Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018/05/21 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA MAY 21, 2018 6:45 p.m. SPECIAL STUDY SESSION – Community Room Discussion Item 1. 6:45 p.m. Firearm Sales Written Report 2. 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation 7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council Chambers 1.Call to Order 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2.Presentations 2a. Proclamation Declaring the First Friday in June National Gun Violence Awareness Day 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. LBAE Meeting Minutes of April 9, 2018 3b. Study Session Minutes of April 9, 2018 3c. Joint City Council & School Board Meeting Minutes of April 10, 2018 3d. City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 3e. Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 4.Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, or move items from Consent Calendar to regular agenda for discussion.) 5. Boards and Commissions 5a. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions Recommended Action: Motion to appoint citizen representatives to the Boards and Commissions as listed in Exhibit A. 6.Public Hearings -- None 7.Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None Meeting of May 21, 2018 City Council Agenda 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Recommended Action: Motion to Adopt Resolution Awarding the Sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A. 8b. Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Recommended Action: • Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary and Final Plat subject to conditions (requires 4 affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 13 to the Zoning Code and amending the Zoning Map from C-2 General Commercial and R-4 Multiple Family Residential to PUD 13 for the property located at 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Boulevard and 3743 Monterey Drive, and set the second reading for June 4, 2018 (requires 5 affirmative votes). 8c. Westwood Hills Nature Center Project Recommended Action: Motion to approve the results of the Design Development Phase and authorize staff and consultants to move to the next phase of preparing Construction Documents for the Westwood Hills Nature Center project. 8d. First Reading of Ordinance Related to Membership Terms of Environment & Sustainability Commission Recommended Action: Motion to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending Sec. 2-332 of the St. Louis Park City Code related to the membership terms of the Environment and Sustainability Commission and to schedule the second reading of the ordinance for June 4, 2018. 9. Communications – None Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. Meeting of May 21, 2018 City Council Agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 4a. Approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 12 to the Zoning Code and amending the Zoning Map from C-2 General Commercial to PUD 12 for the land legally described as: Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication. 4b. Approve the strategic priorities and Council norms as developed at the January Council workshop and May follow up session. 4c. Adopt Resolution amending and restating Resolution No. 16-027 approving Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions 4d. Authorize execution of an amendment to a professional services contract with Short Elliott Hendrickson in the amount of $140,073 for Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 - Project No. 4019-9007. 4e. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Beth El Synagogue. Event to take place on June 17, 2018 at Beth El Synagogue located at 5225 Barry Street West. 4f. Approve for filing Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2018. St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular City Council meetings are carried live on Civic TV cable channel 17 and replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at www.parktv.org, and saved for Video on Demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the lobby of City Hall and on the text display on Civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday on the city’s website. Meeting: Special Study Session Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Discussion Item: 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Firearm Sales RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time Staff was asked to place an item on an upcoming study session agenda to discuss the role of cities in regulating firearms in their communities. Note that the city attorney will be in attendance to participate in the discussion. . POLICY CONSIDERATION: Staff requests policy direction from the council on this matter. SUMMARY: None FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: None Prepared by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: Special Study Session Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Written Report: 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation RECOMMENDED ACTION: None at this time. The purpose of this item is to provide council with a proposed process to develop the rules and procedures for the administration of municipal elections required to use ranked-choice voting. The June 11 Study Session will be the kickoff of this process. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council agree with the proposed plan related to the development of rules and procedures for the administration of municipal elections? SUMMARY: On M ay 7 , 2018 the City Council approved an ordinance amending the City Charter by adding Sec. 12.08 related to Voting Method. The adoption of this ordinance was the first step in a process to implement ranked-choice voting for municipal (Mayor and City Council) elections. Although the ordinance amending the Charter does not officially become effective until 90-days after passage and publication (August 15, 2018), the process required to prepare for and implement ranked-choice voting needs to continue moving forward. Once a city makes the decision to use an alternative voting method they are required to provide the rules that will govern the administration of their municipal elections. The next step in the process to use ranked-choice voting in St. Louis Park is to draft an ordinance detailing these rules. This ordinance needs to address the following topics: definitions, ballot format, write-in votes, tabulation of votes, method of resolving ties, reporting results, recounts, counting procedures, voting systems, testing, and post-election review. While the city has some flexibility in terms of the rules and procedures that are implemented, all of the provisions must continue to meet all state and federal election laws where applicable. Additionally, because ranked-choice voting is already used in Minneapolis, a model for the rules of conduct for municipal elections is readily available and should be closely followed given that these rules and procedures have already been tested and proven to work in conjunction with the current voting equipment and administrative procedures in place in Hennepin County. Because many of these topics will require thorough discussion by council, staff has proposed a schedule that will break up these discussions over a series of meetings and ultimately end with the adoption of the ordinance by council. A simple majority (four votes) will be required for approval of this ordinance. As the council makes decisions regarding the rules that will govern the administration of elections, staff will concurrently work on planning for the actual implementation of ranked-choice voting, including development of communications, marketing, outreach and educational materials. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Staff has allocated money and identified future funding sources to plan for the resources needed. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Proposed Schedule; Minneapolis City Code Chapter 167 Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Page 2 Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation PROPOSED SCHEDULE MEETING DATE MEETING TYPE DISCUSSION TOPICS JUNE 11 STUDY SESSION •DEFINITIONS •LEGAL OVERVIEW OF PROCESS •MINNEAPOLIS MODEL REVIEW JULY 2 SPECIAL STUDY SESSION •BALLOT FORMAT •NUMBER OF RANKINGS AUGUST 6 SPECIAL STUDY SESSION •TABULATION OF VOTES •WRITE-IN VOTES •METHOD OF RESOLVING TIES SEPTEMBER 4 SPECIAL STUDY SESSION •COUNTING PROCEDURES •VOTING SYSTEMS •TESTING OCTOBER 1 SPECIAL STUDY SESSION •REPORTING RESULTS •POST ELECTION REVIEW •RECOUNTS NOVEMBER 13 STUDY SESSION •REVIEW COMPLETED DRAFT ORDINANCE NOVEMBER 19 REGULAR MEETING •ORDINANCE 1ST READING DECEMBER 3 REGULAR MEETING •ORDINANCE 2ND READING 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances CHAPTER 167. -MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS: RULES OF CONDUCT 167.10. -Applicability. This chapter applies to all municipal elections. All provisions of City Charter and Minnesota Statutes pertaining to elections also apply, to the extent they are not inconsistent with this chapter. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08) 167.20. -Definitions. The following words and phrases when used in this chapter shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them in this section: Batch elimination means a simultaneous defeat of multiple continuing candidates for whom it is mathematically impossible to be elected. Chief election official means the city clerk and includes the city clerk's designee(s). Continuing candidate means a candidate who has been neither elected nor defeated. Declared write-in candidate(s) means a candidate(s) who has filed a written request in accordance with section 167.45. Exhausted ballot means a ballot that cannot be advanced under section 167.60(c)(2) or section 167.70(c) (2). Highest continuing ranking means the ranking on a voter's ballot with the lowest numerical value for a continuing candidate. Mathematically eliminated by the next higher current vote total comparison means either: ·(1) The candidate could never win because his or her current vote total plus all votes that could possibly be transferred to him or her in future rounds (from candidates with fewer votes, tied candidates, surplus votes, and from undeclared write-in candidates) would not be enough to equal or surpass the candidate with the next higher current vote total; or (2)The candidate has a lower current vote total than a candidate who is described by (1 ). Mathematically eliminated by the sum of all ranked-choice votes comparison means: (1)For single-seat elections:The candidate could never win because the sum of all ranked­ choice votes for that candidate is less than the highest current vote total. (2)For multiple-seat elections:The candidate could never win because the sum of all 1/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 3 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances ranked-choice votes for that candidate would not be enough to equal or surpass the . current vote total(s) of any of the top "x" continuing, candidate(s) with the highest current vote total(s), where "x" equals the number of seats yet to be filled for the office. Mathematically impossible to be elected means: (1)Mathematically eliminated by the next higher current vote total comparison. (2)Mathematically eliminated by the sum of all ranked-choice votes comparison. . . Maximum possible threshold means the number of votes sufficient for a candi_date to be elected under a first ranked choice tabulation under sections 167.60(b) and 167.70(b). In any given election, the maximum possible threshold equals the total ballots cast that include votes, undervotes, skipped rankings, and overvotes for the office, divided by the sum of one (1) plus the number of offices to be filled, then adding one (1), disregarding any fractions; Maximum Possible Threshold= ((Total ballots cast that include votes, undervotes, skipped rankings, and overvotes for the office)/(Seats to be elected + 1)) + 1, with any fractions disregarded. An overvote occurs when a voter ranks more than one (1) candid.ate at the same ranking. Partially defective ballot means a ballot that is defective to the extent that the election judges are unable to determine the voter's intent with respect to the office being counted. Ranked-choice voting means an election method in which voters rank candidates for an office in order . . of their preference and the b_allots are counted in rounds and votes, or fractions thereof, are distributed to candidates according to the preferences marked on each ballot as described in sections 167.60 and 167.70 ofthis chapter. Ranked-choice voting tabulation center means one (1) or more locations selected by the chief election - . n official for the tabulation of votes.· Ranking means the number assigned by a voter to a candidate to express the voter's preference for that candidate. Ranking numb_er one (1) is the highest ranking. A ranking of lower numerical value indicates a greater preference for a candidate than a ranking of higher numerical value. Repeat candidate ranking occurs when a voter ranks the same_. candidate at multiple rankings for the office being counted. Round means an instance of the sequence of voting tabulation steps established in sections 167.60 and 167.70 of this chapter. Skipped ranking occurs when a voter leaves a ranking blank and ranks a candidate at a subsequent �ariking. 2/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 4 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinanc.es Sum of all ranked-choice votes means the sum of all votes for a candidate at every ranking for an office, including all repeat candidate rankings. Surplus means the total number of votes cast for an elected candidate in excess of the threshold. Surplus fraction of a vote means the proportion of each vote to be transferred when a surplus is transferred. The surplus fraction is calculated by dividing the surplus by the total votes cast for the elected candidate, calculated to four (4) decimal places, ignoring any remainder. Surplus fraction of a vote = (Surplus of an elected candidate)/(Total votes cast for elected candidate), calculated to four (4) decimal places, ignoring any remainder. Threshold means the number of votes sufficient for a candidate to be elected. In any given election, the threshold equals the total votes counted in the first round after removing partially defective ballots, divided by the sum of one (1) plus the number of offices to be filled, then adding one (1 ), disregarding any fractions. Threshold = ((Total votes cast)/(Seats to be elected + 1)) + 1, with any fractions disregarded. Transfer value means the fraction of a vote that a transferred ballot will contribute to the next ranked continuing candidate on that ballot. The transfer value of a vote cast for an elected candidate is calculated· by multiplying the surplus fraction by its current value, calculated to four (4) decimal places, ignoring any remainder. The transfer value of a vote cast for a defeated candidate is the same as its current value. Transferable vote means a vote or a fraction of a vote for a candidate who has been either elected or defeated. Totally defective ballot means a ballot that is defective to the extent that the election judges are unable to determine the voter's intent for any office on the ballot. Undeclared write-in candidate means a write-in candidate who is not a declared write-in candidate. An undervote occurs when a voter does not rank any candidates for an office. (2008-0r-028, § l, 4-18- 08; 2009-0r-102, § 1, 10-2-09; 2013-0r-055, § 1, 5-24-13; 2015-0r-065 , § 1, 7-24-15) 167.30. -Ballots. (a)Ballot format. (1)When there are three (3) or more qualified candidates, a ballot must allow a voter to rank at least three (3) candicdates for each office in order of preference and must also allow the voter to add write-in candidates. (2)A ballot must include instructions to voters that clearly indicates how to mark the ballot so as to be read by the election judges conducting the count, or if voting equipment is to be used, so as to be read by the voting equipment used to tabulate results. (3)A ballot must include instructions to voters that clearly indicate how to rank candidates 3/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 5 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances in order of the voter's preference. (4)A ballot must indicate the number of seats to be elected for each office. (b)Mixed-election method ballots. If elections are held in which ranked-choice voting is used in addition to other methods of voting, the ranked-choice voting and non-ranked-choice voting elections must be on the same ballot if possible, with ranked-choice voting and non-ranked­ choice voting portions clearly separated on the ballot. If placement of all offices to be elected cannot be placed on a single ballot, a separate ballot may be used for those offices to be elected using ranked-choice voting. The city may deviate from the standard ballot order of offices to allow separation of ranked-choice voting and non-ranked-choice voting elections. (c)Ballot format rules. The chief election official shall establish administrative rules for ballot format after a voting mechanism has been selected. All rules shall be adopted in accordance with this section. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08; 2009-0r-102, § 2, 10-2-09; 2013-0r-055, § 2, 5-24- 13) 167.40. -Ranked-choice voting tabulation center. The chief election official shall designate one (1) or more locations to serve as the ranked-choice voting tabulation center. Tabulation of votes must be conducted as described in sections 167.60 and 167.70 of this chapter. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08; 2013-0r-055, § 3, 5-24-13; 2015-0r-065 , § 2, 7-24-15) 167.45. -Write-in votes. A candidate for municipal office who wants write-in votes for the candidate to be counted as votes for the candidate must file a written request with the chief election official no later than seven (7) days before the general or special .election. The chief election official shall provide copies of the form to make the request. (2013-0r-055, § 4, 5-24-13) 167.50. -Tabulation of votes; in general. (a)Precinct tabulation. When the hours for voting have ended and all voting has concluded, the election judges in each precinct shall record and post the number of votes at each ranking on the ballot. The election judges must then securely transfer all election night materials and ballots from the precinct to the location designated by the chief election official. Upon receipt, the election night materials and ballots shall be secured. (b)Notice of recess in count. At any time following receipt of materials per 167.50(a) the chief election official may declare a recess. Notice shall be posted of such recess, which must include the date, time and location at which the process of recording and tabulating votes will' resume and the reason for the recess. (c)Recording write-in votes. At a time set by the chief election official, the judges of the election shall convene at a ranked-choice voting tabulation center to record the names a.nd number 4/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 6 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances of votes received by each declared write-in candidate. The number of votes received by · undeclared write-in candidates wiU be recorded as a grou·p by office.