use development at the intersection of County Road 25
(Highway 7) & Beltline Boulevard in St. Louis Park. Project deliverables include mixed income rental
housing, office, commercial and a park-and-ride facility. The project will incorporate comprehensive
energy efficiency measures. It will enhance connections to transit and the surrounding community. The
dynamic mix of uses will invigorate the streetscape, increase tax base and spur economic activity. The
following is a high-level summary of the project:
Proposed Redevelopment:
Mixed-Use/Mixed-Income Housing | Office/Commercial | Parking Garage
- Housing 1: 120 Units - 80% Market Rate 20% Affordable
- Housing 2: 120 Units - 80% Market Rate 20% Affordable
- Office/Commercial: 80,000 SF (8,000 SF dedicated to commercial/retail uses)
- Parking Garage: 550 Stalls - 268 dedicated to park-and-ride, 282 dedicated to office
Proposed Acquisition Price:
Area 1: $3,443,075
-Consists of land with approximate boundaries of RFP Parcels A & B
Area 2: $ 2,427,525
-Consists of land with approximate boundary of RFP Parcel C
Proposed Closing Dates*:
Area 1: Quarter 4, 2018
-Consists of land with approximate boundaries of RFP Parcels A & B
Area 2: Quarter 4, 2019
-Consists of land with approximate boundary of RFP Parcel C
Anticipated Project Construction Completion Dates*:
- Housing 1: Quarter 1, 2020
- Housing 2: Quarter 1, 2021
- Office/Commercial: Quarter 1, 2021
- Parking Garage: Quarter 1, 2021
Rental Rates:
-Housing 1:80% Market Rate - 20% Affordable (Affordable at 50% AMI)
-Housing 2:80% Market Rate - 20% Affordable (Affordable at 50% AMI)
-Office/Commercial:$16 - $18 PSF Net
Total Development Costs:
-Approximately $73.4 million (excludes parking garage)
-Cost & of design EDA/Met Council owned parking garage TBD
Requested City Assistance
-25 years TIF for housing projects
-10 years TIF for office project
-Support in pursuit of gap financing and 4% Housing Tax Credits
233 Park Avenue South, Suite 201, Minneapolis, MN 55415 P 612.332.3000 F 612.332.8119 www.Sherman-Associates.com
* Dates subject to change if adjacent land assembly and infrastructure work is delayed
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates Page 14
ENCLOSED
Conceptual Site Plan
Conceptual Renderings
233 Park Avenue South, Suite 201, Minneapolis, MN 55415 P 612.332.3000 F 612.332.8119 www.Sherman-Associates.com
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman Associates Page 15
CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN – BELTLINE STATION Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3) Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman AssociatesPage 10Page 10
CONCEPTUAL RENDERING - HOUSING - BELTLINE STATION Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3) Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman AssociatesPage 11Page 11
CONCEPTUAL RENDERING - OFFICE - BELTLINE STATION Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3) Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman AssociatesPage 12Page 12
Sherman Associates Real Estate Development | Property Management Residential | Commercial | Hospitality | Community Impact | Historic
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman AssociatesPage 13 Page 13
–––-
Building Communities.
Enriching Neighborhoods.
Sherman Associates is committed to the development of quality urban housing, hospitality, and commercial products. With the belief that the healthiest neighborhoods are comprised of a variety of people and uses, Sherman strives to create mixed-use developments, incorporating a variety of housing types and leveraging multiple financing tools.
$250 million
Annual pipeline
$2 billion
Total real estate development
completed
600,000
Square feet of commercial and
hotel space
8,500
Residential units developed
5
States actively
developing
400+
Total employees
35
Years of experience Photo by Spacecrafting Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman AssociatesPage 14 Page 14
++--–
Project Examples
EAST TOWN BLOCK | East End Apartments, Hilton Canopy
Hotel, Trader Joes, commercial space
PAPER BOX LOFTS | Historic Redevelopment 800 W BROADWAY | Community Impact, Mixed-use
Redevelopment
RIVERSIDE PLAZA | Affordable Historic ENCORE | Boutique Luxury Residence LONGFELLOW STATION | Transit-oriented, Mixed-use
Development
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman AssociatesPage 15 Page 15
Why Sherman?
Sherman’s vision is fueled by the desire to develop and operate with a long-term perspective. This allows us unwavering commitment to create developments that have a positive impact on the community.
Sherman’s Development team is innovative, smart, and determined. The collaboration and support of our legal, compliance, construction, and asset management teams serve as an advantage in executing a vision that builds communities and enriches neighborhoods.
Vision Oriented
Long Term Impact
Sherman Associates is driven to leverage our expertise, developing the best solution for cities and neighborhoods. We have become an industry leader in market rate and affordable multi-family housing, and mixed-use developments.
Creative & Experienced
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 3)
Title: Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with Sherman AssociatesPage 16 Page 16
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Discussion Item: 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff desires direction from the Council as to whether the
proposed/amended legislative agenda is in keeping with the Council’s expectations.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Are there issues that should be added or deleted? Are the draft
“Top Legislative Issues” acceptable to the Council?
SUMMARY: On January 8 the City Council reviewed a draft of a legislative agenda to be
discussed with our elected and appointed officials on February 5. The Council provided direction
to staff on changes to be made to the document. These changes have been incorporated and are
highlighted in YELLOW in the attached document. These changes include:
•Added “Local Control” as an legislative issue
•Clarified that the City wants Hennepin County to include the portion of Minnetonka Blvd
between TH 100 and TH 169 be included in its CIP for reconstruction
•Moved the issue “Affordable Housing - Limiting Local Authority” from the Public Safety
list of issues to Community Development/Housing
•Added “Police Trainee/Non-traditional Pathway to Policing Program” as a legislative
issue,
At the study session the Council also asked for staff to suggest a possible prioritization of the
various legislative items. Attached are staff’s suggestions on what should be our highest priority
items for 2018
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Prioritization of Legislative Agenda Items
Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Top 2018 Legislative Priorities (DRAFT)
There are thirty issues identified in the attached 2018 Legislative Issues and Priorities document
broken out into four subject areas. Of all of the issues identified, what follows are the highest
priorities of the City Council:
Community Development/Housing
The issue of affordable housing is of significant importance to the City Council. In the attached
document, starting on the first page, is a menu of seven different measures the City Council feels
should be pursued by the state legislature
Transportation
•The Redesign and Reconstruction of CSAH 25 by Hennepin County
•Funding from Hennepin County for the rehabilitation/reconstruction of the portion of
Minnetonka Blvd between TH 100 and TH 169
•Partnership between Hennepin County and the City on the complete reconstruction of the
Minnetonka Blvd/Texas Ave. intersection in 2020.
•Transportation and Transit Financing
Council – Others??
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 2
[1]
City of St. Louis Park
2018 Legislative Issues (Draft)
Community Development Issues
Affordable Housing Financing
Bonding Authority (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: In the 2017 legislative session, the legislature provided $77 million in bonding authority to
construct and preserve affordable housing, improve existing public housing and to expand support
for homeless programs. Although the 2017 bonding authority amount is significant, the continued
demand for affordable housing warrants the need for additional Housing Infrastructure (HIB) and
General Obligation (GO) Bonds for affordable housing. GO bonds can be used to rehabilitate or
construct new public housing. HIB bonds can be used to finance several types of projects including
new construction or rehabilitation of supportive and affordable housing and preservation of
existing federally subsidized rental housing.
Position: The city supports an effective bonding bill that provides Housing Infrastructure (HIB)
and General Obligation (GO) Bonds to fund affordable housing to serve low income households.
Establish a TOD Affordable Housing Fund (Request directed to State Leg./Hennepin Co)
Issue: Efforts are being made to develop a corridor-wide housing strategy for the SWLRT Corridor
for providing a full range of housing options specifically within a half-mile of the station areas. The
fundamental issue with respect to the traditional approaches to infill/redevelopment and mixed-
income housing production/preservation, is an absence of funds.
Position: The city supports the creation of a TOD Affordable Housing Fund and requests that
Hennepin County and the State provide a financial resource to be used to support the preservation
and creation of affordable housing along the SWLRT corridor.
Local Housing Trust Funds (LHTF) (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: In the 2017 session, the legislature passed language that enables cities, counties or regions
to set up and resource LHTFs. In 2018, local affordable housing agencies will be working to
identify a consistent funding source and incentivize communities to take advantage of this locally
controlled tool.
Position: The city supports legislation that establishes a dedicated revenue source for LHTFs,
encourages local jurisdictions, creates a state match and provides technical assistance dollars to
communities to set up their LHTF.
Reduce 4D Tax Classification Tax Rate and Expand Eligibility to Participation in the
Housing Choice Voucher Program (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: Increasing property taxes are impacting multi-family residential rental properties. These
increasing costs are being passed on to renters as owners increase rents. At the same time, the
need for affordable housing continues to increase. Existing rent-restricted buildings are also
struggling with increased taxes and limited ability to increase rents to cover the cost. Reducing
the 4D tax classification rate would provide an incentive for market-rate properties to designate a
portion of their units as rent-restricted and provide tax relief to existing rent-restricted properties.
Expanding eligibility to include properties committing to accepting a minimum (20%) number of
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 3
[2]
Housing Choice Voucher participants would provide an incentive for more rental owners to accept
tenants receiving housing subsidy, which provides greater housing opportunities for program
participants.
Position: The city supports any legislation that would reduce the 4D tax classification rate to
encourage more rent-restricted units in market-rate buildings and/or expand eligibility
requirements to encourage more rental owner participation in the Housing Choice Voucher
Program.
Amend State Statute 471.9996 Rent Control Prohibited to Allow for a 90 Day Tenant
Protection Period Following the Transfer of (NOAH) Property Ownership (Request directed
to State Legislature)
Issue: Currently state statute prohibits any local adoption of an ordinance to control rents on private
residential properties unless the ordinance is approved in a general election. Investment buyers
have been purchasing NOAH multi-family residential properties, rehabbing properties and
increasing rents. In some cases, new owners have non-renewed the leases of existing tenants with
minimal notice and/or implemented substantial rent increases with minimal notice. A 90-day
period that would prohibit rent increases and non-renewals would allow time for existing residents
in these situations to seek alternative housing.
Position: The city supports legislation that would allow for a 90-day tenant protection period
following ownership transfer of a NOAH multi-family residential property.
Establish revenue resource for Inclusionary Housing Fund (Request directed to State
Legislature)
Issue: The Met Council partnered with the Family Housing Fund and the Urban Land Institute of
MN to support mixed-income (inclusionary) housing efforts in the region. Together they
developed a number of tools including the mixed-income calculator and the establishment of an
Inclusionary Housing Fund to assist in financing mixed income projects. A number of
communities in the metro region have adopted policies to ensure the inclusion of affordable
housing in new multi-family residential market-rate developments. To date, a funding source for
the Inclusionary Housing Fund has not been established.
Position: The City supports establishment of a financing resource to fund the Inclusionary
Housing Fund to facilitate mixed-income projects. An Inclusionary Housing Fund would support
local efforts to finance inclusionary housing projects, providing a financial resource for local
communities that adopt Inclusionary housing policies for new multi-family residential
development.
Affordable Housing - Limiting Local Authority (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: Recent discussions on affordable housing solutions include both agencies advocating for
housing programs for primarily multiple family developments, and local home builders pursuing
reduced regulatory authority by the state and cities. Last year the Builders Association of the Twin
Cities had worked toward a bill that was defeated which would essentially require new codes to
receive legislative approval before being adopted. This year an organization called Housing First
MN will be advancing the interests of the construction industry. This organization is advocating
for lesser code standards for affordable housing projects in order to reduce building costs.
Position: Although St. Louis Park strongly supports and encourages affordable housing, minimum
code requirements for energy conservation and building safety should not be compromised on the
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 4
[3]
concept of reducing construction costs to builders. In addition, local land use and zoning standards
for establishing quality of life standards in each community should not be limited by legislative
action.
Other Community Development Issues
TIF District Statutory Modifications (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: Tax Increment Financing (TIF) remains the most viable tool for local economic
development and community reinvestment efforts. TIF is a method local governments use to pay
for the costs of qualifying improvements necessary to create new investment, redevelopment, or
publicly-assisted housing. The financing of the qualifying improvements is paid from the increased
property taxes generated from the new development, redevelopment, or housing that would not
occur “but for” such assistance. There are steps that the State could take that would enhance the
effectiveness of TIF, leverage additional private investment and create more jobs and tax base in
communities. The current types of State-authorized TIF districts lack flexibility and do not
adequately address the varied and unique redevelopment situations found in urban communities.
Currently, the Minnesota TIF Act requires more than 50% of the buildings in a project area be
found to be substandard to qualify as a Redevelopment TIF District. In redevelopment situations
involving only a small number of parcels, this can be an insurmountable standard to meet thus
preventing new investment from occurring.
Position: The City supports greater flexibility and the inclusion of additional uses within current
TIF districts.
•In particular, the City supports a minor modification of the Redevelopment TIF District
statute requiring 50% or more of buildings within project areas be found to be substandard.
•The City supports the elimination of the 5-year rule for districts that take longer to develop.
•To spur additional development, the City supports lengthening the duration of Economic
Development TIF Districts to a full 10 years, or nine years from first tax increment collection.
In addition, the City supports expanding authority to allow for the establishment of Economic
Development TIF Districts for assisting with commercial project development for the
purpose of retention and expansion of existing businesses and the attraction of new business
to the state to create and retain jobs.
•The City further supports the establishment of Transit Oriented TIF Districts within one-half
mile of light rail corridors and one mile from light rail corridor train stations for the purposes
of promoting economic development, redeveloping blighted areas, and the development of
housing near light rail corridors. Eligible expenditures within the district include but are not
limited to (1) the city's or authority’s share of the costs necessary to provide for the
construction of any southwest light rail transit station and related infrastructure, including
but not limited to parking facilities, including structured parking, pedestrian overpasses,
pedestrian connections, and walkways or trails; (2) infrastructure and roadway
improvements, including but not limited to sanitary sewer, water, storm sewer and utility
improvements; (3) land acquisition costs; (4) costs related to environmental remediation, soil
correction, demolition, and relocation; (5) site improvement costs; (6) costs incurred with
respect to the development of or rehabilitation of housing; and (7) related administrative
costs. Additionally, if two or more cities or authorities propose a joint development or
adjacent developments, the cities or authorities would be allowed to expend up to 25% of the
total revenue derived from tax increments generated from such a tax increment district to pay
for the eligible expenditures of another tax increment district located outside the city’s
corporate limits
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 5
[4]
DEED Program Funding (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: The Department of Employment & Economic Development (DEED) is critically important
in the support of communities and local economic development initiatives. DEED manages several
funding programs utilized by the City which have positively impacted St. Louis Park.
Position: St. Louis Park supports the continued annual funding of DEED programs at stable and
sustainable levels. The City believes that continued funding of DEED programs at the same, or an
increased level is vital to economic growth across Minnesota. The City supports legislative
initiatives that strengthen funding levels for economic development programs administered by
DEED and other state agencies such as Small Business Development Centers, the Minnesota
Investment Fund, the Job Creation Fund, Brownfield Cleanup and Redevelopment Grant Program,
Transportation Economic Development Program and proposed new financing tools that support
development along transit corridors. Minnesota communities rely on these programs to remain
competitive with neighboring states in their efforts to bring jobs and tax base back to Minnesota.
Special Service Districts Statutory Authority (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: In 1988, cities were granted general authority under Minn. Stat. § 428A.01 to § 428A.101
to establish Special Service Districts. As currently written, only commercial properties can
financially participate within Special Service Districts. This is challenging for funding additional
services within mixed-use project areas. The City of St. Louis Park has established six Special
Service Districts, including multiple sections of Excelsior Boulevard. Providing infrastructure
improvements and on-going maintenance at the LRT station areas will also be a need
Position: The city supports the inclusion of multi-family housing developments as financial
participants within Special Service Districts and the establishment of Special Service Districts
around transit and LRT station areas.
Transportation Issues
Redesign and Reconstruction of CSAH 25 (Request directed to Hennepin County)
Issue: The City and County are working together to prepare a long term vision to transform the
CSAH 25 Corridor from the rural design through-route it is today to a multimodal urban boulevard
with well-designed landscape architecture and place-making features. The goal is to transform this
Hennepin County Road into an amenity rich, pedestrian and transit oriented, development friendly
Boulevard, between Trunk Highway 100 and France Avenue. A clear long-term vision for CSAH
25 will serve as a guide for both public and private investment in this corridor. Already, the
SWLRT Beltline station, park & ride and proposed Beltline Blvd Station redevelopment project is
beginning to transform the west end of this corridor. The Shoreham mixed-use project is beginning
transformation at the east end and the Parkway 25 project will continue the redevelopment pattern.
The new concept for CSAH 25, when finalized, will support this change to a more urban place and
provide good, attractive access to the Beltline LRT station in St. Louis Park and the neighboring
W. Lake LRT station in Minneapolis.
Analysis: To transform CSAH 25 into an urban boulevard will require the following actions and
considerations:
• A commitment from Hennepin County, with involvement from Minneapolis, to changing
the vision for the corridor.
• Integration into concept plans of both the planned improvements associated with SWLRT
between Beltline Boulevard and Lynn Avenue and the West Lake Street multi-modal
transportation plan into the vision for the corridor.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 6
[5]
•Inclusion in concept plans of strong connections to existing and planned bicycle routes,
filling the existing gap in access to the Cedar Lake Trail from the north.
•Consideration in concept plans of the MCES interceptor along the south side, the lack of
width on north-south streets, the frontage roadway geometry, circulation/access needs,
future land use assumptions, rail/LRT, Beltline Station area plan and design guidelines.
•Addressing storm water treatment, landscape and pedestrians amenities as well as
opportunities for remnant right-of-way to be used for future additional bike and pedestrian
facilities.
•Consideration of the east end “triangle,” where Minnetonka Blvd, CSAH 25, France Avenue
and West Lake Street meet. This area presents both opportunities for gateway treatments
for both Minneapolis and St Louis Park as well as operational challenges for the movement
of traffic, pedestrians, bicyclists and local businesses.
•Analysis of traffic operations analysis, crash/safety, 2040 forecasts (possibly interim year
related to SWLRT improvements), including review of all pedestrian- or bicycle-related
crashes. Limits of operations analysis should be the Hwy. 100 west ramp terminal to France
Avenue.
•Inclusion of multimodal improvements, future intersection locations, and lane arrangement
and circulation.
•Consideration of a new name for the roadway that provides a positive identity while
eliminating the currently existing address confusion. Just as CSAH 5 is also named
Minnetonka Boulevard, CSAH 25 needs a street name around which an image and identity
can be built. In the case of CSAH 25, there is added confusion because of its history of being
originally part of MN Highway 7, a name that continues to be used by many.
•CSAH 25 serves many important functions and is home to a surprising number of
businesses, residents and property owners. All stakeholders should be informed and
involved in the design processes from the beginning.
•Development of a funding and phasing plan will be necessary. Transforming CSAH 25 will
be a large project and will take time and significant resources to implement. New
development in the corridor may be able to play a significant role in funding the
transformation, but timing will be critical for that to happen.
Position: We thank Hennepin County for their participation in the redesign process and request
the County’s support and funding for the actual rehabilitation/ reconstruction of CSAH 25 as the
project moves forward.
Rehabilitation/ Reconstruction of Minnetonka Blvd. (Request directed to Hennepin Co.)
Issue: Minnetonka Boulevard between Trunk Highway (TH) 169 and France Avenue is a
Hennepin County road and is one of the few continuous west-to-east roadway connections in the
City of St. Louis Park. The Minnetonka Boulevard bridge over TH 100 was reconstructed in 2015
and includes bicycle, pedestrian and intersection improvements that have greatly increased the
efficiency and safety in this segment of the corridor. The road to the west and to the east of the
new bridge is in need of rehabilitation reconstruction to ensure that it accommodates the best
facility for bicycles, pedestrians and motorists.
Recently, the city was informed that the portion of Minnetonka Blvd. between France Ave. and
Hwy 100 has been placed in the County’s CIP for reconstruction in 2022 at an estimated cost of
$14 million.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 7
[6]
Analysis: In order to extend the bicycle, pedestrian and roadway enhancements that were
completed at the Minnetonka Boulevard bridge the following items would need to be addressed
for the entire corridor.
• Curb height: Between TH 169 and France Avenue the road is concrete with a bituminous
overlay. While the overlay improves the ride for motorists, it also reduced the curb height
which places the roadway at nearly the same level as the sidewalk in various locations along
the corridor
• Sidewalks/Landscaping: The sidewalks require updating to meet ADA requirements for
pedestrian ramps, width, and clearance from obstructions. To increase safety and provide a
more pedestrian-friendly environment the city would like the County to move the sidewalks
away from the street and plant trees in the boulevard.
• Pedestrian crosswalks: A number of pedestrian crossings should be considered for
enhancements. The addition of pedestrian refuge median or bump outs should be considered
to make the crossings safer on this four-lane road
• Bike lanes: The city and county bike plan include bike lanes on this road which could be
accomplished by creating a three-lane cross section for the corridor since currently a number
of segments are not wide enough to accommodate bike lanes.
• Intersection modifications: Signal systems and intersection geometrics in the corridor should
be studied and updated to include flashing yellow arrows and turn lanes as needed to improve
traffic flow (see below re: the intersection of Texas Ave an Minnetonka Blvd).
Position: The city sincerely thanks Hennepin County for including in its CIP the reconstruction of
Minnetonka Blvd from France Ave to Hwy 100 in 2022. The city requests that the portion of
Minnetonka Blvd between Hwy 100 and TH 169 also be identified in the County’s capital plan for
reconstruction. In 2018, the City reconstructed Texas Avenue south of Minnetonka Boulevard,
stopping just 400 feet south of the Minnetonka Blvd intersection. This project was coordinated
with Centerpoint Energy as a part of a 24 inch distribution line replacement. Centerpoint has
indicated that they will be coming back in 2020 to continue this project through the Minnetonka
Blvd/ Texas Avenue intersection. In order to develop a comprehensive project that will address
intersection design concerns and pavement condition, the City has added the reconstruction of the
Texas/ Minnetonka Boulevard intersection to its CIP for 2020. In addition to the County making
improvements to the entire segment of Minnetonka Blvd west of Hwy 100 as noted above, the
City further requests that the County partner with the City and set aside funding for this much
needed intersection reconstruction in 2020.
Southwest LRT (Directed to State Legislature, Met Council & Hennepin County)
Position: The City continues to strongly support the Southwest LRT Project.
Transportation Funding (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: A comprehensive transportation system is a vital component in planning for and meeting
the physical, social and economic needs of our state and metropolitan region. Adequate and stable
sources of funding are necessary to ensure the development and maintenance of a high quality,
efficient and safe transportation system that meets these needs and that will position the state and
region to be economically competitive in the years ahead.
Analysis: Under current transportation financing structures, transportation needs in the
metropolitan region continue to be inadequate and underfunded. Our transportation funding system
relies primarily on local property taxes and fees and the motor vehicle sales tax (MVST) for transit.
Automobiles are becoming more fuel efficient and MVST receipts continue to lag behind
projections, resulting in funding levels that continually fail to meet demand. Transportation
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 8
[7]
funding and planning must be a high priority for state, regional and local policymakers so that the
transportation system can sufficiently meet the needs of the state’s residents and businesses and
its projected population growth. Funding and planning for our regional and statewide systems must
be coordinated at the federal, state, regional and local levels to optimally achieve long term needs
and goals. In addition, cities lack adequate tools and state resources for the maintenance and
improvement of municipal systems, with resources restricted to property taxes and special
assessments. Cost participation requirements have overburdened city budgets. It is imperative that
alternative revenue generating authority be granted to municipalities and state resources be made
available for this purpose to relieve the burden on the property tax system.
Position: The city:
• Supports stable and sufficient statewide transportation funding and local tools to meet the
long-term transportation system needs of the region and local municipal systems;
• Supports funding to assist cities overburdened by cost participation responsibilities;
• Supports state funding for state highway projects, including congestion and safety
improvements; and
• Supports state financial assistance, as well as innovations in design and construction.
Transit Financing (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: The Twin Cities metropolitan area is served by a regional transit system that is expanding
to include rail transit and dedicated busways. Any operating subsidies necessary to support this
system should come from a regional or statewide funding source. The property taxpayers of
individual cities and counties should not be required to fund the operation of specific transit lines
or routes of service within this regional system.
Analysis: MVST revenue projections have not been reliable and the Legislature has repeatedly
reduced general fund support for Metropolitan Transit. As a result, the regional transit providers
continue to operate at a funding deficit. Shifting demographics in the metropolitan region will
mean increased demand for transit in areas with and without current transit service.
Position: The city supports stable and growing revenue sources to fund the operating budget for
all regional transit providers at a level sufficient to meet the growing operational and capital transit
needs of the region and to expand the system to areas that currently have little or no transit options.
The city also supports an increase in the regional sales tax to fund the expansion of regular route
service, the continuing capital expenses and expanded operational needs of the metropolitan transit
system, if the increase is accompanied by sufficient local controls over the collection and
expenditure of the new revenue and geographic balance is maintained in the expansion of service
to allow cities to appropriately plan for growth in population and service needs along new and
expanded transit service. The city opposes diversions of the uses of this tax for any other purposes.
Public Safety Issues
Police Trainee/Non-traditional Pathway to Policing Program (Directed to State Legislature)
Issue: In recent years the candidate pool for police officers in Minnesota has been shrinking in
numbers and narrowing in the representation of candidate diversity using several descriptors
including race and ethnicity, age and life experience, and academic and career development in
other disciplines. During the 2017 legislative session $400,000 was appropriated for
communities participating in this new program on a 50/50 cost split. Thus far just a handful of
cities have used this approach for diversifying their departments, including St. Louis Park. In
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 9
[8]
2017 two candidates went through this program successfully and are now police offers for St.
Louis Park. However, the he need to create a wider and deeper candidate pool will continue to be
a long term challenge for all police departments
Position: The City applauds the state funding which has been applied to this new approach thus
far and requests that this funding not only be maintained but increased in future biennium’s
Railroad and Hazardous Substance Safety
Issue: The current situation within St Louis Park suggests that there will be the continued shipment
of hazardous material commodities through the community including but not limited to crude oil
and ethanol at current or increased levels in the future. In the interest of public safety, the fire
service and emergency managers’ commonly work together to secure various types of information
for emergency planning and response. Railroad companies are reluctant if not unwilling to provide
information about hazardous materials moving through communities due to security concerns,
which makes it difficult to undertake proper emergency planning.
Analysis: Detailed and local railroad planning information would assist emergency managers in
assessing rail hazards, finding local vulnerabilities, gauging response capabilities, and identifying
specific gaps. Examples of information which should be provided under a non-disclosure
agreement (to insure the informatin is secure) includes:
•A disclosure of the railroad company’s response capability
•Information that is available on-scene and response-oriented (i.e. identity and quantity of
HAZMAT carried aboard rail cars involved in an incident). This information should be
provided in a manner that is useable by responders at the scene in a web based format as well
as the Ask Rail phone app.
In addition to the above information, railroad companies should be required to partner with local
jurisdictions, emergency planners and responders on training for responding to an incident.
Position: The City supports legislation that requires railroads to address the concerns noted above.
Oppose statutory prohibition on residential fire sprinklers (Request directed to State
Legislature)
Issue: The Appellate Court struck down the Department of Labor and Industries (DLI) adoption
of the latest International Residential Code (IRC). The IRC had a provision requiring residential
fire sprinklers in newly constructed one- and two-family homes that were 4,500 sq. feet and larger.
Analysis: The sprinkler provision was challenged as to whether it was done legally and
appropriately. The requirement to build these homes safer is no longer in effect. The sobering
reality is that, in terms of fire safety, the most dangerous place to be is at home. And most often
the victims of fire are the younger and older among us, who have a more difficult time getting out
in an emergency situation.
Residential fire sprinklers save lives. Fire sprinklers are cost-effective. In Minnesota recent studies
show the cost of installing residential fire sprinkler systems averages $1.15 per sprinkled square
foot, or approximately 1% of new home construction.
Position: Oppose efforts to prohibit future adoption of the Residential fire sprinkler code.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 10
[9]
Oppose expansion of legal fireworks. (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: There is a continued effort to expand the sale and use of a wider variety of fireworks. In the
past, bills have been introduced that would expand the definition of legal fireworks to include
“aerial and audible”. These bills also proposed disallowing cities from banning the sale of
fireworks, but would allow cities to pass ordinances banning people from using fireworks.
Analysis: There is an inherent danger in aerial fireworks which cause a number of injuries and
pose a serious fire risk. Fireworks injuries in 2015 were the highest they have been in the last 10
years. 43% of the fireworks injuries in the past ten years happen to people 1-19 years of age
(children, teens, and young adults). Fire damage due to fireworks in 2014 was $1.75 million.
Position: Oppose the expansion of legal fireworks in Minnesota to include “aerial and audible”
Continued Health Insurance Coverage for Disabled Public Safety Officers (Request directed
to State Legislature)
Issue: MS299A.465 states that the employer is responsible for continued payment of their
contribution for health insurance coverage for police officers, firefighters, and dependents, if
applicable, that were disabled in the line of duty. The determination of disability in the line of
duty is made by the executive director of the Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA).
On October 1, 2013, the Minnesota Worker’s Compensation Act (MS 176.011) was amended to
include Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) as a compensable work comp injury if it arises out
of employment. This has resulted in a drastic increase in the number of employees who qualify for
this benefit. Although cities may request a reimbursement of the health insurance payments, only
a fraction is reimbursed from the Department of Public Safety, resulting in increasing costs due to
this unfunded mandate.
Position: The City of St. Louis Park does not have issues with this type of program. The questions
come with the interpretation of “in the line of duty” and also with funding of this unfunded
mandate.
• The city has six former public safety employees who qualify for continued payment of health
insurance. In some cases, there were questions about the intent of this language as it relates
to the term “injury in the line of duty.” For example, should a slip and fall in the office be
considered “in the line of duty?”
• The city has only been partially reimbursed for the cost of this mandate, and requests that
this program be fully funded by the state.
Permit to Purchase Firearms/Permit to Carry
Issue: Currently the Permits to Purchase Firearms statute (MN Stat. 624.7131; 624.7132) requires
local law enforcement agencies to complete required background checks within 7 days and the
Permit to Carry (MN Stat. 624.714) statute requires the County Sheriff’s Department to complete
the required background checks within 30 days.
Analysis: The St. Louis Park Police Department completes approximately 300 permits to purchase
background checks per year. Aligning the two statutes to require the background checks to be
done in 30 days would allow local law enforcement agencies more time to complete thorough
background checks and also reduce the number of applicants who act on impulse for a permit to
purchase a firearm.
Position: St. Louis Park supports aligning the Permits to Purchase Firearms statutes (MN Stat.
624.7131; 624.7132) with the Permit to Carry (MN Stat. 624.714) statute in terms of the time
required for conducting background checks (from 7 to 30 days).
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 11
[10]
Protecting the Privacy and Safety of Public Officials and Peace Officers
Issue: Only five states (FL, CO, CA, ID, TX) have a law prohibiting the publishing, posting,
promotion of peace officers' and other public officials' home addresses, phones, spouse's addresses,
other contact information, etc., with intent to cause harm or harassment. Minnesota has no such
law, presenting an opportunity to join other states showing a commitment to protecting public
officials and peace officers from having their personal information, spousal information, and other
info published and/or shared on social media, with the intention of causing harassment or harm.
Analysis: This is increasingly a concern for public officials and law enforcement when those
seeking to cause harm recklessly share or publish emails or other correspondence that includes
personal information. Any measure that reduces the threat of reporters or demonstrators showing
up at public officials homes or those of relatives is a great option for addition to our
statutes. Statutes that include the component requiring the publication or posting to be done WITH
INTENT to cause harassment or harm seem likely to be more useful and defensible in the courts.
Colorado's law can be found here:
http://www.leg.state.co.us/clics/clics2009a/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/44EE4D5921D1B7248725757400
783E91?open&file=1316_enr.pdf. With the proliferation of social media, there have been several
instances where public officials personal information was disseminated to cause harm. For
example, after the unfortunate death of Eric Garner in New York, the decedent’s daughter tweeted
the home address of one of the involved officers to 5,000 Twitter followers who, in turn, re-tweeted
this 500+ times.
Position: This issue can affect any public official and Police Officers, when opposing sides of a
discourse attract an element that wants to cause harm or harassment. The City supports an effort
in Minnesota to add this protection to public officials’ privacy and the safety of their families.
General Issues
Local Control (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: Cities are often laboratories for determining public policy approaches to the challenges that
face citizens. Success in providing for the basic needs of a functional society is rooted in local
control to determine how best to respond to the ever-changing needs of a citizenry. Because city
government most directly impacts the lives of people, and representative democracy ensures that
locally elected officials are held accountable for their decisions through local elections, local
governments must have sufficient authority and flexibility to meet the challenges of governing and
providing citizens with public services.
Position: Individual communities should be allowed to tailor their services to meet the unique
needs of their citizens without mandates and policy restrictions imposed by state and federal policy
makers. The state should recognize that local governments, of all sizes, are often the first to identify
problems and inventive solutions to solve them, and should encourage further innovation by
increasing local control. The state should not enact initiatives that erode the fundamental principle
of local control in cities across Minnesota.
Levy Limits (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: During the 2008 legislative session, levy limits were imposed for three years (2009-2011)
on cities over 2,500 in population.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 12
[11]
A one-time levy limit was applied to taxes levied in 2013, payable in 2014, only. This was in effect
for all counties with a population of 5,000 and over and cities with a population of 2,500 and over.
All cities with a population less than 2,500, all towns and all special taxing districts were exempt
from the limits.
Levy limits replace local accountability with a state judgment about the appropriate level of local
taxation and local services. Additionally, state restrictions on local budgets can have a negative
effect on a city’s bond rating due to the restriction on revenue flexibility.
Position: St. Louis Park opposes efforts to establish a levy limit or other proposed restrictions for
local government budgets. Based on our legislative policies that strongly support local budgetary
decision making, St. Louis Park opposes levy limits of any type.
Local Government Aid (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: St. Louis Park supports the LGA program as a means of ensuring all cities are able to
provide basic services without over-burdening the property tax system. In 2003 St. Louis Park
had its entire LGA allocation cut – approximately $2 million/yr. Several years ago a portion of
this cut was restored – approximately $500,000/yr. This funding has been extremely helpful,
particularly related to replacing aging infrastructure and equipment.
Position: St. Louis Park strongly opposes reductions of LGA
Legal Notices – Eliminate Requirement for Paid Publication (Request directed to State
Legislature)
Issue: Current law requires print ads for “proceedings, official notices, and summaries” in local
newspapers. In the 2011 Session, House File 162 called for allowing political subdivisions (cities,
counties, school boards, etc.) to replace the print ads with a single annual notice stating that all
such notices would appear on the political subdivision’s website (i.e. the city website).
Position: The city continues to support the elimination of this requirement, which would save cities
thousands of dollars in annual publishing costs. Publishing legal notices on the city website instead
allows the potential to reach a much greater audience in St. Louis Park than via the local
newspaper, which only reaches about half of the community. Additionally, businesses working
with the city or bidding on city projects find it cumbersome to monitor many different publications.
The city is currently publishing its legal notices at www.stlouispark.org in addition to publishing
them in the official newspaper.
Emerald Ash Borer – (Request directed to State Legislature)
Issue: Emerald Ash Borer (EAB) is the most destructive and economically costly forest pest ever
to invade North America. Ash trees killed by EAB become brittle very quickly and will begin to
fall apart and threaten overhead cables and power lines, vehicles, buildings and people. Few cities
are prepared and no city can easily afford the costs and the liability threats resulting from EAB.
Peer-reviewed studies have confirmed that a coordinated, landscape-based strategy is more cost
effective than fighting EAB city by city.
Position: St. Louis Park supports state funding to provide technical assistance and matching grants
to communities for EAB management/removal costs and related practices.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 13
[12]
Records Retention Related to Correspondence
Issue: HF 1185 was introduced during the 2017 legislative session relating to data practices that
included changing the definition of “correspondence” in government record retention law to
include social media and text messaging and requiring a minimum three-year retention period for
correspondence.
Analysis: The proposed bill was designed to provide a statewide standard retention period for
correspondence. Concerns with the bill include an unfunded mandate on cities (especially small
ones) to meet the new requirements, and the burden of including social media and text messaging
in the definition of correspondence. Social media and text messaging capture typically requires
separate capture software / hardware than email, and thus contributes to increased costs.
Position: The city opposes the bill in its current form. State provided funding and restricting the
definition of correspondence to email at this point would be helpful. Delaying full inclusion of
social media and text messaging to future years so the State can include funding options (and
possibly some standards) would also be helpful. The city does support a standard correspondence
retention period and feels the proposed 3 year minimum is reasonable. That said, not every city is
funded or technically ready to do this. As a result, the city currently endorses the LMC position on
the role that should be fulfilled by existing records retention requirements. The current LMC
position is to oppose HF 1185.
Telecommunications and Information Technology
Issue: Telecommunications and information technology is essential public infrastructure for the
efficient, equitable, and affordable delivery of local government services to residents and
businesses. Telecommunications includes voice, video, data, and services delivered over cable,
telephone, fiber-optic, wireless, and all other platforms.
Analysis: The city and League of Minnesota Cities supports a balanced approach to
telecommunications policy that allows new technologies to flourish while preserving local
regulatory authority. Regulations and oversight of telecommunications services are important
prerogatives for local government to advance community interests, including the provision of high
quality basic services that meet local needs, spur economic development, and are available at
affordable rates to all consumers. For the City of St. Louis Park, this is also consistent with its
priority efforts to advance racial equity and to be a technology connected community. Supportive
policies should also not diminish local authority to work cooperatively with other public agencies,
non-profit organizations, and the private sector to broaden choice and competition of
telecommunications services to meet local needs.
Position: The city opposes the adoption of state and federal policies that restrict cities’ ability to
finance, construct, or operate telecommunications networks.
Competitive Cable Franchising Authority
Issue: Despite claims made by some in the cable industry, studies and evidence to date do not
support that state franchising is the solution for competition, lower consumer rates, and improved
customer service. Unlike the exercise of local franchising authority, state franchising models
frequently make no provision for staffing at the state level or for effective resolution of consumer
complaints. The transmission of video signals, regardless of how they are transported, remains
subject to local franchising authority. Maintaining local franchising most effectively creates and
preserves agreements that guarantee broad access to services throughout the community, ensuring
there is no digital divide for access to video programming services.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 14
[13]
Analysis: State policy should maintain local cable franchise authority and oversight of the rights-
of-way, as well as ensure franchise agreements reflect new technology, and are reasonably tailored
to the technical and operational differences among providers and communities. Independent
studies clearly demonstrate that statewide franchising does not increase direct competition to
incumbent cable franchisees. In Minnesota, there are markets throughout the state with two
franchised cable service providers, which is further proof that state cable franchising is neither
necessary nor warranted in Minnesota. The Legislature, Federal Communications Commission
(FCC), and Congress should also continue to recognize, support and maintain the exercise of local
franchising authority to encourage increased competition between incumbent cable system
operators and new wireline competitive video service providers including: maintaining provisions
in Minn. Stat. ch. 238 that establish and uphold local franchising authority, including the authority
to receive a gross revenues based franchise fee and local authority over areas including: control
and access to public rights-of-way by all video and cable service providers; fees on providers to
ensure the provision of public, educational, and governmental (PEG) programming; video
channels and video streaming for PEG programming equivalent to that of the local broadcast
stations; ensuring programming is accessible and searchable through detailed Electronic
Programming Guide listings that are equivalent to that of local broadcast stations; access to
capacity on institutional networks (I-Nets) provided by local cable system operators for public
safety communications, libraries, schools, and other public institutions; and strengthening local
authority to enforce customer service standards and transparency in pricing.
Position: Given the depth and breadth of cable TV PEG operations and subscribership in St. Louis
Park, and the fact that franchise negotiations will likely begin no later than early 2019, the city
endorses this League of Minnesota Cities policy position.
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 4)
Title: Updated Draft 2018 Legislative Agenda Page 15
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Written Report: 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. This report is to inform the City Council of
activities related to the city’s update of the Comprehensive Plan.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. Please inform staff of any questions.
SUMMARY: The process of updating the city’s Comprehensive Plan for 2040 has begun, and the
Neighborhood Planning Workshops were held in November at four locations around the
community. The workshops were well attended, with 140 people participating from nearly every
neighborhood in the city.
At the workshops community members worked together by neighborhood on a game board that
had a map of their neighborhood and questions to answer around the perimeter. In addition there
was a community survey with the same question posted on the city’s website. The survey had
1,083 responses.
Attached is the draft report of the Neighborhood Workshops input from our consultant HKGi.
Additional data analysis of the survey responses is not yet completed and will be added to this
report. You can see that a few of the common themes that we heard included: requests for
additional and safer pedestrian crossings of high traffic intersections, more pedestrian lighting,
affordable housing, revitalizing commercial areas, additional gathering spaces and. improvement
of natural areas and parks.
In the spring there will be additional community engagement opportunities. The exact organization
of those workshops will be determined by the information in the draft Comprehensive Plan, which
will be largely in a draft form at that time.
Work on many sections of the Plan is progressing and a working schedule is attached. Staff is
working with the Planning Commission as the primary responsible commission, and with other
commissions on specific items.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The contract for the planning consultant has
been executed and funding for this has been allocated in the 2017 and 2018 community
development budgets.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Draft Neighborhood Planning Input Report
Comprehensive Plan Project Schedule
Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Principal Planner
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park 2040
ST. LOUIS PARK 2040 PLAN
DRAFT COMMUNITY INPUT REPORT
DECEMBER 2017
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 2
i St. Louis Park 2040
CONTENTS
COMMUNITY INPUT PROCESS 1
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AREAS
AND NEIGHBORHOODS...............................................................................................................1
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING WORKSHOPS..................................................................................2
NEIGHBORHOOD FEATURES GAME..............................................................................................3
ONLINE NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING SURVEY.............................................................................5
DEVELOPMENT............................................................................................................................7
PEOPLE........................................................................................................................................8
MOBILITY.....................................................................................................................................9
ENVIRONMENT...........................................................................................................................10
SUMMARY OF QUESTION RESPONSES 7
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 3
ii Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
SUMMARY OF MAPPING RESPONSES 11
CENTRAL....................................................................................................................................11
EAST CENTRAL..........................................................................................................................13
SOUTHEAST...............................................................................................................................15
SOUTHWEST...............................................................................................................................17
WEST CENTRAL..........................................................................................................................19
NORTHEAST................................................................................................................................21
NORTHWEST...............................................................................................................................23
Prepared by HKGi, project consultants
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 4
1 St. Louis Park 2040
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
AREAS AND NEIGHBORHOODS
A Comprehensive plan is an official document that
guides the future of the city. The City of St. Louis Park
has begun the process of creating a 2040 Plan, an
update to its 2030 Comprehensive Plan. The 2040 Plan
will build on the Vision 3.0 foundation, completed in
2017, and integrate it into the plan elements of land
use and development planning, housing goals and
strategies, transportation and mobility planning, parks
and trail planning, public facilities, equity, economic
development, and environmental sustainability.
The City of St. Louis Park has defined 35
neighborhoods that encompass the entire land area
of the City. In 2009, residents of these neighborhoods
provided important feedback and comments for
the Plan by Neighborhood chapter of the 2030
Comprehensive Plan. Because it is important to
address future development and planning at a
neighborhood scale, the 2040 Plan project team has
engaged the neighborhoods for the initial phase of
community engagement for this project.
The 35 neighborhoods have been grouped
geographically into 7 Neighborhood Planning Areas
(NPAs), as shown in Figure 1.
Bass
Lake
Harriet
Lake
Cemetery
Lake
Calhoun
Lake
Sweeney-Twin Lake
Sweeney-Twin
Lake
Wirth
Lake
Brownie
Lake
Cedar
Lake
Lake of the
Isles Lake
Edina Mill
Pond Lake
Victoria
Lake
Hannan
Lake
Unnamed
(Cobblecrest)
Lake
Meadowbrook
Lake
Mirror
Lake Mirror
Lake
Windsor
Lake
Unnamed
Lake
Shady
Oak
Lake
Spring
Lake Loring
Lake
Twin
Lake
Unnamed
Lake
Unnamed
Lake
Wolfe
Park
Lake
Highland Park
Pond Lake
Westwood
Lake
Unnamed
(Cedar
Manor) Lake
Unnamed
Lake
Unnamed
Lake
Unnamed
(Crane)
Lake
Unnamed
Lake
Unnamed
Lake
Lake
LakeLake
Lake
Lake Lake
Lake LakeLake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
Lake
R o y a l s t o nR o y a l s t o n
A v e / F a r m e r sA v e / F a r m e r s
M a r k e t S t a t i o nM a r k e t S t a t i o n
B a s s e t tB a s s e t t
C r e e k V a l l e yC r e e k V a l l e y
S t a t i o n
S t a t i o n
B r y n M a w rB r y n M a w r
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
W e s t L a k e
W e s t L a k e
S t r e e t
S t r e e t
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
B e l t l i n e B l v d S t a t i o nB e l t l i n e B l v d S t a t i o n
W o o d d a l e
W o o d d a l e
A v e n u e
A v e n u e
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
L o u i s i a n aL o u i s i a n a
A v e n u eA v e n u e
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
B l a k e R o a dB l a k e R o a d
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
D o w n t o w nD o w n t o w n
H o p k i n s
H o p k i n s
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
S h a d y O a kS h a d y O a k
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
P e n n
P e n n
A v e n u e
A v e n u e
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
V a n W h i t eV a n W h i t e
B o u l e v a r dB o u l e v a r d
S t a t i o n
S t a t i o n
W e s t 2 1 s t
W e s t 2 1 s t
S t r e e t
S t r e e t
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
O l s o nO l s o n
& P e n n& P e n n
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
O l s o n &
O l s o n &
H u m b o l d t
H u m b o l d t
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
O l s o n &O l s o n &
B r y a n tB r y a n t
S t a t i o n
S t a t i o n
O l s o n &O l s o n &
7 t h S t r e e t
7 t h S t r e e t
S t a t i o nS t a t i o n
N o r t h e a s tN o r t h e a s t
N o r t h w e s tN o r t h w e s t
E a s t
E a s t
C e n t r a lC e n t r a l
C e n t r a lC e n t r a l
W e s tW e s t
C e n t r a l
C e n t r a l
S o u t h w e s tS o u t h w e s t
S o u t h e a s t
S o u t h e a s t
Shelard
Park
Kilmer
Pond Blackstone
Westdale
Westwood
Hills
EliotPennsylvania
Park
Crestview
Cedarhurst
Lake
ForestEliot
ViewWillow
Park
Birchwood
Cedar
Manor
Bronx
Park Fern
HillTexa
Tonka
Cobblecrest
Lenox SorensenOak Hill
Aquila
Triangle
Minnehaha
Amhurst
Elmwood
Minikahda
Vista
South
Oak Hill
BrooklawnsMeadowbrook
Browndale
BrooksideCreekside
Minikhada
OaksWolfe
Park
´3,000
Feet
COMMUNITY INPUT PROCESS
Figure 1. Neighborhood Planning Areas
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 5
2 Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
WORKSHOPS
The initial phase of community engagement
for the 2040 plan included four Neighborhood
Planning Workshops, aimed at covering the
seven Neighborhood Planning Areas and all 35
neighborhoods.
Turnout for the Neighborhood Workshops was high;
over 130 residents participated, with 50 residents
attending the meeting on November 28th for the
Central and West Central Planning areas.
The Workshops were 1.5 hours long and were located
at community centers specific to the Neighborhood
Planning Areas.
DATE # OF PARTICIPANTS NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING
AREA NEIGHBORHOODS
11/14/17 36
EAST CENTRAL
LAKE FOREST
FERN HILL
TRIANGLE
SOUTHEAST
WOLFE PARK
MINIKAHDA OAKS
MINIKAHDA VISTA
BROWNDALE
11/16/17 21 SOUTHWEST
BROOKLAWNS
BROOKSIDE
CREEKSIDE
ELMWOOD
MEADOWBROOK
SOUTH OAK HILL
11/28/17 50
CENTRAL
BIRCHWOOD
BRONX PARK
LENOX
SORENSON
WEST CENTRAL
AMHURST
COBBLECREST
MINNEHAHA
OAK HILL
TEXA TONKA
11/30/17 26
NORTHEAST
BLACKSTONE
CEDARHURST
ELIOT
ELIOT VIEW
NORTHWEST
CEDAR MANOR
CRESTVIEW
KILMER POND
PENNSYLVANIA PARK
SHELARD PARK
WESTDALE
WESTWOOD HILLS
WILLOW PARK
Table 1. Neighborhood Planning Workshops
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 6
3 St. Louis Park 2040
COMMUNITY INPUT PROCESS
NEIGHBORHOOD FEATURES
GAME
The Neighborhood Planning Workshops consisted
of a short presentation given by City planning staff
and the project consultants. Then participants were
divided into tables by their neighborhoods to play
the Neighborhood Features Game. This game was
designed to gather input from residents about their
preferences for future developments, as well as to
gather common issues and opportunities that exist
in the topics of Development, People, Mobility, and
Environmental Assets. Within each topic, participants
answered three questions and worked around the
board to complete.
Participants also used dot stickers to mark places
in their neighborhood where they would like to
see future development, where they experience
challenges getting around, where they typically gather
with friends and neighbors, as well as locating key
environmental assets.
Summaries of the dot-mapping by Neighborhood
Planning Areas are located on pages 9 - 22 of this
document. STARTIntroduce yourself to your teammates Please print clearlyThanks and have fun!BREAK You should be halfway done with your time. Take a break and stretch.You are doing great! FINISH!!Where are your neighborhood’s existing and potential gathering places?Mark the locations with a blue dotWhere are your
neighborhood’s
environmental
assets?
Mark the locations with a
green dot NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERNEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERWhat are the most important features of your neighborhood’s character that should be preserved? EDUCATION / LIFE-LONG LEARNINGIn what ways could educational opportunities be improved for neighborhood residents of all ages, incomes, and races?HEALTH + SAFETY SOCIAL CONNECTIONSCOMMERCIALCOMMERCIALWhat kind of commercial businesses (retail, service, restaurant) would you like to see in or near your neighborhood?HOUSINGHOUSINGAre there housing issues or opportunities (e.g. affordability, maintenance, size) in your neighborhood? If so, what are they?MOBILITYWhere are there challenges for getting around easily and safely in your neighborhood? Mark the location with a red dotWhere do you live?Mark the location with a yellow dotDRIVING DRIVING What would make getting around by car more desirable in your neighborhood?WALKING + BIKINGWALKING + BIKINGWhat would make your neighborhood more desirable for walking and biking?TRANSITTRANSITWhat transit services would improve your neigbhorhood?NATURAL AREAS ENVIRONMENT +
SUSTAINABILITY PARKS + RECREATION PARKS + RECREATION
What park and recreation facilities do you use? Are
there any changes you would suggest?EDUCATION / LIFE-LONG LEARNINGHEALTH + SAFETY What would make your neighborhood a healthier and safer place to live?SOCIAL CONNECTIONSWhat would increase opportunities for neighborhood residents to connect with each other?NATURAL AREAS
How could the natural environment (lakes, wetlands, trees, open spaces, air) be
improved in your neighborhood?
ENVIRONMENT +
SUSTAINABILITY
What are your biggest concerns or priorities regarding the environment or
sustainability in your neighborhood?GROUPNames:Where are potential sites for future new development in your neighborhood? Mark the location with an orange dotPLANNING AREA:
NEIGHBORHOOD(S): ____________________________
DATE:___________________UnnamedLakeUnnamedLake")100")7L o u i s i a n aL o u i s i a n aA v e n u eA v e n u eS t a t i o nS t a t i o n36th Street WestHighway7WooddaleAvenueMinnetonkaBoulevardLouisianaAvenueSouthHighway100South23rdStreetWestParkCenterBoulevardCountyRoad2528th Street WestDakotaAvenueSouthWalkerStreetBarry StreetLake Street WestEdgewoodAvenueSouthCedarLakeRoadAlabamaAvenueSouthStateHighway100FrontageRoadWestside DriveTrafficCircle
StateHighway7FrontageRoadLibrary Lane31st Street WestTaftAvenueSouth33rdStreetWestWebsterAvenueSouthHampshireAvenueSouth26th Street WestVernonAvenue SouthCamerata WayGeorgiaAvenueSouthToledoAvenueSouthOakLeafCourtColoradoAvenueSouthGorhamAvenue27th Street WestKentuckyLane29th Street WestZarthanAvenueSouth28th Street West1st Street NorthwestHamilton Street34thStreetWest25 1/2 Street West22nd Street West24th Street West32ndStreetWestXenwoodAvenueSouthRepublic AvenueHighway7UticaAvenueSouthOxford StreetEliot View Road37thStreetWestWalkerStreet35th Street West36thStreetWestBrunswickAvenueSouth23rdStreetWestBrownlow AvenueKentuckyAvenueSouthLouisianaCourtOakLeafDriveBlackstoneAvenueSouthNevadaAvenueSouthJerseyAvenueSouthMarylandAvenueSouthAlabamaAvenueSout
hIdahoAvenueSouthFloridaAvenueSouthEdgewoodAvenueSouthSalemAvenueSouthYosemiteAvenueSouthOakParkVillageDriveMonitor StreetStateHighway100FrontageRoadUticaAvenueRi
dgeDriveTrafficCircleHighway100FrontageRoadDakotaParkWolfeParkNelsonParkBirchwoodParkSunshineParkRoxburyParkKeystoneParkCenterParkFreedomParkParkviewParkJorvigParkWebsterParkNorthsideParkCedarKnollParkLouisianaOaksBronxParkEdgebrookParkLilacParkBlackstoneEliotCedarhurstLakeForestEliotViewWillowParkBirchwoodBronxParkFernHillTexaTonkaLenoxSorensenOak HillTriangleElmwoodSouthOak HillBrooklawnsWolfePark Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User CommunityNEIGHBORHOOD FEATURES GAME CENTRALN
DEVELOPMENTDEVELOPMENTPEOPLEPEOPLEMOBILITYMOBILITY
ENVIRONMENTENVIRONMENTFigure 2. Neighborhood
Features Gameboard
Neighborhood
Features Game at
a Neighborhood
Planning Workshop
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 7
4 Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
Male, 44.61%
Female, 46.15%
Not specified, 9.23% Male
Female
Not specified
Aquila
Birchwood
Blackstone
Bronx Park
Brooklawns
Brookside
Browndale
Cedar Manor
Cedarhurst
Cobblecrest
Creekside
Eliot
Eliot View
Elmwood Fern Hill Lake Forest
Lenox
Minikhada Oaks
Minikhada Vista
Minnehaha
Oak Hill
Pennsylvania Park
Sorenson
Texa Tonka
Triangle
Westwood Hills Willow Park Wolfe Park
AquilaBirchwood
Blackstone
Bronx Park
Brooklawns
Brookside
Browndale
Cedar Manor
Cedarhurst
Cobblecrest
Creekside
Eliot
Eliot View
Elmwood
Fern Hill
Lake Forest
Lenox
Minikhada Oaks
Minikhada Vista
Minnehaha
Oak Hill
Pennsylvania Park
Sorenson
Texa Tonka
Triangle
Westwood Hills
Willow Park
Wolfe Park
Figure 3. Workshop Participation by Neighborhood
Figure 4. Workshop Participation by Gender
Figure 5. Workshop Participation by Race and Ethnicity
Figure 6. Workshop Participation by Age
133
WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
5.38%
2.31%
0.77%
91.54%
0%20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Other race, ethnicity or origin
Black or African American
Asian
White
Other race, ethnicity or origin
Black or African American
Asian
White
10.77%
30.77%
16.92%
14.62%
16.92%
9.23%
0.76%
0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%
75+
65-74
55-64
45-54
35-44
25-34
18-24
75+
65-74
55-64
45-54
35-44
25-34
18-24
Male,
44.61%
Not specified, 9.23%
Female,
46.15%
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 8
5 St. Louis Park 2040
ONLINE NEIGHBORHOOD
PLANNING SURVEY
With the intention of gathering as much input as
possible, and the understanding that many people
may not be able to attend a Neighborhood Planning
Workshop, an online survey was created and launched
concurrent with the workshops. Over the course
of one month (Nov. 16th - Dec. 15th, 2017) 1,083
residents participated in the online survey.
The survey questions were structured similar to the
questions asked on the Neighborhood Features Game.
Additonal demographic information was gathered, in
the online survey, as well as information about each
participant’s neighborhood. Out of 35 neighborhoods,
all but one were represented in the online survey.
Pages 7 through 14 of this document summarize the
main themes gathered through the online survey and
the gameboard activity at the Neighborhood Planning
Workshops.
0.09%1
4.36%47
6.50%70
1.02%11
6.41%69
2.51%27
Q1 Which neighborhood do you live in? If you are not sure which
neighborhood you live in, follow this link to view a map: Neighborhood
Map
Answered: 1,077 Skipped: 6
Amhurst
Amhurst
Amhurst
Amhurst
Amhurst
Amhurst
Amhurst
Aquila
Aquila
Aquila
Aquila
Aquila
Aquila
Aquila
Birchwood
Birchwood
Birchwood
Birchwood
Birchwood
Birchwood
Birchwood
Blackstone
Blackstone
Blackstone
Blackstone
Blackstone
Blackstone
Blackstone
Bronx Park
Bronx Park
Bronx Park
Bronx Park
Bronx Park
Bronx Park
Bronx Park
Brooklawns
Brooklawns
Brooklawns
Brooklawns
Brooklawns
Brooklawns
Brooklawns
Brookside
Brookside
Brookside
Brookside
Brookside
Brookside
Brookside
Browndale
Browndale
Browndale
Browndale
Browndale
Browndale
Browndale
Cedar Manor
Cedar Manor
Cedar Manor
Cedar Manor
Cedar Manor
Cedar Manor
Cedar Manor
Cedarhurst
Cedarhurst
Cedarhurst
Cedarhurst
Cedarhurst
Cedarhurst
Cedarhurst
Cobblecrest
Cobblecrest
Cobblecrest
Cobblecrest
Cobblecrest
Cobblecrest
Cobblecrest
Creekside
Creekside
Creekside
Creekside
Creekside
Creekside
Creekside
Crestview
Crestview
Crestview
Crestview
Crestview
Crestview
Crestview
Eliot
Eliot
Eliot
Eliot
Eliot
Eliot
Eliot
Eliot View
Eliot View
Eliot View
Eliot View
Eliot View
Eliot View
Eliot View
Elmwood
Elmwood
Elmwood
Elmwood
Elmwood
Elmwood
Elmwood
Fern Hill
Fern Hill
Fern Hill
Fern Hill
Fern Hill
Fern Hill
Fern HillKilmer
Kilmer
Kilmer
Kilmer
Kilmer
Kilmer
Kilmer
Lake Forest
Lake Forest
Lake Forest
Lake Forest
Lake Forest
Lake Forest
Lake Forest
Lenox
Lenox
Lenox
Lenox
Lenox
Lenox
Lenox
Meadowbrook
Meadowbrook
Meadowbrook
Meadowbrook
Meadowbrook
Meadowbrook
Meadowbrook
Minikahda Oaks
Minikahda Oaks
Minikahda Oaks
Minikahda Oaks
Minikahda Oaks
Minikahda Oaks
Minikahda Oaks
Minikahda Vista
Minikahda Vista
Minikahda Vista
Minikahda Vista
Minikahda Vista
Minikahda Vista
Minikahda Vista
Minnehaha
Minnehaha
Minnehaha
Minnehaha
Minnehaha
Minnehaha
Minnehaha
Oak Hill
Oak Hill
Oak Hill
Oak Hill
Oak Hill
Oak Hill
Oak Hill
Pennsylvania Park
Pennsylvania Park
Pennsylvania Park
Pennsylvania Park
Pennsylvania Park
Pennsylvania Park
Pennsylvania Park
Sorensen
Sorensen
Sorensen
Sorensen
Sorensen
Sorensen
Sorensen
South Oak Hill
South Oak Hill
South Oak Hill
South Oak Hill
South Oak Hill
South Oak Hill
South Oak Hill
Texa-Tonka
Texa-Tonka
Texa-Tonka
Texa-Tonka
Texa-Tonka
Texa-Tonka
Texa-Tonka
Triangle
Triangle
Triangle
Triangle
Triangle
Triangle
Triangle
Westdale
Westdale
Westdale
Westdale
Westdale
Westdale
Westdale
Westwood Hills
Westwood Hills
Westwood Hills
Westwood Hills
Westwood Hills
Westwood Hills
Westwood Hills
Willow Park
Willow Park
Willow Park
Willow Park
Willow Park
Willow Park
Willow Park
Wolfe Park
Wolfe Park
Wolfe Park
Wolfe Park
Wolfe Park
Wolfe Park
Wolfe Park
ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Amhurst
Aquila
Birchwood
Blackstone
Bronx Park
Brooklawns
1 / 2
St. Louis Park 2040 Neighborhood Planning Survey
1,083
SURVEY RESPONSES
COMMUNITY INPUT PROCESS
Figure 7. Survey Participation by Date
Figure 8. Survey Participation by Neighborhood
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 9
6 Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
Figure 9. Survey Participation by Race and Ethnicity
Figure 10. Survey Participation by Gender
Figure 11. Survey Participation by Age
Female:
64.42%
Male:
35.58%
White
2.08%
1.39%
2.60%
1.04%
0.69%
0.52%
3.47%
94.10%
0.16%
0.32%
16.10%
23.35%
19.97%
21.74%
15.14%
3.22%
0%0%10%10%20%20%30%30%40%40%50%50%60%70%80%90% 100%
12-17 years old
18-24 years old
25-34 years old
35-44 years old
45-54 years old
55-64 years old
65-74 years old
75+ years old
Asian
Black or African
American
Hispanic, Latino or
Spanish origin
American Indian or
Alaska Native
Middle Eastern or
North African
Native Hawaiian or
Other Pacific Islander
Other race, ethnicity,
or origin
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 10
7 St. Louis Park 2040
1. NEIGHBORHOOD
CHARACTER
2. COMMERCIAL 3. HOUSING
What are the most important features
of your neighborhood’s character that
should be preserved?
What kind of commercial businesses
(retail, service, restaurant) would
you like to see in or near your
neighborhood?
Are there housing issues or
opportunities (e.g. affordability,
maintenance, size) in your
neighborhood? What are they?
»Parks and recreation facilities
»Trails/sidewalks
»Trees and green spaces
»Existing homes
»People
»Residential neighborhood environment
»Nearby businesses
»Accessibility / convenience
»Natural landscape
»Community services
»Schools
»Controlled growth
»Parking
»Transit
»History
»Retail & restaurant businesses
»Safety
»Restaurant/coffee shop
»Small/local
»Grocery
»Retail
»Mixed use
»Walkable businesses
»None: do not expand commercial
»Recreation/entertainment
»Compatibility with neighborhood
»Health clinic
»Improved sites/landscaping
»Accessible spaces
»Improved internet access
»Miscellaneous
»Shared working space
»Affordability
»Character of new single family houses
»Maintenance/upkeep needs
»Issues with rental properties
»More housing options wanted
»Increased density
»Maintain housing mix
»Scale of new multi family housing
»Non-residential uses of homes
»Preserve nature
»Environmental design
»Miscellaneous
»Mixed Use wanted
»Sidewalks
What we heard through the gameboard activity:What we heard through the gameboard activity:What we heard through the gameboard activity:
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update
SUMMARY OF QUESTION RESPONSES
DEVELOPMENT
The following is a summary of themes identified for each question posed for the gameboard activity. Themes are listed in order by prevalence.
Page 11
8 Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
PEOPLE
The following is a summary of themes identified for each question posed for the gameboard activity. Themes are listed in order by prevalence.
4. EDUCATION / LIFE-LONG
LEARNING
In what ways could educational
opportunities be improved for
neighborhood residents of all ages,
incomes, and races?
»Community education improvements
»Facility/program accessibility
»Improve facility/program communications
»Add new facilities
»Collaborate with school facilities
»Improve community center facilities
»Library improvements
»Park facility for educational programs
»School curriculum improvements
»Improve internet access
»Reduce fees
»Improve daycare options
»Improve transportation options
»Joint programs with other cities
»Park recreational programs
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
5. HEALTH + SAFETY
What would make your neighborhood a
healthier and safer place to live?
»Add & maintain sidewalks
»Reduce/calm vehicle traffic
»Improve ped/bike crossings
»Improve intersections
»Improve street/path lighting
»Increase police involvement
»Improve recreational options
»Improve transit services
»Protect air quality
»Support neighborhood interaction
»Improve ped/bike environment
»Reduce noise pollution
»Support complementary mix of land uses
»Improve trash facilities
»Miscellaneous
»Protect water quality
»Support access to healthy options
»Improve utility services
»Protect soil quality
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
6. SOCIAL CONNECTIONS
What would increase opportunities for
neighborhood residents to connect
with each other?
»Support neighborhood communications
»Add places for neighborhood gathering
»Increase neighborhood events/programming
»Improve internet access
»Add benches / places to sit
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 12
9 St. Louis Park 2040
SUMMARY OF QUESTION RESPONSES
MOBILITY
The following is a summary of themes identified for each question posed for the gameboard activity. Themes are listed in order by prevalence.
7. WALKING + BIKING 8. TRANSIT 9. DRIVING
What would make your neighborhood
more desirable for walking and biking?
What transit services would improve
your neighborhood?
What would make getting around
by car more desirable in your
neighborhood?
»Add & maintain sidewalks
»Improve ped/bike crossings
»Add/improve bike facilities
»Improve sidewalk/trail safety
»Reduce/calm vehicle traffic
»Add ped/bike bridge
»Expand trail system
»Improve street/path lighting
»Improve/maintain walkability
»Improve intersection safety
»Improve street parking
»Improve trails
»Miscellaneous
»Increase/improve bus service
»Develop light rail line
»Add/improve bus shelters
»Add shuttle/circulator service
»Add/improve bike facilities
»Improve intersection safety
»Reduce/calm vehicle traffic
»Improve street parking
»Add/improve street connections
»Improve intersection congestion
»Street maintenance
»Increase non-motorized travel
»Reduce cut-through traffic
»Improve bike facilities
»Improve street/path lighting
»Increase environmental vehicle options
»Improve driveway access
»Improve intersection safety
»Increase police involvement
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 13
10 Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
ENVIRONMENT
The following is a summary of themes identified for each question posed for the gameboard activity. Themes are listed in order by prevalence.
10. NATURAL AREAS
How could the natural environment
(lakes, wetlands, trees, open spaces,
air be improved in your neighborhood?
»Tree planting, replacement, treatment
»Pond/wetland/lake maintenance
»Preserve/improve green spaces
»Add green spaces
»Minnehaha Creek improvements
»Decrease invasive vegetation
»Preserve/improve walkability
»Increase native vegetation
»Increase pollinator-friendly habitats
»Miscellaneous
»Noise pollution
»Litter management
»Stormwater quality
»Soil contamination issues
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
11. ENVIRONMENT +
SUSTAINABILITY
What are your biggest concerns or
priorities regarding the environment or
sustainability in your neighborhood?
»Increase / improve recycling
»Water quality
»Tree planting, replacement, treatment
»Stormwater management
»Litter management
»Manage development density
»Noise pollution
»Soil contamination issues
»Water conservation
»Invasive plants
»Light pollution
»Minnehaha Creek improvements
»Renewable energy
»Manage traffic
»Miscellaneous
»Preserve/improve/add green spaces
»Air quality
»Increase pollinator-friendly habitats
»Pond/wetland/lake maintenance
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
12. PARKS + RECREATION
What park and recreation facilities do
you use? Are there any changes you
would suggest?
»Existing park
»Add indoor park facilities
»Existing trails
»Westwood Nature Center
»Miscellaneous
»Park facilities for all ages
»Rec Center
»Add park amenities
»Add/improve dog park
»Park maintenance
»Playground
»Add trails
»Add community gardens
»Aquatic facilities
»Ice rink
»Playfields
»Skiing
»Trail lighting
»Add park near Knollwood
»Community rec programs
What we heard through the gameboard activity:
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 14
11 St. Louis Park 2040
CENTRAL
There were 24 gameboard participants at the
Neighborhood Planning Workshop representing the
Central Neighborhood Planning Area, which includes
four neighborhoods:
»Birchwood
»Bronx Park
»Lenox
»Sorenson
The following are take-aways from the dot-mapping
exercise:
»Potential future development sites are generally
preferred at the intersection of Lake Street and
Minnetonka Blvd, as well as near the Walker-Lake
area
»Gathering spaces within the Central Planning Area
have been identified near parks, St. Louis Park High
School, and businesses along Lake St, Minnehaha
Blvd and Louisiana Ave
»Difficult intersections that have been identified
align with busier traffic patterns
»Identified environmental assets are primarily linked
to existing parks and open spaces
“Where do you live?”“Where are potential sites for future new
development in your neighborhood?”
SUMMARY OF MAPPING RESPONSES
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 15
12 Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
“Where are your neighborhood’s existing and
potential gathering places?”
“Where are there challenges for getting around
easily and safely in your neighborhood?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s environmental
assets?”
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 16
13 St. Louis Park 2040
EAST CENTRAL
There were 7 gameboard participants at the
Neighborhood Planning Workshop representing the
East Central Neighborhood Planning Area, which
includes 3 neighborhoods:
»Lake Forest
»Fern Hill
»Triangle
The following are take-aways from the dot-mapping
exercise:
»Only one future development site was identified,
potentially signifying limited support for and/or
awareness of potential new development in the
area.
»Gathering spaces were identified in conjunction
with existing parks, open spaces, and businesses
along Minnetonka Blvd
»Difficult intersections were identified primarily
along Minnetonka Blvd and near Hwy 100
»Twin Lakes Park and Fern Hill Park are popular as
environmental assets for the area
“Where do you live?”“Where are potential sites for future new
development in your neighborhood?”
SUMMARY OF MAPPING RESPONSES
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 17
14 Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
“Where are your neighborhood’s existing and
potential gathering places?”
“Where are there challenges for getting around
easily and safely in your neighborhood?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s environmental
assets?”
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 18
15 St. Louis Park 2040
SOUTHEAST
There were 23 gameboard participants at the
Neighborhood Planning Workshop representing
the Southeast Neighborhood Planning Area, which
includes 4 neighborhoods:
»Browndale
»Minikahda Vista
»Minikahda Oaks
»Wolfe Park
The following are take-aways from the dot-mapping
exercise:
»Excelsior Blvd was identified as a popular roadway
for future development
»Businesses along Excelsior Blvd as well as
neighborhood parks and schools were identified as
gathering places
»Many difficult intersections were identified for all
modes of transportation, mainly along Excelsior
Boulevard, Monterey Dr./36th St and France Ave
»Wolfe Park and Bass Lake Preserve are extremely
popular as environmental assets for the area
“Where do you live?”“Where are potential sites for future new
development in your neighborhood?”
SUMMARY OF MAPPING RESPONSES
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 19
16 Neighborhood Input Report DEC ‘17
“Where are your neighborhood’s existing and
potential gathering places?”
“Where are there challenges for getting around
easily and safely in your neighborhood?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s environmental
assets?”
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 20
17 St. Louis Park 2040
SOUTHWEST
There were 20 gameboard participants at the
Neighborhood Planning Workshop representing
the Southwest Neighborhood Planning Area, which
includes 6 neighborhoods:
»Brooklawns
»Brookside
»Creekside
»Elmwood
»Meadowbrook
»South Oak Hill
The following are take-aways from the dot-mapping
exercise:
»Future development sites were identified mostly
along Excelsior Blvd
»Wooddale Ave at Hwy 7, Cedar Lake Trail, 36th
St and the future site of a LRT station have been
identified as a challenging intersection for bicyclists
and pedestrians, as well as along Excelsior Blvd at
Highway 100
»Bunny’s Bar and Grill, neighborhood parks and
churches were identified as popular gathering
places
»Environmental assets identified correspond to
Meadowbrook Park and Lake, Minnehaha Creek,
and neighborhood parks
“Where do you live?”
“Where are potential
sites for future new
development in your
neighborhood?”
SUMMARY OF MAPPING RESPONSES
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 21
18 Community Engagement Summary
“Where do you live?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s existing and potential gathering places?”
“Where are there
challenges for
getting around
easily and
safely in your
neighborhood?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s environmental assets?”
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 22
19 St. Louis Park 2040
WEST CENTRAL
There were 16 gameboard participants at the
Neighborhood Planning Workshop representing the
West Central Neighborhood Planning Area, which
includes 5 neigbhorhoods:
»Amhurst
»Cobblecrest
»Minnehaha
»Oak Hill
»Texa Tonka
The following are take-aways from the dot-mapping
exercise:
»Future development sites were primarily
identified at the intersection of Texas Avenue and
Minnetonka Blvd (Texa-Tonka), with an emphasis
on the surface parking lots located here
»Aquila Park, Oak Hill Park, Minnehaha Creek and
businesses along Minnetonka Blvd are popular
gathering places
»Many difficult roadway intersections were
identified in alignment with Cedar Lake Trail, as
well as West 36th St, Minnetonka Blvd, near Oak
Hill Park and along Knollwood Green
»Minnehaha Creek, Aquila Park, Oak Hill Park,
and Texa-Tonka Park were identified as a key
environmental asset for the area
“Where do you live?”
“Where are potential
sites for future new
development in your
neighborhood?”
SUMMARY OF MAPPING RESPONSES
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 23
20 Community Engagement Summary
“Where do you live?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s existing and potential gathering places?”
“Where are there
challenges for
getting around
easily and
safely in your
neighborhood?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s environmental assets?”
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 24
21 St. Louis Park 2040
NORTHEAST
There were 7 gameboard participants at the
Neighborhood Planning Workshop representing
the Northeast Neighborhood Planning Area, which
includes 4 neighborhoods:
»Blackstone
»Cedarhurst
»Eliot
»Eliot View
The following are take-aways from the dot-mapping
exercise:
»Few future development sites were identified, with
all located at the outskirts of the Neighborhood
Planning Area
»Popular gathering places were identified at
neighborhood parks and the Jewish Community
Center
»Difficult intersections were located along the
Cedar Lake Trail. Cedar Lake Rd, Louisiana Ave, Park
Place Blvd, and Highway 100
»Identified environmental assets include
neighborhood parks, Cedar Lake Trail corridor, and
Otten Pond
“Where do you live?”
“Where are potential
sites for future new
development in your
neighborhood?”
SUMMARY OF MAPPING RESPONSES
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 25
22 Community Engagement Summary
“Where do you live?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s existing and potential gathering places?”
“Where are there
challenges for
getting around
easily and
safely in your
neighborhood?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s environmental assets?”
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 26
23 St. Louis Park 2040
NORTHWEST
There were 13 gameboard participants at the
Neighborhood Planning Workshop representing
the Northwest Neighborhood Planning Area, which
includes 8 neighborhoods:
»Cedar Manor
»Crestview
»Kilmer Pond
»Pennsylvania Park
»Shelard Park
»Westdale
»Westwood Hills
»Willow Park
The following are take-aways from the dot-mapping
exercise:
»Only one future development site was identified,
at the intersection of Texas Avenue and Wayzata
Boulevard
»Popular gathering places were identified in
conjunction with Westwood Hills Nature Center,
Lamplighter Park, schools, and Minneapolis Golf
Club
»Difficult intersections were located along
Cedar Lake Road, at Texas Avenue and Wayzata
Boulevard, and near Lamplighter Park
»Westwood Hills Nature Center, Lamplighter Park,
Hannon Lake, Cedar Manor Park and Minneapolis
Golf Club were identified as key environmental
assets for the area
“Where do you live?”
“Where are potential
sites for future new
development in your
neighborhood?”
SUMMARY OF MAPPING RESPONSES
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 27
24 Community Engagement Summary
“Where do you live?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s existing and potential gathering places?”
“Where are there
challenges for
getting around
easily and
safely in your
neighborhood?”
“Where are your neighborhood’s environmental assets?”
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 28
St. Louis Park 2040
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 29
TASK OCT NOV DEC JAN’18 FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL-DEC
TASK 1:
Establish Framework for 2040 Plan and
Process
TASK 2:
Update Where We Are Today
TASK 3:
Conduct Community Engagement Round 1
TASK 4:
Update Where We Are Headed
TASK 5:
Update Plan by Neighborhood Chapter
TASK 6:
Conduct Community Engagement Round 2
TASK 7:
Prepare Complete Draft of 2040
Comprehensive Plan
TASK 8:
Gain Approval of Draft 2040 Comprehensive
Plan
TASK 9:
Prepare Final 2040 Comprehensive Plan
MEETINGS
City Staff
Planning Commission
Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission
(PRAC)
Environment & Sustainability Commission
(ESC)
City Council
Neighborhood Planning Areas (7)
Stakeholders
Online Survey
ST. LOUIS PARK 2040 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Project Schedule (Updated 1/16/2018)
ESC + PRAC Invited
Public Hearing & Action
Action to send Draft Plan
out for Review
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 5)
Title: 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Page 30
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Written Report: 6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Historic Walker-Lake Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Do the Walker-Lake initiatives identified in this report meet with
council’s expectations and does the Council support staff’s continued work in this business area?
SUMMARY: The following discussion provides a summary of all the initiatives and activities
that are currently underway in Historic Walker-Lake and identifies next steps. The summary
includes information on Historic Walker-Lake grant activities, the Walker building, Perspectives,
The Nest, Historical Society Space, the Holiday Train, Walker-Lake Street reconstruction, design
guidelines, and the comprehensive plan update.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Julie Grove, Economic Development Specialist
Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner
Jennifer Monson, Planner
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Deb Heiser, Engineering Director
Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager, EDA Executive Director
Page 2 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 6)
Title: Historic Walker-Lake Update
DISCUSSION
SUMMARY:
Moving the Market Grant
For the past two years staff has been working with the businesses, high school and community
members in the Walker-Lake Street area to promote and rejuvenate the area neighborhood and
businesses. In November 2016, the city was awarded a $35,000 “Moving the Market” grant from
Hennepin County to help reactivate the Walker/Lake business area. Since then, staff has been
working with stakeholders on grant activates through focus group meetings, surveys,
neighborhood meetings, an open street event and email correspondence. Grant activities include:
•Brand Development: The city engaged
Nemer Fieger and a focus group,
consisting of business owners, property
owners and neighborhood residents, for
planning, research and design concepts.
"Historic Walker Lake" was selected as
the name for the area. A brand logo was
designed and will be used in way finding
and placemaking elements such as signs,
lighting, benches, bike racks and
marketing.
•Activation Plan: The Musicant Group wrote an Activation Plan which provides easy to
implement steps designed to generate more activity in the Historic Walker Lake business
area. This plan includes recommendations for enhancing the area and a prioritized list of
improvements, systems and activities that could be implemented over time that would
enliven the area. View the entire St. Louis Park Historic Walker-Lake Activation Plan for
more information. The plan will be distributed to businesses, property owners and
neighborhood representatives as staff meet with them over the winter. The plan can be used
by these groups and the city as a guide to install one of the suggested enhancements, hold
an event or plan an activity.
•Implementation: With the remaining grant funds, permanent placemaking and wayfinding
elements will be installed in spring 2018 to spur reinvestment, attract new businesses and
broaden the customer base for local businesses. These elements could include directional
signage, identification signs, banners, benches or lights. Staff is currently work on a study
that will incorporate plans for street reconstruction and streetscape design in this area. The
plan will identify where placemaking and wayfinding should be located. See below for
more information on streetscape study. Once the study is complete staff will utilize the
remaining grant funds to install placemaking elements.
Historic Walker – Lake Design Study
In the 10 year Capital Improvement Plan, the City has dedicated funding to rehabilitate streets,
reconstruct alleys, and install bikeways in Historic Walker Lake area. In October 2017, the City
entered into an agreement with SRF Consulting to develop a design study to guide the future of
this District.
Page 3 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 6)
Title: Historic Walker-Lake Update
The goal of the design study is to develop a design concept for the public infrastructure in this
District. The future design will leverage the infrastructure investment and take advantage of
opportunities to enhance the district including:
• Improve pedestrian connections
•Improve the intersections at Walker Street/ Lake Street and Lake Street/ Wooddale Ave/
Dakota Avenue
• Parking
•Create gateway elements into the district
•Build on the main street feel on Walker Street
•Creating public gathering spaces
•Landscaping
•Streetlights
•Decorative pavement
• Public Art
• Wayfinding
The consultant has completed the initial data collection for the study area and is working on design
concepts. These concepts will be brought to the City Council at the February 12 Study Session,
prior to sharing them with stakeholders in March.
Street Reconstruction Planning
Engineering will be starting work this fall on the design and feasibility study for street and alley
rehabilitation projects in the Historic Walker Lake area. Prior to starting, design staff will reach
out to the property owners and businesses to discuss and refine the scope of this project. The goal
of the feasibility study is to analyze and determine the future design of the streets and alleys in this
district. It is anticipated that streetscape elements such as streetlights, benches, pavers, and
gathering spaces will be incorporated into the design.
The locations of the work proposed in the next 5 years includes:
•Library Lane (Lake Street to Walker Ave)- includes on-street parking
•Walker Ave (Lake Street to Brunswick) - includes the reconfiguration of the intersection
of Walker Ave/ Lake Street, and on-street parking
•Brunswick (Walker to Frontage Road)
•Frontage road (Brunswick to alley)
•Alley between Walker and Frontage Road
•Alley between Library Lane and Railroad tracks.
•Bikeway (Lake Street)
•Bikeway (Wooddale)
It is anticipated that these projects will include the following work:
•Replace pavement
•Remove and replace curb and gutter as needed
•Remove and replace sidewalk as needed, and incorporate ADA improvements
•Reconstruct gravel alleys in concrete – standard alley width is 10 feet
•Intersection enhancements/ improvements
•Planting of street trees
•Boulevard restoration
Page 4 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 6)
Title: Historic Walker-Lake Update
The final plan will be used as a guide for type and placement of placemaking elements including
art, streetscape design, event locations, wayfinding, etc.
Walker Building
The current ownership status of the Walker Building is that a prospective buyer and the property
owner have reached a purchase agreement for the property. The prospective buyer is in the final
stages of its due diligence of the property which includes an environmental site assessment (ESA).
Closing on the property has been tentatively scheduled for the end of February pending the results
of the ESA. In the event that sale does not occur, the EDA is prepared to submit a Purchase
Agreement for the property.
Perspectives
Perspectives is located at 3381 Gorham Ave. It is an award winning, multi-program, human service
agency for women and their children suffering from addictions, mental illness, and poverty. The
services offered span from recovery and mental health programs to employment and parenting
education. Perspectives is the only supportive housing program that provides a 12-month, in-house
academic, social, and nutritional enrichment program for children. Their programs successfully
return 83% of their residents to permanent housing, and nearly 100% of their clients reside in
Hennepin County. Perspectives is in the final stages of planning a substantial addition to the
facility. The addition will expand on teaching and counseling services offered to children and
families and establish a daycare. Construction is anticipated to begin in the spring of 2018.
Historical Society
Staff will continue to work with the Historical Society on a search for a new location. Staff is
prepared to conduct a location search and provide an Inventory of Prospective space options for
the Historical Society once the organization prepares preferred location criteria and a business plan
reflecting how the space will be financially supported.
The Nest
Staff prepared an Inventory of Prospective Properties for the Nest in the Walker-Lake area. The
Nest Team is evaluating these space options and is expected to return to the Council once it has a
recommended location and business plan.
Holiday Train
The Canadian Pacific Holiday Train returned to St. Louis Park for a second year on Sunday,
December 10, 2017. Large crowds turned out for this festive event, which is designed to draw
attention to the issue of food insecurity and to raise money for local food shelves. This year, the
St. Louis Park Emergency Program (STEP) raised $32,245 from the Holiday Train event,
including a $7,000 donation from Canadian Pacific. Additionally, participants donated 5,451
pounds of food.
Design Guidelines
The majority of buildings in the Historic Walker-Lake District are one and two story, smaller scale
retail and service uses. The city would like to explore the potential for design guidelines that
preserve the character and scale of the district as reinvestment occurs. In the coming months, the
city will be issuing a request for proposals (RFP) to hire a consulting firm to write design
guidelines for the district. The city plans to form a focus group, research the existing building
character, and present design guidelines to city council. A component of this plan may include a
study of the district’s parking requirements and allowed uses. The scope of the request for
proposals is still being finalized, and can be expanded based on feedback from council.
Page 5 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 6)
Title: Historic Walker-Lake Update
Comp Plan
The city’s Comprehensive Plan is being updated in 2018. Current uses in the area consist of a wide
mix of uses including schools, commercial, industrial, residential and city owned parking. Based
on community input thus far, wholesale redevelopment of or changes to land uses in the area is
not envisioned. Rather, reinvestment in existing properties is likely to occur. The city intends to
improve the existing streets and landscaping and is working on branding and wayfinding to
highlight and enhance the area. In addition as stated previously, the city is looking at creating
Design Guidelines that would consider preserving the scale of the area as reinvestment or other
changes occur. Land use and zoning changes could possibly follow as an outcome of the process.
Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
Plan Categories:
•red = Commercial
•white = low density residential
•gold = medium density residential
•light green = civic
•green = parks and open space
•grey = general industrial
Zoning Map
Zoning categories:
•red = C2 Commercial
•yellow = residential
•green = parks and open space
•grey = general industrial
Page 6 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 6)
Title: Historic Walker-Lake Update
NEXT STEPS
•Obtain public input for the proposed street and alley rehabilitation projects in the Historic
Walker Lake area in preparation for the Street Reconstruction Plan.
•Utilize the remaining grant funds to install permanent placemaking/way finding elements
in the spring 2018 in locations identified in the Street Reconstruction & Streetscaping Plan.
•Pursue additional grant funding and as funds become available the city will work with
stakeholders to implement placemaking activities and improvements that engage and
connect the Historic Walker lake community.
•Continue to assist The Nest and the Historical Society with site search prospects with the
understanding that these organizations will need to lead their respective site search
processes.
•Issue a request for proposals (RFP) to hire a consulting firm to write design guidelines,
potentially form a focus group, research the existing building character, and present design
guidelines to city council.
•Complete Comprehensive Plan Update citywide.
The above activities combined with the city’s capital improvement plans for the area including
adding bike lanes, Walker Street infrastructure improvements, and the combined efforts of the
City, Hennepin County, Metropolitan Council and Three Rivers Park District should further
improve access to the regional trail and LRT stations at Wooddale and Louisiana Avenue, as well
as rejuvenate the area, improve local business viability, and foster greater community
cohesiveness.
Staff would like feedback on the above initiatives. Staff is also interested in any other ideas the
Council may wish staff to explore in reactivating this business area.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Written Report: 7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Update - Modifications of Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time. This is a status update related
to the proposed project.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to continue to proceed with
modifications to the Wooddale Bridge over Highway 7?
SUMMARY: Staff and consultant team have been working on preliminary design plans to
modify the Wooddale Bridge over Highway 7. The improvements are intended to construct safe
and comfortable pedestrian and bicycle facilities across the bridge and to increase sight lines for
vehicles at the ramp terminals.
The timing of the plan development and approvals has been closely coordinated with Southwest
Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) due to the projects close proximity and overlapping impacts. As a
result, past delays in the SWLRT approval process have caused delay to the Wooddale bridge plan
preparation and approvals. However, based on continued work with the SWLRT planning team,
staff feels the city no longer needs to wait for the construction of SWLRT to begin.
Therefore, staff is working with our consultant to complete final plans this winter and begin
construction in the spring of 2018. Since this bridge is within MnDOT right of way a limited use
permit will be required to complete the construction. This permit and the accompanying resolution
will be on the February 5, 2018 Council meeting for approval.
Additional information related to the project scope and schedule can be found in the following
pages.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION: The estimated total project cost for the modifications to the
Wooddale Bridge is estimated at $2.45 million. The funding for this project is from available tax
increment funds from the Elmwood TIF District
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Exhibit – Bridge Layout
Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Page 2 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 7) Title:
Update - Modifications of Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The construction of the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) line and the
Wooddale LRT Station has been delayed again and is now planned for 2018/19-2022. This will
result in corridor modifications along Wooddale Avenue that include the installation of traffic
signals at the Highway 7 ramp terminals, modifications to the intersection of Wooddale Avenue
at the South Service Road, and the construction of an underpass for the Regional trail crossing at
Wooddale.
In 2015 staff hired the consulting firm of Short Elliott Hendrickson (SEH) to help explore ways to
leverage the programmed improvements of SWLRT to enhance pedestrian and bicyclist safety,
traffic operations, and allow for future growth of the Wooddale corridor. In late October of 2015
the City convened a design workshop that was attended by staff from SWLRT, MnDOT, Hennepin
County, and the City. In addition, the PLACE development team and our consultant SEH were in
attendance. The desired outcome from this workshop was to find a cost effective solution that
balances the needs of all users of this multimodal corridor with a high level of safety and livability.
Since that time, the SWLRT project has completed final plans and the city and PLACE
Development have finalized that projects site layout. Construction of SWLRT has been delayed
again and is now expected to begin in late 2018 or early 2019. Staff will coordinate the timing
and scope of the Wooddale Bridge improvements with the construction activities of the SWLRT.
However, it now looks like SWLRT construction at this location may not start until 2019. Staff
believes there is no advantage to waiting until SWLRT is approved and under construction to begin
the bridge widening.
Staff has engaged SEH to complete final design plans and receive approvals from MnDOT for the
modifications to the Wooddale Bridge over Highway 7. The improvements are intended to
construct safe and comfortable pedestrian and bicycle facilities across the bridge and to increase
sight lines for vehicles at the ramp terminals.
Project Scope:
The project initiated by the City will include widening of the bridge deck by about 7 feet on each
side. This widening will allow additional space for and enhancements to the pedestrian and bicycle
facilities across the bridge. In addition, it pulls the concrete parapet walls back to provide better
sight lines for drivers as they approach Wooddale Avenue from the Highway 7 ramps.
The new bridge cross section will include; four lanes of traffic across the bridge, a turn lane for
the Highway 7 entrance ramps, 12 foot wide sidewalks and 6 foot wide bike lanes.
The project will also add landscaping at strategic locations that will soften the feel of the corridor
and compliment the SWLRT Wooddale Station and PLACE development.
Construction Sequencing:
The construction sequencing and impacts to the corridor during construction are still being
finalized. The intent of the design team is to keep half of the bridge open while the other half is
being worked on. The expectation is that one lane of traffic in each direction and one sidewalk
will be open at all times.
Page 3 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 7) Title:
Update - Modifications of Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7
Elements not in the current Project Scope:
The bridge modifications discussed above will address many of safety concerns that currently exist
in this corridor. However, the signalization of the ramp terminals is currently part of the SWLRT
design and budget. The expectation is that the bridge modification work by the City will be
completed by late 2018. The schedule for SWLRT to install the traffic signals is still unknown.
Staff will continue to advocate to SWLRT and their contractor to install the signals as soon as
possible. Due to the continued delays in the SWLRT construction schedule it is possible that the
signals may not be installed until 2021 or 2022.
Schedule:
Due to delays with the MnDOT review and approval process the schedule for this project has
shifted approximately 4-6 weeks. The revised schedule is shown below.
90% Plan Submittal to City and MnDOT December 2017
Final Roadway and Bridge Plans late January 2018
Open Bids March 2018
Award Construction Contract March or April 2018
Construction April to Sept. 2018
Next Steps:
As part of the SWLRT project the City will need to enter into an agreement with MnDOT to assign
ownership and maintenance responsibilities for the signals proposed as part of their project. This
agreement will be brought to the Council at an upcoming meeting later this year. The City has a
number of similar agreements with MnDOT for signals throughout town.
• • -·JJ
EXISTING MEDIAN, CURB &
t• aoGIIDALl I t•..aGOAll
12.0· I 11.0· 11.0·
WOOODAlE AVENUE PIKl'OSIO IIO,iO'IAY CONSTIU:IIGt Sh. 103•n- tOhSI
SIGNAL LEGEND
i PROPOSED SIGNAL POLE
i PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN PUSH BUTTON
PROPOSED NEWSIGNAL SYSTEM
.;J;. PROPOSED PEDESTRIANJ2S1 PUSH BUTTON PEDESTAL
WQQOQAL[ AV[NU[ PRCPOKOflOAOUY Sh. IOf•U-IOl•H
PROPOSED RAISED MEDIAN, CURB & GUTTER
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 7)
Title: Update - Modifications of Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 Page 4
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Written Report: 8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Citywide Fiber Infrastructure Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required. This is a periodic update to Council on the
status of fiber optic infrastructure and fiber-to-the-premise initiatives in the City of St. Louis Park.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the Council have any questions about the 2017 – 2018 fiber
infrastructure projects that are designed to continue addressing the Council adopted goal and
priority that St. Louis Park be a technology connected community?
SUMMARY: In 2012, a study of the city’s fiber optic infrastructure was completed by CTC, a
telecommunications consultancy. The central study question was, “what else should the City of St.
Louis Park consider doing with the fiber optic network built jointly by the city and St. Louis Park
Schools since most major city and school buildings were being served by it?” Three of the
recommendations from that study suggested the city: (1) continue to take advantage of public
works construction projects to inexpensively install at least conduit to support future fiber
connections; (2) use existing and additional fiber conduit to build redundant fiber connections to
major public buildings to support disaster recovery and business continuity; and (3) consider
leasing unused fiber strand capacity to other parties to accelerate deployment of high-speed
broadband capacity to homes and business as part of an overall community and economic
development strategy. Those and other study recommendations were adopted. Subsequently, in
2015, Council also adopted five major City Council Goals and Priorities, one of which was that
“St. Louis Park be a technology connected community.” Consistent with these Council-endorsed
policies, staff has added to the fiber optic infrastructure to support 2012 study recommendations
and the 2015 Council Goals and Priorities.
In 2017, over 8 miles of fiber infrastructure were built; redundant fiber connections added and a
disaster recovery site was established to help keep critical services operational. Fiber strand
capacity was also leased to Arvig and to US Internet to support fiber-to-the-home and business
(also known as “fiber-to-the-premise”). This helps improve choice, competition, and state-of-the-
art broadband in the city. Similar efforts are programmed to continue in 2018. Details on work
accomplished are provided in the Discussion that follows later in this report.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: As in past years, funds have been budgeted
as part of 2018 Engineering Capital Improvement Program projects as well as the Development
Fund to continue support of these investments.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Prepared by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Page 2 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 8)
Title: Citywide Fiber Infrastructure Update
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: At its December 13, 2017 meeting, the Telecommunications Advisory
Commission received its annual update on 2017 completed and 2018 planned fiber and wireless
efforts, as well as on progress made by US Internet in providing fiber-to-the-premise service in St.
Louis Park. Below is an outline of work completed in 2017 and planned for 2018 that was
presented.
2017
In 2017, the following fiber / conduit, wireless, and security projects/installations were completed
by the City:
•Texas Avenue (Minnetonka – Highway 7)
•Sorensen Neighborhood
•Xenwood Avenue (27th – 29th Streets)
•Utica Avenue (Minnetonka Boulevard – 26th Street)
•Barry and 36 ½ Streets
•West End Loop – Wayzata Boulevard, Utica Avenue, Gamble Drive
•Municipal Service Center – Era on Excelsior over Minnehaha Creek (redundant loop)
•Inglewood Avenue / 39th Street to France Avenue
•Highways 7 / 100 Fiber Relocation Completion
•Ford Road / South Wayzata Boulevard to North Wayzata Boulevard (Shelard Park)
•Minnetonka Boulevard (City Hall to Glenhurst Avenue)
•Wi-fi at the Outdoor ROC, Wolfe Park Playground, and Veterans Amphitheatre
•Fixed Wireless Meter Reading Project Completion
•Security systems at buildings and parks supported by fiber were also enhanced
2018
In 2018, the following fiber / conduit and wireless projects are planned by the City:
•Elmwood-Brooklawns-Brookside Neighborhoods
•Texas Avenue (south of Highway 7)
•Wooddale Avenue / Highway 7 Bridge Modifications
•Monterey Drive (north of Excelsior Boulevard)
•Jordan Avenue
•Water Treatment Plant 4 (east of Susan Lindgren School)
•Dakota Avenue (Wayzata Boulevard – 14th Street) for SLP Public Schools
•Westwood Nature Center Fiber Relocation (part of building replacement project)
•Linear Park Wi-fi (east of Utica Avenue between Wayzata and Gamble)
•SCADA System Replacement / Fiber Extension Project (major effort)
US Internet (USI) Progress
US Internet made its service debut in St. Louis Park in June 2017 by bringing fiber-to-the-home
service to Era on Excelsior first, as promised (Meadowbrook Manor). That and other areas to
receive service starting last year are listed below. Also listed below are preliminary 2018 planned
fiber service deployments. Other areas will be added soon.
Page 3 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 8)
Title: Citywide Fiber Infrastructure Update
2017:
•Era on Excelsior (Meadowbrook Manor) – 551 households
•Village in the Park – 204 households
•Apartment Complexes South of Wayzata Boulevard / West of Park Place Boulevard
•Wayzata Boulevard Business Corridor
•Park Glen Road Business Area
•Parkdales Area
•West End Area
•Interchange Tower
2018:
•Sorensen Neighborhood – Single Family Debut
•Louisiana Court Apartments / others in area
•Village Garden Apartments
•Via (PLACE) Development (when completed)
•Other Areas TBD
Summary of 2017 and 2018:
•2017 was a very productive year
•2018 looks very promising
•Fiber-to-the Premise, additional choice, and competition are happening
•Fiber and wireless will continue to co-exist and complement each other (pressure is
building to deploy more by cellular companies)
•Major City Council policy directives are being achieved to make St. Louis Park a
Technology Connected Community
•Advancing Racial Equity is being served through guided deployment of newer
technologies
NEXT STEPS: Much work was completed in 2017 and much work is planned in 2018. As the
City completes redundancy, disaster recovery, and business continuity efforts, more emphasis will
be placed in 2018 on supporting and accelerating fiber deployment throughout the community.
That includes a broadband readiness ordinance, a draft of which will be presented to Council for
its review and consideration soon. The main principle and goal of such an ordinance is to ensure
that new and significantly remodeled buildings are ready to accept broadband offerings from
multiple providers by building in capacity up front. Again, this supports the desire for resident and
business broadband choice, provider competition, and state-of-the art technologies. All of this
again supports the Council adopted goal that St. Louis Park be a technology connected community.
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Written Report: 9
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Via (PLACE) Project Update
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. Please inform staff of any questions you might
have.
SUMMARY: On December 18, 2017 the EDA approved a Second Amendment to the Purchase
and Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and PLACE E-Generation One, LLC providing
for a new closing date for the North Parcels (on or before April 30, 2018) and an alternative
financing plan for the affordable housing units specified within the Contract, (in the event the tax
exempt status of private activity bonds and Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) were
eliminated through pending federal tax reform legislation). Subsequently, the federal tax
legislation signed into law left both financing mechanisms intact; however, with the lowering of
the corporate tax rate, the value of the credits will decrease. One report estimates the value of the
credits will decrease by approximately 15 percent. Affordable housing projects like Via that
intended on utilizing these mechanisms may now proceed as planned but are nonetheless having
to make some adjustments with their lenders in light of LIHTC’s reduced value. As a result,
PLACE has not closed on its acquisition of the North Parcels of the Via site and is continuing to
work though underwriting requirements with its various lenders. PLACE has represented to staff
that a majority of its proposed lenders have committed, or are in the process of committing, to
providing financing for the North Apartment Components (Via Sol). PLACE is also pursuing new,
additional funding options should they be necessary. In December, staff spoke with one of
PLACE’s proposed lenders, who indicated they liked the project and were working with PLACE
and its other financing partners as expeditiously as possible. PLACE has stated that it hopes to
close on its financing and the property in February or March; the exact timing however will be
determined by its lenders.
Staff will continue to keep the EDA informed of PLACE’s progress toward securitization of
financing and the property closing for Via Sol.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a well-maintained and
diverse housing stock.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director, City Manager
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Written Report: 10
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Fourth Quarter Investment Report (Oct – Dec 2017)
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time.
SUMMARY: The Quarterly Investment Report provides an overview of the City’s investment
portfolio, including the types of investments held, length of maturity, and yield.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The total portfolio value at December 31,
2017 is approximately $60 million. Approximately $36.3 million is invested in longer term
securities that include U.S. Treasury notes, Federal agency bonds, municipal debt securities, and
certificates of deposit. The remainder is held in money market accounts and commercial paper
for future cash flow needs. The overall yield to maturity is at 1.33%, up from .88% at the end of
2016.
VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion
Investment Portfolio Summary
Prepared by: Darla Monson, Accountant
Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Page 2 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 10)
Title: Fourth Quarter Investment Report (Oct – Dec 2017)
DISCUSSION
BACKGROUND: The City’s investment portfolio is focused on short term cash flow needs and
investment in longer term securities. This is done in accordance with Minnesota Statute 118A
and the City’s Investment Policy objectives of: 1) Preservation of capital; 2) Liquidity; and 3)
Return on investment.
PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The total portfolio value increased in the fourth quarter
from approximately $55.3 million at 9/30/2017 to $60 million at 12/31/2017. The increase was
due to the receipt of the second half property tax and tax increment settlements from Hennepin
County on December 1st. .
The overall yield of the portfolio has increased to 1.33%, compared to 1.26% at 9/30/2017 and
.88% at 12/31/2016. This is the combined yield including both cash held in money market
accounts and long term investments. Cities will typically use a benchmark such as the two year
Treasury (1.89% on 12/31/2017) or a similar measure for yield comparison of their overall
portfolio.
While large balances in money market accounts reduce the portfolio yield slightly, it is necessary
to keep cash available for construction contract payments and on-going expenses for payroll and
operating expenses between property tax settlements. The next property tax settlement will be a
70% advance of the first half tax payments in June 2018. A large amount of cash will also be
needed in the first quarter of 2018 for the February 1st debt service and TIF pay as you go note
payments. Money market rates continued to increase during the fourth quarter and range from
.93% to 1.04%. One year ago, money market rates were much lower at just .26% to .36%.
In addition to the $20.8 million of cash held in money market accounts, the portfolio also has
$2.9 million of commercial paper. Commercial paper are promissory notes with short maturity
periods issued by financial institutions and large corporations, and usually have higher rates than
money market accounts for investing cash in the shorter term. Rates on the commercial paper in
the portfolio range from about 1.3% to 1.65% and will mature during the first and second
quarters of 2018 for cash flow needs.
Approximately $3.6 million of the portfolio is invested in fixed and step rate certificates of
deposit. There are currently 15 CD’s in the portfolio, each with a face value of $245,000 or less,
which guarantees that each CD is insured by the FDIC up to $250,000. They have varying
maturity dates over the next 3 years with rates of up to 2.3%. Four CD’s reached maturity during
the quarter and were replaced with U.S. Treasury notes.
The remaining $32.7 million of the portfolio is invested in other long term securities which
include municipal bonds ($5 mil), Federal agency bonds ($12.8 mil) and U.S. Treasury notes
($14.9 mil). Municipal bonds are issued by States, local governments, or school districts to
finance special projects. Agency bonds are issued by government agencies such as the Federal
Home Loan Bank or Fannie Mae and may have call dates where they can be called prior to their
final maturity date. Rates have increased and a U.S. Treasury note purchased in December has a
rate to maturity of 2.12%.
Page 3 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 10)
Title: Fourth Quarter Investment Report (Oct – Dec 2017)
This table is a summary of the City’s portfolio at December 31, 2017:
NEXT STEPS: None at this time.
9/30/17 12/31/17
<1 Year 41% 48%
1-2 Years 22% 15%
2-3 Years 14% 17%
3-4 Years 19% 17%
>4 Years 4% 3%
9/30/17 12/31/17
Money Markets/Cash $15,892,807 $20,798,755
Commercial Paper $2,593,488 $2,887,102
Certificates of Deposit $4,500,682 $3,565,799
Municipal Debt $6,009,990 $4,972,040
Agency Bonds/Treas Notes $26,351,892 $27,745,003
Institution/Broker Investment Type CUSIP Maturity Date Yield Par Value
Market Value at
12/31/2017
Estimated Avg
Annual Income
Citizens Indep Bank Money Market 0.05%1,471 1,471 1
4M Liquid Asset Money Market 0.93%1,494,485 1,494,485 13,899
4MP Liquid Asset Money Market 1.01%13,012,329 13,012,329 131,425
4M 2017A Bonds Money Market 0.93%1 1 0
4MP 2017A Bonds Money Market 1.01%4,552,630 4,552,630 45,982
19,059,445
UBS Institutional Money Market 1.04% 1,110,350 1,110,350 11,548
UBS Institutional Money Market & Cash 1.04% 627,489 627,489 6,526
1,737,839
PFM Comm Paper - BNP Paribas NY 09659CAG3 01/16/2018 1.39% 1,000,000 999,240 13,900
PFM Comm Paper - Toyota Motor Credit 89233HAG9 01/16/2018 1.32% 600,000 599,580 7,920
PFM Comm Paper - JP Morgan 46640FV8 06/29/2018 1.64% 800,000 792,832 13,120
PFM Comm Paper - ING Funding 4497W1G26 07/02/2018 1.62% 500,000 495,450 8,100
2,887,102
PFM CD - Ally Bank UT 02006LNL3 02/05/2018 1.25% 240,000 239,998 3,000
PFM CD - Third Fed S&L Assn OH 88413QAT5 02/22/2018 1.35% 240,000 240,024 3,240
PFM CD - Cit Bank UT 17284CH49 06/04/2019 1.90% 240,000 240,151 4,560
PFM CD - Amer Exp F UT 02587CAC4 07/10/2019 1.95% 240,000 240,101 4,680
PFM CD - Capital One Bank 14042E4S6 07/15/2019 1.95% 240,000 239,976 4,680
PFM CD - First Bk Highland IL 3191408W2 08/13/2019 2.00% 240,000 240,192 4,800
PFM CD - Webster Bk NA CT 94768NJX3 08/20/2019 1.90% 240,000 240,295 4,560
PFM CD - Capital One Bank 140420PS3 10/08/2019 2.10% 240,000 240,578 5,040
PFM CD - State Bk India IL 856283XJ0 10/15/2019 2.10% 240,000 240,605 5,040
PFM CD - Goldman Sachs Bank NY 38148JHB0 01/14/2020 2.20% 240,000 240,857 5,280
PFM CD - Amer Express UT 02587DXE3 01/30/2020 1.95% 240,000 238,982 4,680
PFM CD - Camden Nat'l Bank ME 133033DR8 02/26/2020 1.80% 240,000 239,995 4,320
PFM CD - Private Bank & Tr IL 74267GVA2 02/27/2020 1.75% 240,000 240,245 4,200
PFM CD - World's Foremost 9159919E5 08/06/2020 2.30% 200,000 198,126 4,600
PFM CD - Comenity Cap Bk UT 20033AND4 10/13/2020 2.00% 245,000 245,674 4,900
3,565,799
PFM Muni Debt - Williamston Mich Sch 970294CN2 05/01/2019 1.46% 2,000,000 1,997,040 29,200
PFM Muni Debt - New York City 64971WUX6 08/01/2019 1.33% 2,000,000 1,986,440 26,600
PFM Muni Debt - Connecticut St 20772JKN1 10/15/2020 1.78% 1,000,000 988,560 17,800
4,972,040
PFM Fannie Mae 3136G1AZ2 01/30/2018 1.00% 200,000 199,954 2,000
PFM FHLB Bond 3130A7CX1 03/19/2018 0.90%2,120,000 2,117,774 19,080
PFM FHLB Global 3130A9AE1 10/01/2018 0.91%2,000,000 1,986,700 18,200
PFM US Treasury Note 912828WD8 10/31/2018 0.89% 200,000 199,204 1,780
PFM FHLB 3130AAE46 01/16/2019 1.25% 730,000 725,416 9,125
PFM FNMA 3135G0H63 01/28/2019 1.03%1,600,000 1,592,848 16,480
PFM FHLB Global 3130A9EP2 09/26/2019 1.04%1,400,000 1,378,552 14,560
PFM FHLMC 3137EAEF2 04/20/2020 1.49%1,000,000 985,870 14,900
PFM FNMA 3135G0T60 07/30/2020 1.60%1,250,000 1,234,538 20,000
PFM US Treasury Note 912828L32 08/31/2020 0.93% 925,000 911,486 8,603
PFM US Treasury Note 912828L32 08/31/2020 0.89% 1,000,000 985,390 8,900
PFM US Treasury Note 912828L32 08/31/2020 1.09% 700,000 689,773 7,630
PFM FHLB 3130ACE26 09/28/2020 1.48% 575,000 564,978 8,510
PFM FHLMC 3137EAEJ4 09/29/2020 1.69% 530,000 523,947 8,957
PFM FHLMC 3137EAEK1 11/17/2020 1.91% 800,000 795,808 15,280
PFM US Treasury Note 912828N48 12/31/2020 1.02% 250,000 248,263 2,550
PFM US Treasury Note 912828N48 12/31/2020 1.12% 750,000 744,788 8,400
PFM US Treasury Note 912828Q78 04/30/2021 1.86% 1,050,000 1,027,278 19,530
PFM US Treasury Note 912828Q78 04/30/2021 1.87% 675,000 660,393 12,623
PFM US Treasury Note 912828R77 05/31/2021 2.02% 1,600,000 1,564,000 32,320
PFM FHLB Global 3130A8QS5 07/14/2021 1.25% 750,000 725,085 9,375
PFM US Treasury Note 912828D72 08/31/2021 1.86% 600,000 598,032 11,160
PFM US Treasury Note 912828D72 08/31/2021 1.73% 1,200,000 1,196,064 20,760
PFM US Treasury Note 912828D72 08/31/2021 1.93% 1,600,000 1,594,752 30,880
PFM US Treasury Note 912828D72 08/31/2021 1.85% 1,150,000 1,146,228 21,275
PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.72% 1,100,000 1,065,625 18,920
PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.64% 575,000 557,031 9,430
PFM US Treasury Note 912828T67 10/31/2021 1.85% 200,000 193,750 3,700
PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 1.96% 700,000 691,635 13,720
PFM US Treasury Note 912828X47 04/30/2022 2.12% 850,000 839,843 18,020
27,745,003
GRAND TOTAL 59,968,699 800,266
Current Portfolio Yield To Maturity 1.33%
Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 10)
Title: Fourth Quarter Investment Report (Oct – Dec 2017)
City of St. Louis Park
Investment Portfolio Summary
Dec 31, 2017
Page 4
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Written Report: 11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Update on Charter Commission Study on Ranked Choice Voting
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council require any additional information on this
topic?
SUMMARY: The Charter Commission has met three times since receiving the council directive
to study and make a recommendation as to whether the City’s Charter should be amended to
provide for the use of RCV.
Chair Maaske would like council to be aware of the following:
During the course of their discussions, it was determined that the commission would like to
undertake a public process to help them learn more about the use of RCV in local elections and
provide an opportunity for public input. The commission felt a defined public process would help
them gain more information and understanding on the topic of RCV, and would assist them in
making a formal recommendation to the City Council.
On January 10, 2018 the Charter Commission met to review and discuss a proposal for a public
process. Following discussion and input from all commissioners, the following public process was
approved:
•Expert Q&A Panel with the Charter Commission (early-mid February)
•Public Listening Session with the Charter Commission (mid-February – early March)
•Charter Commission meeting to vote on recommendation (mid-March)
Staff has started the scheduling process for these events and is working with the Executive
Committee of the Charter Commission to secure panelist participants and develop a public
advertising/communication plan. The panelist participants were selected by the Charter
Commission. Both the Expert Q&A Panel and the Public Listening Session will be televised. As
more information becomes available it will be released and posted on the city website.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged
community.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Sara Maaske, Charter Commission Chair
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: Study Session
Meeting Date: January 29, 2018
Written Report: 12
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
TITLE: Parkshore Senior Campus – Minor PUD Amendment
RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action at this time. The purpose of this report is to inform
the city council of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) minor amendment application to
construct a performance center addition at the Parkshores senior housing building located at
3663 Park Center Blvd.
POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the proposed performance center addition meet the
requirements of the zoning ordinance and Parkshore Senior Campus PUD?
SUMMARY: Parkshore Senior Campus, LLC submitted an application to amend their PUD to
construct a 2,500 square foot, one-story addition to the east side of the existing building. The
addition consists of:
•An 878 square foot performance center consisting of a stage and seating. The performance
center is for the use of its residents. It will not be open to the public.
•An 826 square foot common area that can be combined with the performance center to
increase seating, or kept separate for other activities.
•A small private dining room.
•Additional restrooms.
The project will also include a 1,140 square foot patio. The patio will include landscaping, a gas
fire pit and seating. The patio is separate from the performance center.
The plans are currently being reviewed by various city departments and the Minnehaha Creek
Watershed District. It is expected that the plans will meet the requirements of the zoning
ordinance.
Unless the city council wishes to discuss the project further, the application will be placed on the
city council consent agenda on February 5, 2018.
FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: None.
VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to promoting an integrating arts,
culture and community aesthetics in all City initiatives, including implementation where
appropriate.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Aerial Photo
Site Plan
Floor Plan
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Page 2 Study Session Meeting of January 29, 2018 (Item No. 12)
Title: Parkshore Senior Campus – Minor PUD Amendment
AERIAL PHOTO:
N0°28'43"E425.0077Ingress & Egress Esmt per Doc.No. 9770383Roadway Esmt per Doc.No. 7237320Most SW Cor Lot 3,Silvercrest AdditionW'ly Line Lot 3, SilvercrestAdditionNW'ly Line Lot 3, SilvercrestAdditionSE Cor Lot 2, ParkCenterUtility Esmt per Doc.No. 5546530Trail Esmt per Doc. No. 7237322,,Silvercrest AdditionE Line Lot 1, Blk 1,Silvercrest AdditionW Line Lot 2FD FIP OPEN0.27 NO.28 WFD FIP OPEN0.07 S0.11 WFD FIP0.06 S0.11 WFD FIP 23908?0.17S0.08WFD FIP OPEN0.37 N0.08 WFD FIPSM 437__0.46 S0.24 WFD FIP OPEN0.29 S1.06 EFD FIP0.69 S1.38 EFD FIP 23908?0.78 S1.08 EFD FIP OPEN0.26 S0.62 EOPENSIGNGRATEACUNITOVERHANGACUNITBituminous PathBituminous PathBituminous PathGEN.PADGRASSGRASSGRASSGRASSCITY PARKCITY PARKLOADINGDOCKBENCHESBENCHESRET WALLSANCOSANCO11 STALLSPARK CENTER BOULEVARD(PUBLICLY TRAVELED)P A R C E L AOwner:The Wayside House, Inc.Owner: City of St. Louis ParkSouth LineLot 2294+/- Ft. Nto 36th St. WDrainage and Utility Easement per platof Silvercrest Addition18.1±19.5±1.5±1.1±7.0±7.0±14.7±14.4±19.8±30.5±30.1±8080L O T 1L O T 2SILVERCRESTWESTMORELAND PARKPARKCENTERPARKCENTER1051051012256.74PONDPARKSHORE PLACEADDITIONNPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEABOVE GROUND PARKING STRUCTUREPATIOADDITIONLINK WILSONREG. NO: 21629I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A REGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.DateProject Number1301 American Blvd ESuite 100Bloomington, MN 55425tel: (612) 879-6000www.kaaswilson.comCopyright Kaas Wilson Owner:Projectkaas wilson architects1/32" = 1'-0"12/6/2017 1:57:32 PMC:\Revit Local\17018-E.J. Plesko-ST.Louis Park-Parkshore Performance Room Add_borga004.rvtArch. Site Plan9.15.201717018Parkshore Performance RoomAdditionParkshore Senior Campus, LLCA1203663 Park Center BlvdSaint Louis Park MN 554166515 Grand Teton Plaza, Suite 300Madison WI 53719Interiors:Kaas Wilson Archtiects1301 American Blvd. E.,Suite 100Bloomington, MN 55425Structural:BKBM5930 Brooklyn Blvd.,Minneapolis, MN 55429Civil/Landscape:Civil Site Group4931 W 35th St., Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416P:763.213.3944General Contractor:Stevens Construction1650 W. 82nd St., Suite 1040Bloomington, MN 554311/32" = 1'-0"1Site PlanPERMEABLE -40,135 SF -35%IMPERMEABLE -74,117 SF -65%TOTAL -114,252 SFPERMEABLE -43,208 SF -38%IMPERMEABLE -71,044 SF -62%TOTAL -114,252 SFEXISTINGw/ ADDITIONRev. No.RevisionDateStudy Session Meeting of January 22, 2018 (Item No. 12) Title: Parkshore Senior Campus – Minor PUD AmendmentPage 3
UPFDFDREF.UPDNUPDWFDFDOvenREF.DWOvenFDFD1122ABCExisting Dining057Kitchen061Lounge052Circulation060PROPERTY LINE0'-0"N.I.C.N.I.C.N.I.C.N.I.C.X047Arst90°90°66'-0"45°1 3 5 °45°NEW PATIOADDITIONEXISTINGPAVING1138 ft29'-11 3/8"28'-9 9/16"STAGE11'-4"WINDOW8'-0"4'-8"WINDOW8'-0"6'-8"WINDOW8'-0"4'-8"WINDOW8'-0"6'-8"GAS FIRE PITALLUMINUM TRELLIS ABOVEEXISTING PLANTINGSNEW PLANTINGS45 ft²Family08246 ft²Family081NEW PLANTINGVPCPTEXISTING TRANSFORMEREXISTING TRANSFORMEREXISTING MECHANICALLVPCPTTVGAS FIREPLACE10101010105897MODERNFOLD ACOUSTI-SEAL 932 PAIRED PANEL FOLDING PARTITIONPROJECTOR-IN CEILING4A6003A6001A600180 ft²Private Dining080188 ft²Circulation082168 ft²Service Station086826 ft²Commons B083878 ft²Commons A084BULLETIN WALL51 ft²Storage0851'-4 1/4"6'-4"9'-4"6'-4"5'-4"4'-0"FLD. VFY3'-1 11/16"4444444444756ClosetClosetTVNEW PLANTINGS259 ft²Three-SeasonPorch087SCREEN WALLNEW PLANTINGSA50015A600A5004A5002A5003A3002A3003XI500121113RELOCATED GENERATORI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AI1.3AI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AI2AF2BI2AI2A085084a083087a087b086089088CPTCT081082080084c084b087dI2AI2AF2BF2BF2BF1F1F1F2CTCPT20'-3"135°11'-10 1/16"2'-0"14'-0"27'-10 1/16"5'-5 1/16"2'-0"1'-4"4'-8"35'-9 15/16"3'-4"19'-3 1/2"4'-0"3'-10"3'-0"11'-4"1'-10 3/8"7'-4"1'-5 3/16"8'-0"8'-0"16'-0"7'-4"1'-10 3/4"7'-0"2'-3 3/4"7'-0"7'-0"6'-2 1/2"7'-1 5/16"9 3/4"5'-0"FLD VFY8"7'-4"2'-0"3'-6"2'-7"3'-8 1/8"3'-0"2'-6"5'-4 1/8"135°135°2'-0"3'-0"32'-3 13/16"2'-5"2'-5"27'-6 9/16"9'-8"3'-0"3'-11"4'-4"6'-0"5'-4"3'-10 11/16"NEW CMU MECHANICAL ENCLOSURE02030201014" RIGID INSULATION BELOW SLAB ON GRADE4'-0" MIN.E9E9E9E9E6E6E99'-9"087cXI50014XI50015XI50016XI4001LVPCPTXI500178XI501XI501342LVP CTLVPCTXI5011XI500132XI5004563'-8" MIN.3'-8" MIN.1Unless noted otherwise, dimensions at framed walls aretaken to the center line of stud, dimensions to furring wallsare to the finished face of wall, and dimensions to masonrywalls are taken to the face of wall. All dimensioning isnominal.GENERAL NOTES:2See sheet A800 for wall, floor-ceiling, and roof-ceilingassemblies.= EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN3See sheet A700 for room finish schedule.4See sheet A804 for door schedule, door elevations, anddoor details.5Flooring transitions between rooms separated by doorsshall occur below the door, which may or may not be thecenter of the wall assembly.6All louvers and access panels shall be painted to match theadjacent wall or ceiling surface.7Locations of electrical appurtenances (switches, controlpanels, outlets, etc.), fire alarm horn/strobe, or other suchdevices shall not be moved in any manner from thelocations shown in the drawings without approval by thearchitect.8All structure shall be fire protected in accordance with therequired ratings listed on the Code Analysis, sheet A110.9The general contractor is responsible for coordination andsequencing of the work of all trades.10All doors, frames, glazing, finishes, etc. that are indicated toremain shall be properly protected against damage duringconstruction. Any items that are damaged shall be restoredto their original condition and quality, by either repair orreplacement. The Architect shall determine whether or not arepair sufficiently restores the condition and quality of thedamaged item.11Patch and repair concrete floor slabs as required.B24SS36B18XI500121113COOKTOP WITH DOWNDRAFT VENT.34" HIGH COUNTERTOPBUILT-IN OVEN AND REF.I2AI2AI2AI2AF1I2AI1.3F2F1F1F13'-0"2'-6"5'-4 1/8"3'-0"089Service Station086W1236W24365XA850XI50014XI50015XI50016XI50078910I2AI2AI2AI2A082081Family081Family082XI500710987'-4"2'-0"5'-0"5'-0"2'-0"XI500LINK WILSONREG. NO: 21629I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS PLAN, SPECIFICATION OR REPORT WAS PREPARED UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND THAT I AM A REGISTERED ARCHITECT UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA.DateProject Number1301 American Blvd ESuite 100Bloomington, MN 55425tel: (612) 879-6000www.kaaswilson.comCopyright Kaas Wilson Owner:Projectkaas wilson architectsAs indicated12/6/2017 1:58:09 PMC:\Revit Local\17018-E.J. Plesko-ST.Louis Park-Parkshore Performance Room Add_borga004.rvtFloor Plans -Ground9.15.201717018Parkshore Performance RoomAdditionParkshore Senior Campus, LLCA3003663 Park Center BlvdSaint Louis Park MN 554166515 Grand Teton Plaza, Suite 300Madison WI 53719Interiors:Kaas Wilson Archtiects1301 American Blvd. E.,Suite 100Bloomington, MN 55425Structural:BKBM5930 Brooklyn Blvd.,Minneapolis, MN 55429Civil/Landscape:Civil Site Group4931 W 35th St., Suite 200St. Louis Park, MN 55416P:763.213.3944General Contractor:Stevens Construction1650 W. 82nd St., Suite 1040Bloomington, MN 554311/4" = 1'-0"1Ground Level3/8" = 1'-0"2Ground Level - Kitchenette1/2" = 1'-0"3Ground Level - RestroomsRev. No.RevisionDateStudy Session Meeting of January 22, 2018 (Item No. 12) Title: Parkshore Senior Campus – Minor PUD AmendmentPage 4