· (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18- 08; 2009-0r-102, § 3, 10-2�09; 2013-0r-055, § 5, 5-24-13) 167.60_. -Tabulation of votes; single-seat elections. (a)Applicabillty. This section applies to a ranked-choice voting election in which one (1) seat in an office is to be filled from a single set of candidates qn the ballot. The method of tabulating ranked-choice votes for single-seat elections as described in this section must be known as the "single-seat single transferable vote" method of tabulation. (b)First ranked choice tabulation. Afirst ranked choice tabulation shall. be done under this clause before a tabulation as described in clause (c). A first ranked choice tabulation will consist of a first round on_ly. Under the first ranked choice tabulation, the vote total will be the sum of the number one (1) ranked votes. The maximum possible threshold must be determined. If the vote total for a candidate, other than an undeclared or a declared write-in candi.date, is equal to or greater than the maximum possible threshold, that candidate is declared elected and the tabulation is complete. If the vote total for no candidate, other than an undeclared or a declared write-in candidate, is equal to or greater than the maximum . . . . . . possible threshold, a tabulation, as described in clause (c), shall be done. (c)Tc!bu/ation of round(s). (1)Tabulation of votes at the ranked-choice voting tabulation c;enter must proceed in rounds for each officeto be counted. The threshold must be calculated. The sum of all ranked-choice votes for every candidate must be calculated. Each round must proceed sequentially_as follows: a.The number of votes cast for each candidate, as indicated by the highest continuing ranking on each ballbt, must be counted. If a candidate, other than an undeclared write-in candidate, has a vote total that is equal to or greater than the threshold, that candidate is declared elected and the tabulation is complete. If no candidate, other than an undedared write-in candidate, has a vote total that is equal to or greater than the threshold, a new round begins and the tabulation must continue as described in clause b. b.At the beginning of the second round only, all undeclared write-in candidates and all candidates for whom it is mathematically impossible to be elected must be defeated simultaneously. For rounds subsequent to the second round, all candidates for whom it is mathematically impossible to be elected must be defeated simultaneously. Votes for the defeated candidates must _be transferred to each ballot's next-ranked continuing candidate, except votes for candidates defeated in the final round are .not transferred if, by their defeat, the number ,of 5/,12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 7 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances continuing candidates is reduced to one (1 ). If no candidate can be defeated under this clause, the tabulation must continue as described in .clause c. Otherwise, the tabulation must continue as described in clause d. c.The candidate with the fewest votes is defeated. Votes for the defeated candidate must be transferred to each ballot's next-ranked continuing candidate, except votes for candidates defeated in the final round are not transferred if, by their defeat, the number of continuing candidates is reduced to one (1 ). Ties between candidates with the fewest votes must be resolved by lot by the chief election official. The candidate chosen by lot must be defeated. The result of the tie resolution must be recorded and reused in the event of a recount. d.The procedures in clauses a. to c. must be repeated until one (1) candidate reaches the threshold, or until only one (1) continuing candidate remains. If only one (1) continuing candidateremains, that continuing candidate must be elected. In the case of a tie between two (2) or more continuing candidates, the tie must be resolved by lot by the chief election offidal. The result of the tie resolution must be recorded and reused in the event of a recount. A tied candidate chosen by lot must be defeated. When only one (1) continuing candidate remains after a tie has been resolved by lot by the chief election official, that continuing candidate must· · be elected and the votes of the tied candidate chosen by lot wil.1 be retained. (2)When a skipped ranking, overvote or repeat candidate ranking is encountered on a ballot, that ballot shall count towards the highest continuing ranking that is not a skipped ranking, an overvote or repeat candidate ranking. If any ballot cannot be . advanced because no further continuing candidates are ranked on that ballot, or because the only votes for further continuing candidates that are ranked on that ballot are either overvotes or repeat candidate rankings, the ballot shall not count towards any candidate in that round or in subsequent rounds for the office being counted .. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08; 2009-0r-102, § 4, 10-2-09; 2013-0r-055, § 6, 5-24-13; 2015- Or-065 , § 3, 7-24-15) ·167.70. -Tabulation ofvotes, multiple-seat elections .. (a)Applicability. This section applies to a ranked-choice voting election in which more than one (1) seat in office ls to be filled from a single set of candidates on the ballot. The method of tabulating ranked-choice votes for multiple-seat elections as described in this section must be known as the "multiple-seat single transferable vote" method of tabulation. (b)First ranked choice tabulation. A first ranked choice tabulation shall be done under this clause before a tabulation as described in clause (c). A first ranked choice tabulation will consist of a first round only. Under the first ranked choice tabulation, the vote .total will be the sum of the number one (1) ranked votes. The maximum possible threshold must be 6/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 8 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances determined. If the number of candidates, other than any undeclared or declared write-in candidate, whose vote total is equal to or greater than the maximum possible threshold is equal to the number of seats to be filled, those candidates are declared elected and the tabulation is complete. If the number of candidates, other than any undeclared or declared Write-in candidate, whose vote total is equal to or greater than the maximum possible threshold is less than the number of seats to be filled, a tabulation, as described in clause (c), shall be done. (c)Tabulation of round(s). (1)Tabulation of votes at the ranked-choice voting tabulation center must proceed in rounds for each office to be counted. The threshold must be cal(ulated. The sum of all ranked-choice votes for every candidate must be calculated. Each rourid must proceed sequentially as follows: a.The number of votes castfor each candidate for the current round must be counted. If the number of candidates, other than any undeclared Write-in. . . candidate, whose vote total is equal to or' greater than the threshold is equal to the number of seats to be filled, those candidates Who are continuing candidates are elected and the tabulation is complete. If the number of candidates, other than any undeclared write-in candidate, whose vote total is equal to or greater than the threshold is not equal to the number of seats to be filled, a new round begins ahd the tabulation must continue as described in clause b. b.Surplus votes for any candidates whose vote total is equal to or greater than the· threshold must be calculated. c.At the beginning of the second round only, after any surplus votes are calculated .but not yet transferred, all undeclared write-in candidates and all candidates for whom it is mathematically impossible to be elected must be defeated simultaneously. For rounds subsequent to the second round, after any surplus votes are calculated but not yet transferred, all candidates for Whom it is mathematically impossible to be elected must be defeated simultaneously. Votes for the defeated candidates must be transferred to each ballot's next-ranked .. continuing candidate, except votes for candidates defeated in the final round are not transferred if, by their defeat, the number of continuing candidates is reduced to the number of seats yet to be filled. If no candidate can be defeated under this clause, the tabulation must continue as described in clause d. Otherwise, the tabulation must continue as described in clause a. . . d.The candidate with the largest surplus is declared elected and that candidate's surplus is. transferred. A tie between two (2) pr more candidates must be resolved by lot by the chief election official. The surplus of the candidate chosen by lot must be transferred before other transfers are made; The result of the tie resolution 7/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 9 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances must be recorded and reused in the event of a recount. The transfer value of each vote cast for an elected candidate must be transferred to the riext continuing candidate on that ballot. If no candidate has a surplus, the tabulation must continue as described in clause e. Otherwise, the tabulation must continue as described in clause a; e.If there are no transferable surplus votes, the candidate with the fewest votes is defeated. Votes for a defeated candidate are transferred .at their transfer value to each ballot's next-ranked continuing candidate, except votes for candidates defeated in the final round are not transferred if, by their defeat, the nur:nber of continuing candidates is reduced to the number of seats yet to be filled. Ties . between candidates with the fewest votes must be resolved by lot by the chief election official, and the candidate chosen by lot must be defeated. The result of the tie resolution must be recorded ahd reused in the everit of a recount. f.The procedures in clauses a. to e. must be repeated until the number of candidates whose vote total is equal to or greater than the threshold is equal to the number of seats to be filled, or until the number of co·ntinuing candidates is( . . equal to the number of seats yet to be filled. If the number of continuing candidates is equal to the number of seats yet to be filled, any remaining conti�uing candidates must be declared elected. In the case of a tie between two (2)or more contihuing candidates, the tie must be resolved by lot by the chief election official. The result of the tie resolution must be ·recorded and reused in the event of a recount. Candidates defeated under this clause in the final round ·will retain their votes. (2)When_ a s_kipped ranking, overvote or repeat candidate ranking is encountered on a ballot, that ballot shall count towards the highest continuing ranking that is not a skipped ranking, an overvote or repeat candidate ranking. If any ballot cannot be advanced because no further continuing candidates are ranked.on that ballot, or because the only votes for further continuing candidates that are ranked on that ballot are either overvotes or repeat candidate rankings, the ballot shall not count towards any candidate in that rourid or in subsequent rounds for the office being counted. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08; 2009-0r-102, § 5, 10-2-09;2013-0r-055; § 7, 5-24-13; 2015- 0r-065 I§ 4, 7-24-15) 167.75. -Ties resolved by lot. (a)Who resolves a tie by lot. The chief election official must resolve a tie by lot. (b)_Notice to candidates with tiedyotes. The chief election official must notify all candidates with tied votes that the tie will be resolved by lot, except those candidates who have not provided contact information that would allow notice under this section. This notice must be sent at . 8/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 10 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances least one (1) hour prior to resolving the tie by lot. The notice must be sent through a medium that would generally be capable of reathing a person within the one-hour period, sucli as face-to-face, a fax, an e-mail, an instant message, a text, a video chat, a telephone call, or a voicemail. The chief election official may considerthe preference of each candidate for the medium through which the notice would be provided. The chief election official is not required to confirm that the notice is received by a candidate before resolving a tie by lot. A · tie may be resolved by lot even though some or all of the candidates who have tied votes are not present. (c)Witnesses. The resolving of the tie by lot must be witnessed by two (2) election judges who are members of different major political parties. (d)Video. The resolving of the tie by lot may be recorded through any audio and visual recording technology. (e)Media. The chief election official may contact the media to view the chief election official resolve a tie by lot. (f)Procedures. The chief election official may establish written procedures for implementing . this section .. ( 2015-0r-065. § 5, 7-24-15) 167 .80. -Reporting results. (a)Precinct summary statement. Each precinct must print a precinct summary statement, which must minimally include the number of votes in the first ranking for e�ch candidate. (b)Ranked-choice voting tabulation center summary statement. The ranked-choice voting tabulation center must print a summary stc1tement, which must include the following· information: total votes cast; number of undervotes; number of totally defective and spoiled ballots; threshold calculation; total first choice rankings for all candidates; round-by-round. tabulation results. including simultaneous batch eliminations, surplus transfers, and defeated candidate transfers; and exhausted ballots at each round. (c)Election abstract. The election abstract must include the information requi_red in the ranked­ choice voting tabulation center summary statement, with the addition of the number of registered voters by precinct, the number of same day voter registrations, and the number of absentee voters. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08) 167_.90. -Recounts. (a)Required recounts. A candidate defeafed in the final round of tabulation may request a recount of the votes cast for the nomination or election to that office if the difference between the final round vote total for that candidate and for a winning candidate is less than the percentage threshold as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 204-C.36. In case of offices where two (2) or more seats are being filled from 9/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 11 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances among all the candidates for the office, the percentage threshold difference, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 204C.36, is between the elected candidate with the fewest votes and the candidate with th.e highest final round vote total from among the candidates who were not elected. (1)Candidates shall file a written request for the recount with the city clerk. All requests shall be filed during the time for notice of contest of the election for which a recount is sought. (2)Upon receipt of a request made pursuant to this section, the city shall recount the votes for a municipal office at the expense of the city. (b)Discretionary candidate recounts. Candidates defeated in .the final round of tabulation when the vo.te difference is. greater t .han the difference required by section 167.90(a), and candidates defeated in an earlier round of counting, may request a recount in the manner provided in this section at the candidate's own expense. (1)The votes shall be recounted as provided in this section if the requesting candidate files· with the city clerk a bond, cash, or surety in an amo.unt set by the city for payment of the recount expenses, (c)Notice of contest. Time for notice of contest of election to a municipal office which is recounted pursuant to this section shall begin to run upon certification of the results by the governing body of the municipality. (d)Scope of recount. A recount conducted as provided in this section is limited in scope to the determination of the number of votes validly. cast for the office to be recounted. Only the ballots cast in the election and summary statements certified by the election judges may be considered in the recount process. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08; 2009-0r-102, § 6, 10-2-09; 2013-0r-055, § 8, 5-24-13) 167.100. -Count procedures. The chief election official shall establish administrative procedures for the tabulation of votes in accordance with rules for counting the votes contained in sections 167.50, 167.60 and 167.70 of this chapter. (2008�0r- 028, § 1, 4-18-08; 2013-0r-055, § 9, 5-24-13) 167.110. -Electronic voting systems. All provisions of Minnesota Statutes pertaining to electronic voting equipment systems apply, to the extent they are not inconsistent with this chapter. Any voting equipmentsystem used to conduct an election under this.section must be authorized for use by the county auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 206.58. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08) 167 .. 120. -Testing of voting systems. 10/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 12 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances The chief election official shall have the voting system tested to ascertain that the system will correctly mark ballots using all methods supported by the system, and count the votes cast for all candidates and on all questions per Minnesota Statute Section 206.83. In addition to all requirements of Minnesota Statute Section 206.83, the equipment must be tested to ensure that each ranking for each candidate is recorded properly, and must be tested to ensure the accuracy of software used to perform vote transfers an.d produce results. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08) 167.130. -Post-election review of voting system and tabulation of results. (a)Selection of test date; notice. Post-election review is not required for a hand count election. At canvass, the chief ele.ction official must select by lot the offices and precincts to .be reviewed and set the date, time and place for the post-election review. (b)Scope and conduct of test. The post-election review must be conducted, in public, of a sample of ballots cast for at least one (1) single-seat ranked-choice voting election for city council, if applicable, and one (1) multiple-seat ranked-choice voting election for either park board or board of estimate and taxation, if applicable. (c)Single seat test. At canvass,the chief election official shall select, by lot, a total of two (2) precincts. Using the actual ballots cast in the two (2) precincts selected, the judges of the election shall conduct a hand count of ballots cast for the one (1) or two (2) offices of council member. Using procedures called forjn section 167.100 of this chapter and accompanying rules, the judges shall count and record the ballots cast .. (d)Multiple seat test. At canvass, the chief election official shall select, by lot, a total of two (2) precincts. Using the actual ballots cast in the two (2) precincts selected, the judges of the election shall conduct a hand count of ballots cast for either the office of park board or the office of board of estimate and taxation, also to be determined by lot. Using procedures called for in section 167.100 of this chapter and accompanying rules, the judges shall count and record the ballots cast. (e)Standard of acceptable performance by voting system. A comparison of the results compiled by the voting system with the results compiled by the judges of election performing the hand count must show that the results of the electronic voting system differed by rio more than the applicable percentage threshold, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 204C.36, from the hand count of the sample tested. Valid votes that have been marked by the voter outside the vote targets or using a manual marking device that cannot be read by the voting system must not be included in making the determination whether the voting system has met the standard of acceptable performance. (f)Additional review if needed. Additional review(s) may be required as follows: (1)Additional precinct review. If a test under clause (c) or (d) reveals a difference greater than the applicable percentage threshold, as provided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 11/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 13 5/15/2018 Minneapolis, MN Code of Ordinances 204C.36, in at least one (1) precinct of an office, the chief election official must immediately publicly select by lot two (2) additional precincts of the same office for review. The additional precinct review must be completed within two (2) days after the precincts are selected ·and the results immediately reported to the county auditor. (2)Additional office review. If the additional precinct review also indicates a difference in the vote totals that is greater than the applicable percentage threshold, as prnvided by Minnesota Statutes, Section 204C.36, in at least one (1) precinct of an office, the chief e_lection official must conduct a review of the ballots from all the remaining precincts in the office being reviewed. This review must be completed no later than two (2) weeks after the canvass. (g)Report of results. Upon completion of the post-election review, the chief election official must immediately report the results to the county auditor and make those results public. (h)Update of vote totals. If the post-election review under this section results in a change iri the number of votes counted for any candidate, the revised vote totals must be incorporated in the official result from those precincts. (i)Effect on voting systems. If a voting system is found to have failed to record votes accurately and in the manner provided by this chapter, the voting system may not be used at another . .election until it has b�en approved for use by the county auditor, pursuant to Minnesota Statute Section 206.58. In addition, the county auditor may order the city to conduct a hand recount of all ballots cast in the election. U)Penalties to voting equipment system vendor. If the voting system failure is· attributable to either .its design or to actions of the vendor, the vendor is liable.for the cost-of a hand recount ordered per section 167 .130{i) and is liable for additional penalties imposed per agreement between the city and the vendor. (2008-0r-028, § 1, 4-18-08; 2009-0r-1 02, § 7, 10- 2-09; 2013-or�o55, § 1 o, 5-24-13) 167.140. -Deadline for primary campaign reports pursuant to Minn. Stat.§ 383B.048. For the sole purpose of filing primary campaign reports pursuant to Minn. Stat� § 383R048, sub_d. 1, the city ' . adopts the primary election date for municipal primaries as determined by Minnesota Statutes during city municipal election years. Primary campaign reports will be due one (1) week prior to this date, as provided in Minn. Stat. § 383B.048, subd. 1, as if a primary were being held for such elective offices, notwithstanding the elimination of primary elections for �ity municipal offices. (2009-0r-�52, § 1, 7-17�09; 2015-0r-065 , § 6, 7-24-15) Editor's note-. Ord. No. 2015-0r-065 , § 6, adopted July 24, 2015, retitled the catch line of§ 167 .140 from "Primary date for campaign reports pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 383B.048" to re.ad as herein set out. 12/12 Special Study Session Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2) Title: 2019 Municipal Elections: Ranked-Choice Voting Planning and Implementation Page 14 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Presentation: 2a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Proclamation Declaring the First Friday in June National Gun Violence Awareness Day RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Mayor is asked to read the Proclamation proclaiming the First Friday in June as National Gun Violence Awareness Day. POLICY CONSIDERATION: None at this time. SUMMARY: In partnering with the St. Louis Park chapter of Moms Demand Action, it is proposed that the city formally proclaim the first Friday in June as National Gun Violence Awareness Day. The 4th National Gun Awareness Day helps honor Hadiya Pendleton, a teenager who marched in President Obama’s second inaugural parade and was tragically shot and killed just weeks later, and Americans who are victims of gun violence. Individuals can join the campaign by wearing orange on Friday, June 1st to help honor Hadiya, the 96 Americans whose lives are cut short every day and the countless survivors of gun violence. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Proclamation Prepared by: Maria Carrillo Perez, Management Assistant Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2a) Page 2 Title: Proclamation Declaring the First Friday in June National Gun Violence Awareness Day PROCLAMATION DECLARING THE FIRST FRIDAY IN JUNE TO BE NATIONAL GUN VIOLENCE AWARENESS DAY This proclamation declares the first Friday in June to be National Gun Violence Awareness Day in the City of St. Louis Park to honor and remember all victims and survivors of gun violence and to declare that we as a country must do more to reduce gun violence. WHEREAS, every day, 96 Americans are killed by gun violence and on average there are nearly 13,000 gun homicides every year; and WHEREAS, Americans are 25 times more likely to be killed with guns than people in other developed countries; and WHEREAS, protecting public safety in the communities they serve is a city councils highest responsibility; and WHEREAS, support for the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens goes hand-in- hand with keeping guns away from dangerous people; and WHEREAS, city councils and law enforcement officers know their communities best, are the most familiar with local criminal activity and how to address it, and are best positioned to understand how to keep their citizens safe; and WHEREAS, in January 2013, Hadiya Pendleton, a teenager who marched in President Obama’s second inaugural parade and was tragically shot and killed just weeks later, should be now celebrating her 21st birthday; and WHEREAS, to help honor Hadiya – and the 96 Americans whose lives are cut short and the countless survivors who are injured by shootings every day – a national coalition of organizations has designated June 1st, 2018, the first Friday in June, as the 4th National Gun Violence Awareness Day; and WHEREAS, the idea was inspired by a group of Hadiya’s friends, who asked their classmates to commemorate her life by wearing orange; they chose this color because hunters wear orange to announce themselves to other hunters when out in the woods and orange is a color that symbolizes the value of human life; and WHEREAS, anyone can join this campaign by pledging to Wear Orange on June 1st, the first Friday in June in 2018, to help raise awareness about gun violence; and WHEREAS, by wearing orange on June 1, 2018 Americans will raise awareness about gun violence and honor the lives of gun violence victims and survivors; and WHEREAS, we renew our commitment to reduce gun violence and pledge to do all we can to keep firearms out of the wrong hands, and encourage responsible gun ownership to help keep our children safe. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 2a) Page 3 Title: Proclamation Declaring the First Friday in June National Gun Violence Awareness Day NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that Mayor Jake Spano of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota declares the first Friday in June, June 1, 2018, to be National Gun Violence Awareness Day. I encourage all citizens to support their local communities’ efforts to prevent the tragic effects of gun violence and to honor and value human lives WHEREFORE, I set my hand and cause the Great Seal of the City of St. Louis Park to be affixed this 21st day of May, 2018. ____________________________________ Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Minutes: 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES LOCAL BOARD OF APPEAL & EQUALIZATION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 9, 2018 1. Convene the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization The St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization convened at 6:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call – Declaration of Quorum Board Members present: Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Margaret Rog. Board Members absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Assessor (Mr. Bultema), Residential Appraiser (Mr. Hoppe), Hennepin County Assessor (Mr. Atchison), Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guests: James Atchison, Hennepin County Assessor. 3. Appoint Chair It was moved by Board Member Mavity, seconded by Board Member Hallfin, to appoint Board Member Brausen as Chair. The motion passed 7 – 0. 4. Acknowledgement of Trained Member (Brausen) The Board acknowledged Board Member Brausen as a trained member. 5. Acknowledgement of Assessing Staff Members in Attendance The Board acknowledged Cory Bultema (City Assessor), Mark Hoppe (Residential Appraiser), and James Atchison (Hennepin County Assessor). 6. Accept Roster of Appellants and Call for Any Additions Mr. Bultema presented the initial roster of appellants to the Board. The Board accepted a total of 76 parcels into the record for Local Board of Appeal and Equalization actions. The copy of the roster is attached to these minutes. A call for roster additions was made. Two appellants were added to the roster. It was moved by Board Member Harris, seconded by Board Member Rog, to call to close the roster of appellants. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3a) Page 2 Title: Local Board of Appeal & Equalization Meeting Minutes of April 9, 2018 The motion passed 7-0. 7. Determination of Date and Time for Continued Proceedings (Reconvene) It was the consensus of the Board to reconvene the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization on April 23, 2018 at 6:00 p.m. prior to the Study Session in the Council Chambers. 8. Instruct Assessor to: a. Inform Appellants for Reconvene Date via Telephone and Mail b. Inform Appellants of Board Process c. Inform Appellants of the County Board Application Date (May 16) d. Re-Inspect and Re-Appraise Parcels Under Appeal 9. Completion of the Local Board Certification Form The Board completed the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Certification Form. 10. Recess The Local Board of Appeal and Equalization recessed the meeting at 6:09 p.m. STATE OF MINNESOTA ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) ss CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ) The undersigned, being the duly qualified City Clerk of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, certifies that the foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of the official Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Minutes of April 9, 2018, that are on file in the office of the City Clerk. WITNESS my hand and the Seal of the City of St. Louis Park this _______ day of April, 2018. ______________________________ Melissa Kennedy City Clerk Date: April _____, 2018 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Minutes: 3b UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 9, 2018 The meeting convened at 6:35 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Margaret Rog. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Engineering Director (Ms. Heiser), Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffman), Recreation Superintendent (Mr. West), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas). Guest: Susan Niz, Allies of St. Louis Park; Andrew Lataya, MNDOT; Glenn Waguespack, Nancy Blankford, Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc. 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – April 16 & 23, 2018 Mr. Harmening presented the proposed Study Session agenda for April 16 and 23, 2018. Councilmember Brausen asked about discussing climate action, affordable housing, and the upcoming NLC Summit at a future study session. Councilmember Hallfin noted the City of Boulder brought a youth contingency to the NLC meeting when he attended last, and suggested St. Louis Park do the same, adding he would like to discuss this at a future study session as well. 2. Petition for Safer Highway 7 Intersections It was noted that on February 15, 2018, a 15-year-old boy died when struck by vehicles traveling on Highway 7 in St. Louis Park. The victim, Daunte Jamal Moore, was crossing Highway 7 in a southbound direction several car lengths west of the Texas Avenue S. intersection. In response to this tragic incident the Allies of St. Louis Park developed a petition and Ms. Niz presented it with 1,300 signatures, to the council. It states the following: “We, the Allies of St. Louis Park, and in partnership with our neighboring Hopkins community, respectfully demand immediate action toward increased safety of Highway 7 intersections and pedestrian crossings at the Knollwood Mall area. We ask for improved lighting, reduced speed limits, and improved walk signals and signage for pedestrians. These intersections lie between grocery stores and rental complexes and the increased safety for pedestrians as well as drivers must be a priority. We do not want one more accident, such as the one that led to the death of 15-year-old Hopkins student Daunte Jamal Moore on Thursday, February 15. We ask that changes be implemented expeditiously and collaboratively and that our elected leaders courageously advocate for the completion of these improvements.” City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 2 Title: Study Session Minutes of April 9, 2018 Ms. Niz stated there needs to be a reduction in harm of intersections and more listening to community input, while looking at this issue through a racial diversity lens. She questioned the consideration of chain link fence barriers and would like more discussion on this. She stated she herself crossed the intersections at Blake and Highway 7 and at Texas and Highway 7, and the crosswalks are very old and worn out, and the intersections are not safe, with the speed of cars on Highway 7. Ms. Niz pointed out this is an equity issue, and with the car speed and poor lighting in the area, she asked the city to follow-up with MNDOT on a speed study. Ms. Niz also asked the council about the possibility of pedestrian bridges across Highway 7 at Texas Avenue, adding that folks risk their lives daily here, while crossing the highway. She asked for the city to continue this conversation and gather input from the community, while also conducting a survey. She noted how St. Louis Park speaks extensively about walkability and race equity, adding the council needs to raise these discussions higher on the priorities list. Ms. Niz stated her concerns are having a speed study conducted by MNDOT, gather community input on lighting following the renovations of Highway 7, discuss pedestrian bridges, and develop a plan while looking through an equity lens. Councilmember Mavity thanked Ms. Niz for her presentation, adding she is heartsick over what happened to Mr. Moore. She noted that over the years, the council has reviewed many intersections within the city, noting we will need to look at what can be done to increase safety. Ms. Niz noted the chain link fence is creating more barriers, without creating safer crossing and addressing speeds. Councilmember Mavity agreed with her on this, and also noted sidewalks should be added to the area as well. Councilmember Harris noted pedestrians are the priority and any time anyone parks their car, they become a pedestrian. She asked Ms. Niz to share more about the survey and what she would like to see as an end result that the city could work towards. Ms. Niz stated she learned much going door-to-door with the petition and noted the city could gather more comprehensive input on resident’s needs and preferences by engaging with the community. She stated this is race equity issue, and this is a chance for the city to go to these folks, and not just get them to come to city hall. Ms. Niz added these folks are children, the elderly, and disabled who do not have privilege, and the city needs to gather their perspectives. Councilmember Harris stated the city did a study 9 years ago on intersections that had accidents. She noted she met with Ms. Heiser to discuss this, adding the city could review this past study, and update this information now. Councilmember Mavity added when Connect the Park was developed, the city collected information on where pedestrian bridges were needed, to make areas safer. She noted there was a lot of research done at that time. Ms. Heiser added a study was conducted in 2007 and included in the comprehensive plan, discussing bikes and pedestrians, and who uses intersections. She added today we add the racial equity lens to these studies, while considering safety and ADA accessibility. Councilmember Miller thanked Ms. Niz for her comments and for bringing this issue forward. He stated he thinks of Highway 7 as a highway that goes through our community without any safety City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 3 Title: Study Session Minutes of April 9, 2018 measures, and cars travel 50-55 miles per hour. He stated he would like MNDOT to conduct a study, agreeing this is a race equity and economic equity issue. He stated he would like to move forward as quickly as possible, adding this is a spending priority. Mayor Spano asked Mr. Lutaya, MNDOT, how much authority the city has to do anything on Highway 7. Mr. Lataya stated the city does not have authority, as Highway 7 is in the state’s right-of-way, all changes or improvements must be approved by MNDOT. He added if MNDOT conducts a speed study, there is potential the speed on Highway 7 could increase. Mayor Spano asked if MNDOT takes pedestrians into consideration. Mr. Lataya stated yes; however, noting that Highway 7 is a freeway with wide open lanes, and the tendency for drivers is to drive faster to make it through the lights. He added if most cars are speeding, the state’s recommendation is to raise the speed limit. Councilmember Hallfin pointed out to the council that he recently met with the Hopkins mayor, and noted while St. Louis Park is adding sidewalks on Texas Avenue, Hopkins is not. Councilmember Hallfin asked the Hopkins mayor why they are not adding sidewalks, and the Hopkins mayor stated if 75% of people say they do not want a sidewalk in a certain location, the city of Hopkins will not add them. Mr. Lataya stated MNDOT will include ADA improvements on all renovated sidewalks, and all signals will be upgraded to accommodate pedestrian push buttons, lanes will be realigned to force vehicles to slow down before turning onto Highway 7 from Texas Avenue, and lighting will be on all four corners. He added similar improvements will be made for the Highway 7 and Blake and Aquila intersections, adding refuge islands, and closing the on ramp from Aquila to Highway 7. Ms. Heiser added the city will include bike lanes on Texas connecting Lake Street to 28th Avenue and the North Cedar Regional trail, as well as building sidewalks along the east side from the frontage road to Lake Street, and on the west side as well to Division Street. She noted the chain link fence is a barrier to encourage pedestrians to cross Highway 7 at the intersection and to prevent mid-block crossing. Ms. Niz asked about adding a pedestrian bridge near Knollwood vs. policing pedestrians. She asked instead of the chain link fence, for a more-user friendly and beautiful area, with plants and artwork, to create a source of pride – while preserving equity. Councilmember Miller stated he would be very interested in looking at this as an option, noting the city shows its values by where it spends its dollars. Councilmember Brausen stated he is in favor of a speed study. Councilmember Mavity disagreed, saying she would not be in favor of a speed study if speeds were to increase. Councilmember Rog asked how the city could look at pedestrian bridges if they must be approved by MNDOT, adding these types of changes seem to stop the conversation. Ms. Heiser stated if the council would like staff to review a pedestrian bridge for the area, they can; however, a bridge could not be completed this year or as part of the current renovation project. She added if the council wanted a pedestrian bridge, the city would need to purchase land from Knollwood. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 4 Title: Study Session Minutes of April 9, 2018 Mayor Spano noted he has walked these intersections and noticed MNDOT is not clearing the crossings or landings. He stated they were completely covered with snow and ice and sidewalks were non-passable. He asked city staff to look into St. Louis Park city staff clearing snow from these areas and being paid to ensure those facilities are accessible to residents. Mayor Spano stated he is not happy with the state on this, nor with Metro Transit – as they are not keeping these areas free of snow for pedestrians crossing, or those waiting for transportation. He stated these are issues of equity also, adding he is hoping to develop tools for city departments to look at these issues through a racial equity lens as well. Mayor Spano thanked Ms. Niz for her comments and for the good conversation on this issue, adding it is important to have data about what is happening and where. Mr. Harmening stated in the short term, MNDOT will move forward with the renovation project; however, adding a pedestrian bridge could take years to be built. He stated he would still advocate for a fence on the north side of the highway, especially because it saves lives. Councilmember Brausen agreed with having a fence. Councilmember Miller stated he would also like to study the possible purchase of property from Knollwood. Ms. Niz added she would like to acquire more information from residents as a baseline, but is not suggesting delaying the Highway 7 improvement project. Mr. Lataya stated MNDOT is continuing to improve on community engagement and wants to promote community communication. 3. Westwood Hills Nature Center Project – Update on Design Development Mr. Hoffman provided a summary background on city facilities condition, construction, and CIP development over the past ten years to help create a long term financial plan. Noting the Westwood Hills Nature Center project Master Plan, completed by Miller Dunwiddie Architecture, was approved by council on May 23, 2016. The design goals identified were provided to the project architect/engineering firm of Hammel, Green and Abrahamson, Inc. (HGA) to further develop. Council authorized the schematic design phase of the project HGA presented on December 18, 2017. Mr. Hoffman explained sustainability strategies and energy analyses were developed and rating systems reviewed. Based on council direction, the design team is working towards a zero-energy certified building, which means 100% of the building’s energy needs on a net annual basis are supplied by on-site renewable energy. He noted if council continues to direct staff towards a certified Zero Energy building, all components in the Life Cycle Analysis are integrated and need to be included to achieve the energy goal. The design team from HGA presented updates to the design, noting the whole project will be a teaching tool. Exhibits will still allow for movement, and an expanded lounge area will be added to the west, along with offices, a conference room and multipurpose rooms, which can be subdivided into 3 rooms. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 5 Title: Study Session Minutes of April 9, 2018 Mr. Waguespack stated the storm water area will become a turtle pond, and the roof design will be adjusted with the gutter in the center to allow access for cleaning off snow and managing debris. He added bird safe glass will be included and adjustments can be made towards the energy goal. Mr. Hoffman explained the life cycle and energy cost analysis, adding the building design reflects a reduced carbon footprint from being all electric with geo thermal as a source for heating and cooling. He noted the design will save energy and is in compliance with the climate action plan. Mr. Harmening stated if the council is satisfied with plan at this point, the next decision is authorizing construction plans, which will then lead to going for construction bids. He added that staff will need to know if council wants to take this next step. Councilmember Mavity stated the design is in line with the climate action plan and she likes how this is looking. She stated, however, she strongly dislikes the poles that support the building, which seem to create a cluttered feeling, and stand in the way of actually seeing nature. Mr. Waguespack stated the poles are actually farther apart than they look, and not all are structural. He added he appreciated Councilmember Mavity’s comments. Councilmember Harris stated she likes seeing how the project and design all interconnect to create a zero energy and carbon neutral building. She added she is excited about the approach and moving forward. Councilmember Brausen agreed with Councilmember Harris. Councilmember Rog asked if staff would be on the roof cleaning off debris and whether that will take staff time away from programming or planning. Mr. Hoffman stated facilities staff, not programming staff, will clear debris from the roof and maintain the building as is currently done. Councilmember Brausen asked if any of this is new technology, never before been used. Mr. Waguespack stated the project uses proven technology that has already been used. Mayor Spano stated the project feels more like a combination of things to get to zero energy. Mr. Waguespack added they are not relying on cutting edge technologies and are using known strategies to get to zero energy. Councilmember Rog stated she thinks all the goals for this building could have been accomplished without using all of these resources. She stated she is frustrated, but hopes to broaden access to the facility for the schools and communities of color, adding programming resources, while resting on the backs of PTOs, and developing curriculum also. She hopes for opportunities for transportation on after school care and more partnering with schools to ensure access to the broadest school populations. Councilmember Brausen stated he agrees with Councilmember Rog’s comments. Mayor Spano stated he is very supportive of the project and looks forward to exploring ways to work with the school district as well, adding there are ways to make sure this happens. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 6 Title: Study Session Minutes of April 9, 2018 Councilmember Harris added this will also be a way to align science education with school curriculum. A majority of the City Council directed staff to move forward with the design development and zero energy plans. 4. Funding of Non-Profit Organizations Mr. Harmening and Ms. Deno gave background information on how and who the city has funded in past. Ms. Deno noted the council has had a long-standing policy of only allocating CDGB dollars to eligible non-profits in the community for brick and mortar type improvements or for programs the city sponsored. Mayor Spano stated he appreciated staff’s sharing all of the funding amounts, but wanted to know how the decision was made to fund certain non-profits, and in which amounts. Mr. Harmening stated the non-profit must demonstrate that public dollars are used for a public purpose, and that they are achieving a goal or initiative or filling a resource need that the city does not provide. He added that the city has had long relationships over time with various non-profits, and he does not know how some dollar amounts were arrived at. Mr. Harmening added in each of these cases, a decision was made at some point by the council to support a social service provider the city could turn to, if needed, adding one example of this would be STEP. Councilmember Hallfin noted he is a STEP board member and someone had asked him if funding for STEP might decrease, and how it compares to the city funding the new nature center. He stated the way he answered this question was that it’s mutually exclusive, and the way a building is funded by the city has nothing to do with how STEP is funded. Mr. Harmening added it all comes down to decisions the council makes each year on budget. Councilmember Harris stated typically cities don’t fund human services, counties do this. She stated it would be helpful to have a checklist, and look at parameters, linking funding back to the city’s comprehensive plan or vision for the city, in order to have some clarity about funding. Mayor Spano asked if the council wants to have rules about what the city does and does not fund, or do they want to take requests for funding on an ad hoc basis, one at a time. He added if there are guidelines, they should be aligned with Vision 3.0, noting this might be the first question the council will want to ask. Councilmember Miller agreed with Mayor Spano, adding it would be helpful to have guidelines so the council is not perceived as giving dollars only to certain areas. Councilmember Mavity agreed also, stating the city is not here to be a foundation, and the city’s role is not to be a safety net. She stated she wants to be sure the council articulates clearly what the benefit is for the city and city services, to fund certain non-profits, adding the city needs to be cautious about giving out money. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 7 Title: Study Session Minutes of April 9, 2018 Councilmember Brausen stated when considering this type of funding, the city is responding to a specific need, and he agrees a set process would be helpful to define why certain non-profits are supported. Councilmember Rog stated it is the job of the city to care for its citizens, especially as the federal government becomes more unpredictable in its funding. She hopes the city is able to continue to take on that responsibility, within legal limits, adding that STEP continues to be funded. Councilmember Brausen agreed he is in favor of continuing to fund STEP. Councilmember Rog added the city’s historical society does not get any financial support, and it seems like it provides a community benefit, noting she would like to see the city support them as well. Councilmember Brausen stated he would like the city to pursue buying land to give to non-profits for building affordable housing. He stated he hopes staff is monitoring the situation at Texatonka, as a portion of that land may become available. It was the consensus of the council to have staff develop basic guidelines for funding non-profits. Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal) Councilmember Miller pulled out the written report on street parking restrictions, pointing out the area in Elmwood at 39th and Zarthan Ave., and it being a burden to park on one side of street there. He asked if there would be any flexibility around the policy for contextual situations. Ms. Heiser stated parking restrictions are approved through council-approved resolutions, and because of reductions in the size of a street, staff will recommend parking on one side only, for emergency vehicle passage. Mr. Harmening pointed out if council had good reasons for a contextual situation, that could be added to the policy. He noted that all policies must go to council for final approval. Councilmember Miller asked as council reviews these issues to narrow streets, will they be able to review the policies first. Mr. Harmening stated yes, adding in general the city policies will be looking to narrow streets, to be in line with the Living Streets policy, however, he added these policies will all come back to council for review before final approval. The meeting adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: 5. 2017 Annual Housing Programs Activity Report 6. On-Street Parking Restrictions ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Minutes: 3c UNOFFICIAL MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL/ SCHOOL BOARD MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA April 10, 2018 Call to Order Mayor Pro-Tem Mavity called the meeting to order at 5:45 p.m. Council Members present: Mayor Jake Spano (6pm arrival), Councilmember Anne Mavity, Rachael Harris, Margaret Rog, Thom Miller, and Steve Hallfin. School Board Members present: Karen Waters Board Chair, Nancy Gores Vice Chair (6pm arrival), Joe Tatalovich Clerk, Jim Beneke Treasurer, Directors Anne Casey, Ken Morrison and Mary Tomback. City Staff present: City Manager Tom Harmening, Deputy City Manager Nancy Deno, Management Assistant Maria Carrillo-Perez, Recreation Superintendent Jason West, Communications and Marketing Manager Jacque Larson and Police Chief Mike Harcey. School District Staff present: Superintendent Astein Osei; Director of Business Sandy Salin; Director of Community Education Lisa Greene; Director of Communications & Community Relations Sara Thompson; Director of Special Services Tami Reynolds and Facilities Manager Tom Bravo. City Council and School Board discussion was as follows: • Brief updates from city and school district (by Astein and Tom) o Status of school facilities construction (school district) o Student enrollment status (school district) o Strategic planning process (school district) o Status of WHNC project (city) o Body worn cameras (city) o Climate action plan (city) o Walker/Lake initiative (city) o Racial equity initiative (city and school district) o Ranked choice voting (city) • Debrief on March 14 walkout/discuss potential future walkouts • Critical incident planning – It was the consensus of the school board and the city council that the staff from each organization should start the planning process on undertaking an active shooter training drill at one of the schools. • Discuss agreement between school district and city relating to facilities, programming, funding, etc. The school board and the city council to have staff from each organization begin the process of reviewing and updating the agreement, including the funding arrangement, based on current activities, facilities sharing, cooperative arrangements and the like. CEAC should be the body staff should work with to develop a recommendation to the school board and city council. • Formation of school board/city council subcommittees. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3c) Page 2 Title: Joint City Council/School board Meeting Minutes of April 10, 2018 It was the consensus of the school board and city council to work to schedule joint meetings two times per year if possible with the understanding they would probably not be on a Monday night. Also, if additional meeting(s) are needed they could also be scheduled through coordination of the City Manager and Superintendent of St. Louis Park Schools. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Minutes: 3d UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 16, 2018 1. Call to Order Mayor Spano called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Margaret Rog. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Fire Chief (Mr. Koering), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Community Development Director (Ms. Barton), City Planner (Ms. Monson), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Housing Supervisor (Ms. Schnitker), Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Olson), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Wirth). Guests: St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors and others. 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 1b. Roll Call 2. Presentations a. Retirement Recognition Resolution for Part-Time Firefighter Nicola Typpo Mayor Spano presented a resolution to part-time firefighter Niki Typpo recognizing her 20 years of service to the City of St. Louis Park. Fire Chief Koering extended his appreciation and stated the department will be retiring Ms. Typpo’s name plate and badge so her legacy is intact with the City of St. Louis Park. He read a plaque of recognition and presented it to Ms. Typpo. Ms. Typpo thanked all in attendance for their support, friendship, and love, stating it was an amazing experience. She also thanked all who helped her be part of the St. Louis Park Fire Department. b. St. Louis Park Parktacular Ambassadors Introduction & Recap of Year Maggy Meyers, Parktacular co-director, provided a recap of the Ambassador’s year representing St. Louis Park. The Ambassadors attended 80 events such as parades, coronations, and community service projects. She thanked the city for their support of this program and invited the council to the coronation and the June 13, 2018 senior dinner, which is the kickoff to Parktacular. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 2 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 Ambassadors Jasmine, Autumn, and Adrianna introduced themselves, thanked the city council for supporting Parktacular, and described their favorite events. Councilmember Brausen thanked the Ambassadors for their service, noting it represents the best of St. Louis Park. Councilmember Rog congratulated the Ambassadors on participating in 80 events, noting it is a wonderful youth development program and also thanked the leaders of this program. Mayor Spano commented on how often he has seen Ambassadors at community events and extended the city’s appreciation for their representation of St. Louis Park. c. City Volunteers and Boards and Commissions Volunteers Proclamation Mayor Spano read a proclamation recognizing and thanking the city’s volunteers, board, and commission member for their service and declaring April 20, 2018 as Volunteer Recognition Day in the City of St. Louis Park. He extended the city council’s appreciation for their service to St. Louis Park. Councilmember Brausen thanked the city’s over 1,300 volunteers who contribute over 10,000 hours of their time and talent, stating it is a blessing to the community. d. 4th Annual SLP Earth Day Community Meal and Town Visioning Proclamation Mayor Spano read a proclamation declaring the 4th Annual SLP Earth Day celebration on April 24, 2018 at the St. Louis Park high school cafeteria. Lindsey Prestholdt, a senior high school student, SLP SEEDS’ Youth Board Member, and Earth Day Community Meal Event Co-Chair, introduced herself and described her volunteer involvement with these organizations. She stated they had brought a petition including 600 signatures addressing food equity and this year would like to add another 200 signatures to that petition. She invited the council to SLP Earth Day events on April 24, 2018 and described the activities that will take place. Lynda Enright, District School Nutrition Advisory Committee (SNAC) Member, registered nutritionist, and Health in the Park Better Eating Champion, introduced herself and Sharon Lehrman and described their background as dieticians and work to raise awareness related to mental health issues and physical activities. They are advocates for better eating in schools and throughout our community, as well as funding a referendum for improved kitchens. She stated now is the time and they will be submitting a petition next month to address food insecurity and food inequity to eliminate hunger by addressing it in the 10-year plan and making it a priority. Sarah Wilhelm Garbers, Human Rights Commission Chair, indicated she was thrilled to partner in this event and stated support to have this conversation about equity in the city, noting the other human rights commissioners are also behind this effort. Ms. Wilhelm Garbers announced and invited all to attend the community conversation on April 24th. e. Recognition of Donations Mayor Spano announced and expressed thanks and appreciation for the donation by the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park in the amount of $1,000 for the recreation division’s summer concert series. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 3 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes of March 26, 2018 It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to approve the March 26, 2018 Special Session Meeting Minutes as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 3b. Special Study Session Meeting Minutes of April 2, 2018 It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve the April 2, 2018 Special Study Session Meeting Minutes as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 3c. City Council Meeting Minutes of April 2, 2018 It was moved by Councilmember Harris, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to approve the April 2, 2018 City Council Meeting Minutes as presented. The motion passed 7-0. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar 4a. Adopt Resolution No. 18-060 to recognize Part-Time Firefighter Nicola Typpo for 20 years of service. 4b. Designate Peterson Companies, Inc. as lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of an agreement with the firm in the amount not to exceed $951,326.38 to redevelop the girls fast pitch softball fields in Aquila Park. 4c. Approve a Temporary Liquor License for Heilicher Minneapolis Jewish Day School for their Annual Meeting to be held on June 7, 2018, at the Sabes Jewish Community Center, 4330 Cedar Lake Road in St. Louis Park. 4d. Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Finnegans Community Fund at Gamble Drive and the adjacent privately-owned parking lot in West End for June 02, 2018. 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 18-061 providing for the Sale of $8,800,000 General Obligation Bonds 2018A. 4f. Adopt Resolution No. 18-066 supporting the City of St. Louis Park’s application for becoming a 2018 – 2019 Minnesota GreenCorps Member Host Site. 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 18-062 authorizing fund equity transfers. 4h. Adopt Resolution No. 18-063 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from the Rotary Club of St. Louis Park in the amount of $1,000 for the Recreation Division’s Summer Concert Series. 4i. Adopt Resolution No. 18-064 approving the Fifth Amendment to the Contract for Private Redevelopment with Central Park West, LLC and the modification to the CPW Phase II Assessment Agreement. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 4 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and Commissions - None 6. Public Hearings 6a. First Reading of Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter Sec. 12.08 Related to Voting Method Sara Maaske, charter commission chair, stated when this was brought to the charter commission, a series of six meetings were held to discuss Rank Choice Voting (RCV) starting October 24, 2017. Staff collected and provided data from past years, the commissioners reviewed that material and asked questions of staff. The charter commission convened December 6, 2017 to review additional information and delegated to an executive committee, plus two additional members, to put together a proposal for a public process to consider RCV. The executive committee presented their proposal to the charter commission in January of 2018 that included an expert panel meeting and a listening session. Terry Dwyer, charter commission secretary, stated the first meeting in the public process was held with a subject matter expert panel, selected by the charter commission, who answered an extensive list of questions prepared by the charter commission and covered 90 minutes of testimony. On March 6, 2018 the charter commission held a public listening session where the public was welcomed to speak. There were at least 25 participants at that session and almost all spoke in favor of RCV. Mr. Dwyer stated the charter commission met on March 13, 2018, expressed final thoughts on the process, and voted 10 to 2 in favor of forwarding a recommendation to the city council to amend the city charter to permit RCV. Councilmember Mavity stated the matter before the council tonight is to vote for or against RCV. She asked whether the charter commission’s deliberations got into implementation of RCV in terms of top three, top six. Ms. Maaske stated the charter commission did not get into details of implementation. Mayor Spano opened the public hearing. Diane Steen-Hinderlie, 2829 Yosemite, referenced comments of Tom Freedman, a famous analytical journalist from St. Louis Park, noting the initial stirrings for a RCV campaign may have been when he spoke to a packed auditorium at the high school last spring. Mr. Freedman had said RCV was the next best step for democracy to take. Ms. Steen-Hinderlie stated she hopes the council will unanimously support it. Ms. Steen-Hinderlie stated if the voter was able to rank as many as one desires, there is likelihood you will take a chance on a woman, ethnic minority, blue collar worker, or someone with a disability. She encouraged the council to have St. Louis Park be the model for cities who update their election process. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 5 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 Elaine Savick, 7708 W. 13½ St., a resident since 1979, stated she has been an election judge for many years and thanked the council for eliminating municipal primaries. She felt RCV will inspire more people to come to the polls and Professor Schultz had inspired her as he said RCV increases voter turnout, as it did in Minneapolis and St. Paul, which is a good thing for representative democracy. Professor Schultz stated RCV also elects candidates by the majority of voters. Ms. Savick thinks RCV will make St. Louis Park an even better city and asked the council to move forward with adoption as soon as possible. Katherine Christoffel, 3920 Excelsior Blvd., #431, stated about a year ago she was attracted in part to the city by its reputation for open mindedness and diversity and she was delighted to learn RCV may be coming to St. Louis Park. Now she is learning more about RCV and urged the council to make it the law of the land. Ms. Christoffel called attention to the most compelling benefits of RCV: positive influence on voting processes and outcomes, as it has been proven to increase voter participation and voter diversity. It assures the winning candidate is the consensus candidate (instead of the lesser of two evils), it encourages all candidates to reach out to all voters and thus expanding the range of issues each candidate must address, and moderating the tone in which they are addressed. She noted some have argued to block RCV on complexity grounds, but she thinks rank choice has become natural in our time as we make rank choice decisions when shopping, ordering at a restaurant, etc. RCV is clearly feasible, as experienced elsewhere, and advice on means are readily available to put RCV into effect here. She has been struck by the ‘whiteness’ of the bodies here even though the city has a substantial minority population. She noted at the charter commission most spoke in support and this is an opportunity to approve RCV for upcoming elections. Julia Davis, 2810 Xenwood, spoke in support of RCV, stating she hopes St. Louis Park joins the communities that have already adopted RCV as it encourages civility in elections. Since candidates need to avoid negative campaigning, they need to appeal to voters who may support another candidate to gain a third or fourth rank and potentially gain a seat. It will increase the diversity of elected officials to more accurately reflect our demographics by allowing third-party candidates to be considered. It encourages a more complex and nuanced approach to issues as both voters and candidates will need to listen more closely to the full range of opinions of election issues. Ms. Davis stated she is excited about his prospect and thanked the council for their consideration. Zaylore Stout, 4942 N. 6th St., Minneapolis, a former council candidate and human rights commissioner, stated St. Louis Park has been at the forefront to address race equity issues. The city has participated in a year-long program regarding race equity with goals to gain better understanding, analyzing policies and practices from a race equity perspective, strategizing with others in how government can advance race equity, hired a race equity coordinator, and won the League of Minnesota Cities president’s award for its commitment to this issue. He asked the council to continue that work and think about RCV from a race equity perspective and lens. He noted the future of diverse candidates who look like him cannot campaign on their ability to purchase their grandparents’ home in St. Louis Park, having lived in St. Louis Park for 40 years, or as a third-generation St. Louis Park resident because the practice of redlining, which occurred through 1946, prohibited the sale of homes to certain minorities. Mr. Stout stated RCV helps counteract systemic inequalities in the voting system with disenfranchised or discouraged minority voters in the electoral process as candidates or as voters. Mr. Stout stated a failure to act on an important reform like this leads us to believe the city is giving ‘lip service’ to the important issue of equity City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 6 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 and equality that it is championing in other areas. He stated the city’s government needs to reflect the community they are tasked to represent, and RCV is an important step in making that aspiration a reality. Roger Cruze, 3953 Xenwood Ave. S., spoke against RCV because he found it was not good government and does not promote diversity in government. As an example, he noted if the Republicans had used RCV in the nomination process, Ted Cruz would have been the nominee, not Donald Trump. Mr. Cruze stated he would be surprised if 2% of the voting population actually know how RCV works. Anyone knows how to put a number against a candidate but they do not know what it means. He felt that anyone who says RCV supports, promotes, or fosters diversity in politics doesn’t know how it works because the first thing that happens when the vote is counted is that diversity gets eliminated. Mr. Cruze noted that last month someone came from Minneapolis said they had a high voter turnout because of RCV and that’s nonsense. He believed the candidate did their job, knocked on a lot of doors, and got a lot of people interested. That’s the cause of high turnout, it wasn’t causal, it was coincidental. Also last month, someone from North Minneapolis who was a candidate said he was elected by RCV but, rather, he was elected because he got people to vote for him and in a runoff election, he would have won handily. He believed RCV is good for incumbent politicians but bad for the rest of us because we will know less about the politicians and it will be much harder to change regimes. Mr. Cruze asked the council to please not adopt RCV for St. Louis Park as it is not good government. Suzann Willhite, 3905 Glenhurst Ave., a 20-plus year resident, stated she served as an election judge for several years, likes high voter turnout, and believes representative democracy is based on an informed and engaged public. She supports RCV for voter reform, participation, representation, more positive campaigns. Ms. Willhite stated she has done door knocking to get people out to vote, but it is a challenge when they say their vote doesn’t matter or there is no candidate they support, which she sees in her own family. She thinks RCV gives voice to people who feel they don’t have good choices or the candidates don’t represent them. Ms. Willhite stated we need a reform in voting to engage more public in voting. She supports RCV for state and national elections and urged the council to vote unanimously to support. Dorothy Doyle, 3041 Marilyn Ave. S., a 27-year resident, stated her support for RCV. As an example, she commented that a few years ago there were four great candidates running for Hennepin County commissioner. She attended a debate where each made great points about county issues including transportation, parks and housing. Ms. Doyle stated it was agonizing to narrow it down to only one so ranking would have served her well at that time. It would have made the investment of her time to learn about the candidates even more valuable because she would have had more input into the outcome. Ms. Doyle asked for the council’s unanimous approval of RCV because of its potential to improve and reward democratic participation. Sean Brown, 4228 Salem Ave. S., stated when he learned the council eliminated primaries, he was perplexed and frustrated the decision wasn’t made to then include RCV. He noted when you eliminate primaries, have multiple candidates, ask for one election and chance for voting, then you can have a split vote or elect a person who may not be backed by the majority of voters in the district. When the charter commission considered RCV, he stated he had come to the meeting with a ‘chip on his shoulder’ but now wanted to thank them City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 7 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 for their careful work to evaluate this. After learning more about it, he does not think there is a good reason to not support it. He urged the council to support it. Susan Niz, 2800 Alabama Ave. S., stated St. Louis Park should support RCV because it will nurture the election process in which the merit of an individual will hold more weight than their circumstance of privilege, campaigns will be more civil and sincere, and they will build relationships. She felt that in St. Louis Park, people of color are not represented in our government. She asked the council to reflect back to when they decided to run for public office and the campaign tools they packed like experience, communication, passion, commitment, and vision for a better community. Ms. Niz stated community engagement needs to happen not only at city hall but also at Oak Park Village Apartments, Meadowbrook Apartments, Louisiana Courts Apartments, and in the hearts and minds of every resident of our city. Ms. Niz stated then, that minority candidate can pack her campaign suitcase with the same tools including her passion, talent, vision, next to another important tool - opportunity, which is the proactive flip side of privilege. She felt RCV is extremely important because it is a systemic change, a policy change, and does not rely on sentiment or intention to be effective. It shifts the structure of our democracy just enough to nudge open the door and create opportunity, which counters privilege, work to repair inequity, and build a city that lives up to the sentiment that all are welcome here. Michael Faeth, 3517 Pennsylvania Ave. S., stated he is a local middle and high school social studies teacher. He explained why it is difficult and depressing to teach elections due to there being a limited number of candidates, lack of diversity, ideologically and racially. He stated it can also be chalked up to money and politics, special interest groups, though that may not be much of an issue at the local level. Mr. Faeth stated it is hard sometimes to explain to students why there is a lack of voter turnout, not enough people running for local offices, or how people in local municipal offices came to be where they are today. He stated it is hard to explain why nobody who looks like they look sit in positions of power. He noted that while RCV is not a panacea of those problems, he thinks anything that nudges us towards an acknowledgement of opening the gates for different people, for third parties, or gives nod to saying we are open to competition, a voice you have not heard before, or to something that you do not expect to see. He stated RCV may give acknowledgement to the attempt to create a system that is more equitable, fair, and arguably more just. He asked the council to vote on that behalf. Debbie Blake, 4091 Colorado Ave. S., a resident since 1972, stated she is a strong advocate to adopt RCV because she is convinced it will result in more candidates running, citizens coming to polls, more diverse candidates, and give voters more diverse choices, which makes elections more competitive and gives voters more reasons to turn out. Ms. Blake stated in cities where RCV is used, voter participation is on the rise, such as in Minneapolis and St. Paul where voter participation was at a nearly 20-year high. She stated RCV encourages more people and diverse populations to vote so their voices truly are heard and that should be a top civic priority. In addition, candidates engage more voters and run a campaign that centers on ideas and policy discussions rather than mudslinging. Ms. Blake stated she thinks our democracy is in peril nationwide and RCV will address this disengagement. She stated RCV can play a small role in St. Louis Park to help build a better system. She hopes the council will vote to adopt RCV and continue the city’s legacy in smart government and community leadership. She noted you can’t change the entire country, but you can be a positive voice in how we elect local leaders and that might inspire others to follow our example. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 8 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 Olaf Jorgenson, 2737 Alabama Ave. S., stated he attended the charter commission meetings and is an advocate of RCV, noting only one commission member was skeptical about RCV and had asked the panel why it would matter if a city like St. Louis Park adopted RCV since it is unlikely to have a hotly contested six-candidate mayoral election, so what is the difference. Mr. Jorgenson stated as a Ward 1 resident, he participated in a primary election for city council last year and while RCV would not have altered the outcome, it would have made a difference in who finished second and the actual vote breakdown. He stated this is important if you want the best people on the ballot because if on the ballot, you can win on Election Day. He stated the council needs to approve RCV so after a few more years, when others adopt RCV, then it can move to the state level. Deb Brinkman, 4327 Alabama Ave. S., a 30-plus year resident, stated she is speaking on behalf of the League of Women Voters of St. Louis Park. She described the League efforts relating to election issues, empowering voters, and improving government. The League supports RCV as it is a positive approach to increase voter participation, engagement, and improve voter representation. She stated following an exhaustive study of various election methods in 2005, the League of Women Voters Minnesota supports the use of RCV in local and state elections. It is also supported by the League of Women Voters St. Louis Park, Senate District 46 DFL, and the St. Louis Park human rights commission. She stated they are happy with the charter commission’s favorable review of RCV. Ms. Brinkman stated there have been dozens of resident letters in the Sun Sailor in support and hundreds of residents have participated in community events to learn about RCV. Education plays a key role in those percentages and the League of Women Voters St. Louis Park and League of Women Voters Minneapolis are committed to providing ongoing education at a grass roots level. She stated the St. Louis Park charter gives us the authority to govern and administer our own elections and respectfully requested the council’s unanimous approval of RCV. Bruce Fisher, 4359 Browndale, stated his parents moved to St. Louis Park in 1948. He had graduated from high school, moved away, and then moved back. Mr. Fisher noted there is not much more to say and he thinks the conversation boils down to helping open the ballot with more candidates with more diverse points of view, it promotes consensus, with a greater potential for a majority winner, and efficiently and effectively combines the primary with the general election. Mr. Fisher stated it will be less expensive since the primary has been discarded and this is a more efficient way to conduct elections. He hopes the council votes it in. Justin Grays, 6405 W. Franklin Ave., stated change begins at home and St. Louis Park is our home. He stated in the presidential election, the president received 27.3% of the vote. He noted that matters because it says the system endorses minority rule, but he wants a system that encourages everyone to have a voice in the system and have someone in office who represents the broadest possible population base. He felt St. Louis Park also needs RCV to encourage other municipalities and states to have it, noting that things flow up, so when you make a change at home, it goes up until eventually it hits the federal level and we all have RCV. He encouraged the council to support RCV, noting eventually change will happen. Karl Gamradt, 3347 Virginia Ave. S., stated every new experience is a lesson in life and the big question is whether or not you actually learn the lesson. Mr. Gamradt stated in 2016, City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 9 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 the presidential election was a new experience, some of which was the race itself, the fact the majority of people did not vote for the guy who took office, and the overall tenor was awful. Last year in Minneapolis, despite what was said tonight about regime change, RCV was in place and a lot of 20+ year candidates got unseated and the data supports there was a lesson learned in Ward 3. Mr. Gamradt stated now the big concern unresolved in St. Louis Park is the fact that our elections are inherently different and not contentious as people generally get along, but as seen in 2016 you can’t guarantee that is always going to be the case. He asked whether we will learn the lesson or keep the present system and hope it stays business as usual. He stated the council has the opportunity to make that change and encouraged them to make it. Gail Dorfman, 4200 Forest Rd., thanked the charter commission for moving RCV forward as it engages more voters in the critical aspect of civic participation, something this city has long valued. The council’s decision to eliminate the primary made sense and she felt this was the next step that also makes sense. She noted the blueprint to implement RCV already exists, it is efficient and cost effective, and has worked well in other communities. She stated her hope the council decides to move this forward tonight. Sara Wilhelm Garbers, 3212 Idaho Ave. S., reminded the city council that in September, they received a memo from the human rights commission indicating they unanimously voted to lend their support to RCV. She encouraged the city council to do so as well. It was noted the following were not in attendance; however, had provided testimony via e- mail: Jim Leuthner, 3128 Florida Ave. S.; Mary Armstrong, 2565 Xenwood; Catherine Gray, 2700 France Ave. S.; Douglas Johnson, 4093 Utica Ave. S.; Honorable Jacob Frey, Minneapolis Mayor; and, Tim Bardell, 2333 Parkwoods Road. Mayor Spano closed the public hearing. Councilmember Harris asked if RCV passes, what resources are available to help with voter turnout and candidate development for minority and indigenous folks. Mr. Harmening stated if RCV passed tonight, there are a lot of folks here tonight who will get the word out about RCV. More traditional supporters are the League of Women Voters, , neighborhood leaders and staff. He explained the council first needs to write the rules for RCV and once that is in place then the city will get the word out before November of 2019 assuming all of the technical pieces are in place and approved. Mayor Spano stated in his work at the Secretary of State’s office, staff has said that turnout is driven by candidates and how engaged voters are in their candidate. He thanked the charter commission for their careful work to evaluate RCV. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve First Reading of an ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter by adding Sec. 12.08, Voting Method to allow for the use of Ranked Choice Voting in municipal elections. Councilmember Brausen stated RCV is a fair and equitable system and the review process has been fair and thorough, noting the charter commission reviewed it and citizens voiced approval by a large majority. Councilmember Brausen stated he supports adopting RCV without need for referendum. He noted he had replaced an African American woman when City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 10 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 elected to the city council when she recruited him to run after she had trouble recruiting a candidate of color. Councilmember Brausen restated his support for RCV and encouraged candidates of color to run for office. Councilmember Miller thanked the charter commission for their careful work. He felt there were a lot of reasons to support RCV and he can’t articulate better than those who voiced their comments tonight with a focus on creating an environment for people of color to run for office through a number of means, including the ability to vote for a non-establishment candidate. This council and staff have been working for several years to move our city forward in terms of race equity including training, exercises, and hiring a race equity coordinator. He explained he is impatient and likes to move faster by getting leaders in our organization who are of different colors. Councilmember Miller explained if this does not pass unanimously tonight, then the next step would be a referendum to the voters, but he would rather not wait. In addition, there is talk in the State Legislature about preempting a city like ours from instituting RCV. He stated if this is not passed tonight, it feeds the perception that RCV is controversial and should not be left up to cities to decide. Councilmember Miller stated he supports the ordinance. Mayor Spano asked the city attorney to talk through the referendum process. Mr. Mattick advised if it goes to a referendum, it could go on the ballot for a vote this November. Assuming it passed, then it would be worked on to get the technicalities in place and approved. Once that is completed the system could be used for municipal elections. Councilmember Hallfin asked if it does not pass tonight could a majority of the council vote to put it to a referendum. Mr. Mattick stated if it does not pass unanimously tonight, then a simple majority of the council can put it to a referendum. Councilmember Hallfin asked about the process if it passes unanimously and citizens don’t want it. Mr. Mattick explained those citizens can submit a petition within 60 days and then council could decide to either let the issue die or move forward with a referendum. Councilmember Brausen asked if not passed unanimously tonight, can the council consider a motion to put it on a referendum immediately or would that have to occur at a separate meeting. Mr. Mattick advised it would normally be sent back to the charter commission so they could initiate it or the council can give the charter commission language for a recommendation. Councilmember Hallfin stated this is a tough decision and while everyone who spoke said it was a ‘no brainer,’ to him it is a fundamental change in how the council is voting and fundamentally deciding how they themselves get elected. He explained he does not think RCV is a bad thing and ultimately may be good for St. Louis Park. But for the seven of them to say how they get chosen is his internal struggle. Councilmember Hallfin stated he has heard a lot of good information and is still undecided at this very moment so he would like to hear his colleague’s thoughts. Councilmember Hallfin recounted those he had talked with, including several charter commissioners and stated the testimony of the high school teacher impacted him as students are saying the St. Louis Park city council is not representative of the community they serve. In addition, the endorsement by the League of Women Voters and human rights commission are huge. He explained what bothers him is when people say a more civil election will result because he has lived in St. Louis Park since 1967 and has never seen an City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 11 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 uncivil election in the city. Councilmember Hallfin noted someone said you need to trust the voters to do this, but to him that is an argument to go to referendum to decide how the council is elected. Councilmember Mavity noted Councilmember Hallfin always takes the recommendation from the city’s commissions into consideration. She stated she hears a lot that democracy is more at risk and to her it feels more at risk so having this conversation feels kind of sacred and she takes it seriously. She stated she appreciates the folks who have concerns about this, as does her husband. She understands those concerns and does not dismiss them lightly. In addition, it is critical to its success in how we educate people about RCV. She stated she has full faith it will be passed tonight. Councilmember Mavity emphasized that every vote matters and it is distressing that people think their vote doesn’t matter. She recounted that in the mid-1990s she had lived in Russia four years, shortly after former Russian President Boris Yeltsin said they would start a democracy. While there, she worked on that effort and trained folks on elections. She felt that in the United States, we don’t fully appreciate how precious this is as she remembers one meeting in Russia where folks were talking about how they had literally struggled their entire lives and been put in prison for the right to vote. Councilmember Mavity stated her support for any process to clear that way, bring people into the process, and inspire people to become involved. Councilmember Mavity pointed out that the city’s charter, when written, envisioned this very moment and laid out a process for the council and charter commission to move this forward. That something this important would require 7 votes, so the charter already gives the power and authorization to do this. She stated the city has a path and a lot of organized support and if not, then they will come forward and the council can put this on a referendum, but she is not seeing that happening. Councilmember Mavity stated the council has already eliminated the primary, which was the first step to improve elections. But that was only the first step and if not doing RCV, then it is not as fair or inclusive as it could be. Councilmember Rog thanked the charter commission for their work and thoughtful debate, staff for responding to the charter commission and council’s needs and questions, and the citizens. She stated she also feels this is a sacred moment, noting all who came to the podium had prepared thoughtful comments. Councilmember Rog stated she also received well-crafted e-mails that were 100% in support and she would like the opportunity to talk to the detractor. She stated she supports RCV, thinking the council is not picking how we get elected, but instead are opening the process, which should be done. She stated everything about RCV excites her and the person ultimately elected to the St. Louis Park council next, unless elected by more than 50% in the first round, will clearly represent more people in St. Louis Park. With that process, people will know their vote matters and people will become more engaged. Mayor Spano thanked the charter commission for their work on this matter and stated he is glad it was sent to an external body to talk about it. He stated he enjoyed the expert panel and found their observations to be helpful. Mayor Spano noted RCV talks about increasing turnout, reducing the power of money, increased engagement and civility, and assures we will have a majority-plurality issue, which in his opinion are all true and also not true. Mayor Spano stated he has seen elections with very high turnout without RCV and with City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 12 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 RCV; very bitter elections involving RCV and bitter elections without RCV; and, RCV where the 50% vote getter did not get elected. He stated there are arguments that suggest correlation but maybe not causation and he feels it is alright to acknowledge that not every data point is met, yet it is difficult for some strong supporters of RCV to concede those points. Mayor Spano stated this issue, for him, is the position of the city on the issue of race and having a city council that represents the community. He stated he spoke to people of color or indigenous folks who were candidates or wanted to be candidates about why they ran and why they didn’t win. One of the compelling arguments made was that people of color and indigenous folks lack a legacy in some of our communities. They have not lived here 40 years. Mayor Spano stated he did not run that way. For him, St. Louis Park was a destination city because his wife is from Duluth and he grew up in Kansas. They could have lived anywhere, but picked St. Louis Park. He stated he knows other candidates who have used those very same arguments, who are people of color, and it did not resonate. Mayor Spano stated he is not suggesting it didn’t resonate specifically because of race but thinks there’s a good chance that was the reason. Mayor Spano stated when he talked to them about their experience running, they argue that RCV lowers the barriers to entry and maybe they won’t win on the first run but it will create name recognition and the experience of running for office. He stated he started to dial into this issue in particular. He described his study of 10-12 cities that use RCV in elections, ranging greatly in size, racial composition, and system of local government. Yet, every single one had a high percentage of people of color and indigenous folks on their council. He reviewed the ratios, noting St. Paul was the lowest with 1 out of 7 being a person of color. Mayor Spano stated in looking at this consistent data point, it tells him it may solve that problem, it is something St. Louis Park should have, and the only way to know if it will work is to try it. He noted approving RCV does not preclude a future council from determining that a different system works better. Mayor Spano stated he has been skeptical on many of the data points but based on this one, he will support RCV tonight. The motion passed 7-0. Mr. Mattick advised that second reading will be considered by the city council on May 7, 2018 and enactment will require another unanimous vote. If adopted, citizens can contest with a petition signed by 2,000 people or 5% of the electorate at the last election within 60 days. If a petition is not received, then the council will develop the details of what RCV will look like. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items 8a. Tenant Protection Ordinance. Ordinance No. 2534-18. Ms. Schnitker presented the staff report. She stated the tenant protection ordinance requires a three-month period following the ownership transfer of a NOAH multi-family residential property during which the new owner is required to pay relocation benefits to tenants if rent is increased, existing residents are rescreened, or non-renewals are implemented without cause. NOAH properties would be defined as buildings where at least 18% of the City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 13 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 units have rents affordable to households with incomes at or below 60% Area Medium Income (AMI) with 18% mirroring the percent of affordable housing required at 60% AMI per the city’s inclusionary housing policy. Ms. Schnitker explained the three-month protection period provides time for tenants to seek out resources and alternative housing if rent increases are too high for them, re- screening is problematic, or the owner intends to do non-renewals without cause. The three- month tenant protection period starts at the time the new owner sends notice to the tenants. Ms. Schnitker stated a public hearing was held on March 5, 2018 at which a number of comments were received in favor with no comments in opposition. There were a few comments and questions by the council and the staff report provides those responses. She explained if the second reading is approved, the ordinance will be published April 26, 2018 and take effect July 1, 2018. Staff is drafting the necessary criteria to implement, monitor and enforce compliance of the ordinance. In addition, staff will develop a comprehensive notification process to ensure the St. Louis Park rental community, including owners, property managers, and tenants are informed and understand the requirements of the ordinance. Tenant assistance organizations and advocates will also be made aware of the ordinance. It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Brausen, to waive the reading and adopt Second Reading of Ordinance No. 2534-18, amending Chapter 8, Section 8-336 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances relating to a tenant protection period following the sale of an affordable housing building and authorize publication of summary ordinance. The motion passed 7-0. Councilmember Brausen stated his appreciation for the many hours and effort of staff, the rental community, land owners, property owners, and housing advocates. Councilmember Harris stated she is pleased with passing this naturally occurring affordable housing ordinance as many live in lower income housing and feel maxed out so she supports what the council can do as a policy making body to preserve their ability to stay in our community. She thanked her colleagues for preserving this housing. Councilmember Mavity stated this is the result of a lot of hard work and long negotiations between the landlord group and advocates, as well as a lot of good will that she appreciates in helping get to this resolution. She noted this is one tool the city can now use to help protect our residents so when a sale happens, they are not thrown out without notice or their rents raised summarily. It will provide time for advocates to work with tenants and while not a full solution, it is one tool she is delighted the city has. Councilmember Rog thanked all who made this possible as it is a step in right direction but there is more to do. She stated the city will need to track what happens and determine whether this is enough time for the tenant to get new housing. She noted there is one building in the city that is threatened with changes and increasingly the city will see more emerging threats to people who are appreciating affordable housing and proud and happy to have this. In addition, other communities are watching St. Louis Park and she is happy we are the leader on this issue. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 14 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 8b. Approval of 2018 – 2023 Garbage, Recycling, Organics Recycling and Yard Waste Collection Contract. Resolution No. 18-065. Ms. Fisher presented the staff report regarding the designation of Waste Management (WM) as the contractor for residential garbage, recycling, organics recycling, and yard waste collection services (solid waste collection), noting the council authorized staff to obtain the lowest cost option for a five year contract. She reviewed the major changes in the 2018-2023 contract and described resident outreach efforts. It was noted the timeline, if authorized for signature, would be effective October 1, 2018, with changes to organics recycling and every-other-week (EOW) garbage service levels effective January 1, 2019. Staff will return to the council this summer to work out changes to solid waste rates in cooperation with finance staff and provide an update on communication and outreach efforts. Councilmember Hallfin noted you can also request a larger recycling cart. Ms. Fisher indicated that is correct, residents can choose a 30-, 60-, or 90-gallon cart and may request an additional cart at no extra cost. Councilmember Harris stated the change with organics not being put with yard waste starts January 1, 2019 and asked for clarification on cart storage as some folks have smaller sized garages. Ms. Fisher explained that residents who participate in organics collection would need to make space for those bags of yard waste but the solid waste ordinance does not require all carts to be stored inside the garage. Staff will include that information in the program guide so that is communicated to residents. Councilmember Harris relayed that a family member had communicated with Ms. Fisher and found her response to be prompt and thoughtful. Councilmember Brausen noted that with every other week trash collection, the requirement is being engaged in the organics program. Ms. Fisher stated that is correct. Staff will work out the specific requirements and it may include backyard composting. Councilmember Brausen stated his support to consider organics composting. He noted the city council laid out the requirements they wanted in the contract and did not know the name of the contractor until staff’s recommendation. Councilmember Mavity stated she supports the recommendation but is disappointed there is not every week recycling because the cost is too great for residents to pay. She stated her family does a lot of recycling and their bin is always overflowing, noting she learned to reduce, reuse, recycle but maybe there should be emphasis through educational materials to reduce, so it lowers what needs to be recycled. It was moved by Councilmember Brausen, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to waive the reading and adopt Resolution No. 18-065, which designates Waste Management (WM) as the contractor for residential garbage, recycling, organics recycling, and yard waste collection services (solid waste collection) and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a contract with MW for that service. Mayor Spano stated five years ago when this started, St. Louis Park was one of the first to have an organized curbside organics program and on occasions when he is speaking about City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3d) Page 15 Title: City Council Meeting Minutes of April 16, 2018 other issues like sustainability and mentions the organics program, it receives applause. Mayor Spano noted that Hennepin County is now going to require it as part of their bid package for solid waste. He thanked his colleagues and residents who supported this action. The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Councilmember Harris commended the city’s police department and street snow plowing team that use science and technology to quickly remove record snowfalls. She stated support to consider a recognition resolution. Following a short discussion on the positive comments the council has received, Mr. Harmening was directed to prepare a commendation resolution for consideration at the next council meeting. Councilmember Rog announced the upcoming Lenox Foundation fund raiser and SLP SEEDS event at Parkway Pizza that will include a talent show. Councilmember Harris announced the Climate Action Plan launch party kick off on April 22, 2018 from 2-5 p.m. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:53 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Minutes: 3e UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 16, 2018 The meeting convened at 5:35 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jake Spano, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller, and Margaret Rog. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Community Development Director (Ms. Barton), City Planner (Ms. Monson), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Housing Supervisor (Ms. Schnitker), Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Olson), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Wirth). Guest: Dave Miller (consultant). Mayor Spano shared that he had sent a donation and letter to a gentleman from Manchester, UK who owns a café and organized a day of kindness to counter the ‘Punish a Muslim’ movement. In the letter, he described the impact living in England and a multi-cultural society had on him during an important time in his life. Mayor Spano stated the gentleman e-mailed a reply, called to talk, and asked if the letter could be shared with local media in England. Subsequently, KARE 11 was contacted and interviewed him so there may be some local coverage. 1. 2040 Comprehensive Plan Update Discussion Housing Goals and Strategies Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report and overview of the 2040 comprehensive plan process with the intent to look long range so day-to-day decisions are easier or considered in a long-range context. She indicated all cities work with the Met Council, which is the regional planning agency, and State law requires comprehensive plans to be updated every ten years. She explained the Met Council develops regional plans, owns and operates the sewer system for most of the metro area, and since it does land planning, will not extend sewer unless its requirements are met. It also deals with regional transportation issues, funding, and housing. Ms. McMonigal noted, however, that St. Louis Park is fully developed and close in so it has not had any issues meeting the requirements of the Met Council. Since the Met Council has control of the sewer system, urban sprawl is contained in the metro area, creating methodical development, which is good for planning, efficient systems, and reducing congestion. She explained the livable communities grant program, noting St. Louis Park was one of the first to receive that grant, as it created a walkable neighborhood that was denser and one the Met Council served with transit. In addition, the Met Council has required plan elements relating to housing, parks and trails, transportation, and land use. Ms. McMonigal reviewed the steps and considerations that have occurred since the 2040 comprehensive plan process started in June of 2017, noting the planning commission will prepare a recommendation on June 6, 2018, and the city council will take action to send it out to City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 2 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 surrounding communities on June 18, 2018. During that time, additional review can also be conducted with final plan adoption by the city council in December of 2018. The Housing Chapter is under review tonight. Ms. McMonigal reviewed the additional elements that St. Louis Park has added to describe the ‘flavor’ of the city. Ms. Schnitker described the programs that are city funded, federally funded, and those administered by the housing authority. Councilmember Mavity asked whether CDBG funds were used. Ms. Schnitker answered in the affirmative. Ms. Schnitker reviewed the housing goals, strategies, and inclusions in the plan. She explained this is a long-range plan so items can be changed, as needed or appropriate. The housing goals were approved by the council in 2014 and serve as a basis with strategies then following. The overall housing goal takes into account a balanced and enduring housing stock that offers a continuum of diverse lifecycle housing choices suitable for households of all income levels including affordable, senior, supportive, and mixed-income. The strategies relate to creating a broad range of housing types; review of existing policies, programs, and regulations to remove barriers to innovative and creative housing options; to establish affordable housing policies and provide equitable housing choices; to use data and research to guide and evaluate housing priorities, policies, and programs; and, to use infill and redevelopment opportunities to help meet housing goals. Councilmember Brausen stated his concern is whether the plan adequately reflects the adoption of the climate action plan, thinking strategies should be added in all areas to increase use of renewable energy sources and reduced carbon footprint. Councilmember Mavity agreed. Ms. Olson noted the mention of green building techniques in one of the goals. Councilmember Brausen supported it being an overarching goal as in time, it will be required for all building projects. Councilmember Mavity asked what is meant by a fair housing policy. Ms. Schnitker stated that the proposal would be for the city council to adopt a fair housing policy for the city. Councilmember Mavity commented on the difference between fair housing policies and affordable housing policies, wanting to be careful the city isn’t saying it supports the concept of the ‘fair housing folks.’ Ms. Schnitker clarified the intent was not looking at desegregation but looking at equitable housing. Ms. Barton stated staff is looking at implementation down the road. Councilmember Mavity commented on three communities that are suing under the fair housing act because each think they have too much affordable housing. She stated she wants to be cautious of the message being sent out. Councilmember Rog agreed and suggested it be included in the overall listing. Ms. Schnitker stated the next housing goal relates to single family homes to place a high priority on creating, preserving, and improving the city’s single-family housing stock, noting the two additional strategies were added to allow accessory dwelling units on all low-density parcels and allow two-family dwelling units (twin homes and duplexes) on all appropriately-sized single- family parcels. Ms. Barton stated requirements will be added around those items. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 3 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 Councilmember Mavity noted technically you could have three units on one lot. Ms. Barton stated you could either have one or the other. Councilmember Mavity stated her preference to use ‘and’ rather than ‘or.’ Councilmember Mavity drew attention to the goal wording for single-family, home ownership, and preservation, safety and sustainability that indicates ‘the city places a high priority on…’ However, this is different from the wording for multi-family that indicates ‘the city is committed to promoting…’ Councilmember Mavity stated if considering the race equity lens, she wants to challenge that wording and revisit the assumption behind whether or not the council believes that single-family is better, a higher priority, than multi-family. She noted with regard to single-family or multi-family, you can have ownership in either of those categories. Councilmember Mavity stated the city needs to be careful of saying it is better to be an owner and asked what that is saying, whether the city is being inclusive and considering the issue through a race equity lens. She stated the wording read to her as being exclusive. Councilmember Mavity raised the issue of the excess land task force and stated she does not think the city has a lot of excess land on which to build single-family homes so to her, it is a false narrative as the city does not have that as a high priority. However, she noted the city can create ownership opportunities in multi-family situations. Councilmember Brausen agreed, noting a priority was to promote more move-up housing. Councilmember Hallfin stated he also agrees and thinks it is coming from when the council had a priority for move-up housing to address young families who buy a smaller house and want to stay in the city. Because of this, he did not find it to be a false narrative and if the city has opportunity in some places, then this wording should stay in the plan. Councilmember Mavity felt there was opportunity to remodel, but there were no open spaces to build single family. Councilmember Hallfin pointed out there are open spaces where the city could certainly build single-family and that may be a future discussion. Councilmember Rog stated a potential solution is to word the goals more specifically without using ‘places a high priority on’ or ‘is committed to.’ She noted the council can continue the important discussion on content but differently word the goals and strategies. Mayor Spano asked if this will get down to that granularity. Ms. Barton responded if the council agrees with the goal but not as stated, this is the time to ask for it to be changed. Councilmember Mavity stated these words were previously used with intention. Councilmember Harris asked, with addressing single-family and zoning, is it also the time to explore whether we want to expand to include triplexes and quads. She asked if there has been a discussion in how to be expansive, maximize the land we have, and get more dwelling units without it being a high-rise. Councilmember Brausen stated the wording could be changed to ‘city wants to preserve and improve.’ Councilmember Rog suggested indicating ‘the city will’ instead of ‘wants to.’ City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 4 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 Councilmember Miller noted the intent of the goal under discussion is to change single-family homes to make them more than one single-family dwelling. Councilmember Brausen stated previously it was to create more single-family houses and bigger houses so he would like to change the goals. Mayor Spano stated the goal wording does not say it is the highest priority. Councilmember Mavity noted it does not include multi-family so it is sending that message relating to single-family. Ms. Schnitker suggested dropping the words ‘places a high priority on’ from this goal so it reads similar to the multi-family goals. Mayor Spano asked if the city wants to push home ownership over other strategies. Councilmember Mavity felt that was the second question, pointing out you can rent single-family homes and own multi-family homes. She asked if the city places different values on single-family or multi-family buildings, and on ownership versus rental. Those are two policy questions. Councilmember Mavity stated she does not agree with the current wording. Councilmember Rog asked if the city should seek a balance. Councilmember Miller stated he doesn’t understand why those two questions are important. Councilmember Mavity felt they were important because they drive staff work and in what staff brings forward for council consideration, such as move-up housing. She noted the council had changed the wording to say we still want move-up housing, not as big, but instead sufficient space for the modern family. With energy conservation, the council removed the word ‘big’ and instead call it ‘family-sized homes.’ Councilmember Mavity stated she think this still responds to ‘big’ with two-car garages and instead should support houses expanding in place. Councilmember Miller stated it sounds like the council supports building an affordable component into ownership and rental. He asked whether that is not what accessory units and two-family dwelling units will do, to make them more affordable. Councilmember Mavity stated it addresses adding more units and eventually it may trickle down to that but the key thing is that this sends the message that a renter is less valued to us as a council. Councilmember Miller stated he does not think that is what it says, noting it will be reworded by staff. Councilmember Harris asked about increasing the income cap to allow more into the move-up housing opportunity. Ms. Olson explained the city cannot change the income levels for the programs with federal or state loans. Mayor Spano stated when viewed through a race equity lens, he does not think they align. Councilmember Mavity stated that is because of the racial disparities in housing, noting Minnesota has the worst homeowner disparities in the USA and that is the case in St. Louis Park as well. She City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 5 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 found the wording telegraphs that single-family homes and the narrative on home ownership is valued more so it does not send the inclusive message that she thinks the council wants to send. Mayor Spano asked if it would discourage a person of color or indigenous person from moving to St. Louis Park because the city supports home ownership over renting. Councilmember Mavity stated no one is reading the comprehensive plan when moving into St. Louis Park but she thinks this does not reflect our values if viewed through a race equity lens. Ms. Schnitker clarified the intent is not to say one type of housing is more important, but rather to talk about all housing in the city and 58% of the housing in St. Louis Park is single-family housing. Ms. Barton suggested changing the wording so all is uniform between housing classifications. Councilmember Hallfin stated this is one segment of our housing and it is important, but not saying it is more important than a different segment of housing. All are important. Councilmember Mavity stated all have voiced support to reword to the housing goals to remove ‘places a high priority on.’ Mayor Spano supported a future conversation on diversity in home ownership opportunities that may not happen in this statement. He stated he is not making that assumption because people of all different backgrounds may not be interested in owning a home and building that equity. Councilmember Rog stated she found the word ‘blighted’ to have a negative connotation and suggested instead to use wording like ‘functionally obsolete.’ She referenced the third bullet point indicating: ‘Promote high-quality architectural design standards of homes through the use of good design, quality materials, and superior construction.’ Councilmember Rog stated she prefers the language used in the land use section indicating: ‘design complementary and compatible with existing neighborhood character.’ Ms. Barton stated that will be revised. Ms. McMonigal asked if the wording relating to two plus garages should be rewritten. Councilmember Mavity supported removing ‘bigger’ as it is not sustainable and to instead support smart design to support families. She stated the council needs to be careful to not reinforce ‘McMansion’ conversions. Ms. Schnitker stated staff will review and rewrite those sections. Ms. Schnitker presented housing goals and strategies for multi-family, noting it contains existing strategies. Councilmember Rog supported emphasizing family-sized affordable since the city increasingly sees developers are not addressing that need. Ms. Barton suggested addressing it under affordable housing instead. Ms. Schnitker stated it would be appropriate in this section if addressing two- and three-bedroom units. Ms. Schnitker presented home ownership goals and strategies. Councilmember Brausen suggested including ‘near light rail’ because the city wants to avoid loss of affordable housing wherever it may be. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 6 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 Councilmember Mavity noted the council voiced support to remove ‘places a high priority on’ wording. Councilmember Rog asked staff to reword the third bullet point to use ‘people with disabilities’ instead of ‘disabled residents.’ Ms. Schnitker presented affordable housing goals and strategies, noting the change to the first strategy. Councilmember Rog stated concern with using 80% of AMI for some of the units. Ms. Schnitker explained the Met Council uses 80% of AMI as an affordability factor but usually it is for single- family properties. Ms. Schnitker continued review of the affordable housing strategies and sub-strategies. Councilmember Mavity stated support for the third bullet, ‘promote the inclusion of affordable housing opportunities in new developments located near the Southwest Light Rail Transit Corridor and other transit nodes, retail, and employment centers and commercial mixed-use districts’ as it reflects the leadership St. Louis Park has with regional conversations and to assure the conversation is regional and other cities are working together. She suggested adding ‘resources and tools to create and preserve housing.’ Councilmember Rog stated support for a stronger focus on senior housing in this section as she has heard of a great need in St. Louis Park for senior housing options, but she does not see it coming through. She also supported strengthening the last bullet on affordable housing to say, ‘emphasize our nonprofit and community partnerships to achieve our funding goals.’ Ms. Schnitker stated staff will reword that bullet point. Councilmember Rog stated her understanding of the difference between ‘affordable housing’ and ‘workforce housing,’ is that people working at prevailing wage can afford to live in workforce housing, which is not subsidized. Ms. Schnitker explained the two terms are interchangeable and not something different. She noted if you look at a workforce housing for households with lower incomes, it is probably in the 50-60% median income range and the city targets housing to the income. Councilmember Mavity stated workforce housing is a marketing term so people won’t think it’s affordable housing. Ms. Schnitker noted the rents would be the same regardless. Ms. Schnitker reviewed the preservation, safety, and sustainability goal, noting it will be reworded to remove ‘places a high priority on.’ She referenced the strategy added to proactively address health hazards in housing and advance design that supports physical and mental health. Councilmember Harris stated as she looks at various goals in the draft copy, rental isn’t as specifically called out. She noted the first page of the document talks about the different types of housing, the second page is reflective of income. Given there is 58% home ownership and 42% is rental, she asked whether there should be a section in the housing chapter specifically calling out rental rather than inferring multi-family is rental. Ms. Barton suggested referring to owner and rental in the goals. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 7 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 Councilmember Mavity stated Councilmember Harris’ point is correct that it does not specifically address rental. Councilmember Harris stated if included, it may speak to programs being addressed regularly. Councilmember Mavity noted perhaps preservation should be part of that. Ms. Schnitker stated staff will look at how to ‘beef up’ that language. Land Use Goals and Strategies Mr. Walther described the recommendations of the planning commission based on their discussion. In the interest of time, he asked the council to focus their comments on which goals and policies needs to be changed, and on what was missed, and suggested if they want items to be reworded, to ask staff to look at it again. Mr. Walther provided an overview of the land use categories, noting the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) category is new and focuses on two of the light rail stations to allow a higher density range and mixed uses oriented around the stations along the proposed Green Line LRT. Councilmember Mavity asked whether Business Park allows housing. Mr. Walther stated it does not. Mr. Walther reviewed the current density and proposed density ranges (units per acre) for the land use categories. Low density residential would go from 3-7 units per acre to 3-10 units per acre, accounting for some changes to allow slightly different housing types and accessory uses. Future zoning study will determine the regulations that would accompany those housing types. Councilmember Harris asked if there is a location in St. Louis Park that has a density of 10 units per acre in a low-density residential area. Mr. Walther stated staff can research that information. Councilmember Rog asked if the number of people in the household is addressed. Mr. Walther stated it is not. Councilmember Rog stated she would like to discuss expanding the maximum of unrelated in a household. Councilmember Mavity supported having that conversation. Mayor Spano asked if this is talking about adding duplexes in low density residential areas. Mr. Walther stated it is not automatically allowed but this change would allow flexibility to explore that option. Mayor Spano noted a lot of neighbors would have interest in that issue. Mr. Walther agreed and stated the proposed Comprehensive Plan change removes one major barrier to further exploring the idea through future zoning studies and amendments. Councilmember Miller asked if having the TOD classification will reduce the number of PUDs. Mr. Walther stated that will depend on how this is implemented in the zoning code. Currently, there is not a zoning district to allow for 125 units per acre so a PUD is the only way to get there. Councilmember Miller stated the concern is that with a PUD, the city has a considerable amount of control on every aspect of the development. But with TOD, he thinks the city may lose some control over those larger developments. Mr. Walther stated possibly, but it depends on how the city chooses to implement the Comprehensive Plan Transit Oriented Development through the zoning code. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 8 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 Councilmember Miller stated he likes PLACE because of its features and the flexibility given to the council through the PUD that allowed that to be created. He wants to make sure the TOD would not take away or diminish the council’s ability and flexibility. Mr. Jeff Miller, HKGi, explained TOD is a land use category; the PUD is a zoning tool. Mr. Walther stated staff suggests removing references to PUDs from the land use plan and address it through zoning. Councilmember Brausen asked if it can be part of the TOD land use category to require a PUD. Mr. Walther indicated best practices would not include a zoning requirement in the comprehensive plan. Ideally, the plan should give people clarity in what to expect in development and the range of density that would be allowed. Councilmember Mavity stated she understands the concern with needing the flexibility and control on what goes in. Mr. Walther presented the livable communities goals and strategies, noting the addition of living streets design principles to enhance the corridors’ appearance and environment and to incorporate Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles and practices into building and site design to maximize visibility and eyes on the street. He asked if the council has comments. Mayor Spano asked about the wording of the goal. Mr. Walther suggested it be edited to insert a comma and remove the redundant ‘and.’ Councilmember Rog stated in looking at the climate action plan and racial commitment, more should be incorporated into the wording to reinforce those priorities. Councilmember Harris stated to emphasize celebrating multiple cultures in St. Louis Park goes a long way to preserving and utilizing neighborhood nodes. She stated she is thinking about Texas and Minnetonka where there is diversity of people and unique cafés when compared to the rest of the city. Councilmember Mavity noted Texas is missing from the list of streets. Mr. Walther stated staff will edit that language to indicate more generically ‘community corridors’ instead of listing specific streets by name. Councilmember Harris asked if the language addressed buildings with pedestrians in mind, noting some have papered over their windows. Mr. Walther stated that can be regulated through the zoning. Councilmember Mavity noted it is an ongoing challenge with Fresh Thyme. Councilmember Brausen stated the language does not reference prior comprehensive plans or whether those past goals have been met. Mr. Walther noted each section addresses where “we have been” and “where we are today” and that is an appropriate place in the document to address past accomplishments. Mr. Walther presented commercial and land use goals and strategies, noting Councilmember Harris’ comments on neighborhood nodes could be addressed here. Councilmember Rog referenced language addressing commercial surface parking lots and the climate action plan and asked if the plan can discourage parking lots or encourage rain gardens. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 9 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 Ms. Schnitker stated that is what this section speaks to. Councilmember Rog suggested adding the word ‘environmental.’ Councilmember Brausen agreed and suggested requiring commercial and office to comply with the climate action plan. He noted the sooner that is required in the code, the better, as buildings will be coming on line in the next few years will still be here in 2040. Councilmember Mavity suggested adding… ‘and environmentally sustainable.’ Mr. Walther continued presentation of commercial and office land use goals and strategies, noting areas that need some rewording. He explained this addresses areas where a change may be needed and whether some of the C2 general commercial should change to C1 neighborhood commercial. Councilmember Mavity stated she agrees with the first bullet and thinks it will be helpful with the development community if this is truly what the council envisions. Mr. Walther stated this also addresses, in large commercial areas, looking at circulation through sites for community connections through the property. He noted there is a general plan goal, as industrial properties are turning over to residential and other uses, so the city wants to preserve a portion of industrial as it offers an employment base and diversity. In addition, there are other areas in the city that will be under redevelopment pressure in the future and the city would like to see the difficult buildings with a broader mix of uses within that area so there’s viable use of the buildings. He noted that may not be a true manufacturing/industrial use due to building restrictions. Mr. Walther stated that will be discussed in text, not indicated on the zoning map, to allow transition and a variety of use in those areas during the interim. Councilmember Miller asked if that will be identified on a map. Mr. Walther stated it could or it could be described in text what the areas would look like for industrial transitional. Councilmember Mavity stated in general she agrees with having that flexibility as it allows for a richer diversity of uses without getting too fine of a point, to allow it to organically develop on its own. However, she has some concern about the vast mix of zoning categories and now creating another one, especially when it seems to overlap existing. Mr. Miller explained this would be creating a new zoning district, not a new land use category in the Comprehensive Plan. Councilmember Mavity stated she prefers to reduce complexity. Councilmember Brausen stated he would like to see additional strategies to increase natural environments on public lands and increase access to public lands for those of diverse backgrounds and income levels. Councilmember Rog stated she supports increasing access and to make it an overarching concept in the land use plan. Mr. Walther stated some study has been done on that including looking at how many households have a park within a certain distance, or commercial, or grocery. Mayor Spano stated he agrees with the green space piece and having more greenery in St. Louis Park, but wants to differentiate green space to what end. If talking about getting people out to enjoy green spaces and public parks, the city will want to be mindful that what is planted in those places City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 10 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 also forecloses other uses. He would like to see more green space in and around commercial spaces, but also to be mindful to what end, and if to incent people to use the spaces, then to plan for that. Councilmember Brausen stated he was thinking about local parks where half is recreational uses and half is mowed, but instead, have it more natural area with trails as kids enjoy that as much as play equipment. Councilmember Rog asked whether the land use piece talks about affordable commercial the same as it talks about affordable residential, to incent small businesses to operate. Ms. McMonigal noted the economic and redevelopment section addresses that issue. Mr. Walther presented the future land use map, noting recommended changes to current land use designations, including location of TOD areas. Councilmember Miller stated the Sam’s Club area seems like a valuable spot and he would hate to miss the opportunity to have it be a TOD. Instead of Industrial Business Park and Commercial, he suggested it reflect what our goals are and then determine what the challenges are (i.e. soil). Mr. Walther noted that is a departure from the land use planning completed with a community advisory committee the city has done recently for the Louisiana Station Area, which emphasizes employment uses around this station area. Councilmember Mavity noted the city has station area plans for all of these, generally this reflects that, and because the area around Louisiana is mostly business, the council had looked at form based zoning to get at a more organic growth pattern and determine what may fit there by building size. She stated she does not know that they are inconsistent, but agrees if we have opportunity with the Sam’s Club site to control it and do more creative planning, we should do so. Councilmember Mavity stated on the Beltline site and mini storage, if it is 10 acres then the maximum would be 300 units. However, some are saying it will be 700 units so it is important to get clear information out on that to the community. She asked staff to provide her with that information and indicated she thinks medium density is appropriate for this area since it is guided to medium. Mr. Walther stated he will provide an example. Councilmember Mavity commented on density bonuses and stated she has not found they have worked well. Mr. Walther agreed and stated it is challenging to put the right number to it so it works and shows the cost benefit. He noted the maximum densities in each land use category reflect the upper limit, even with any density bonuses that may be used in the zoning code. Councilmember Brausen noted the zoning on the south side of Cedar Lake Road and Louisiana Avenue South goes from commercial to mixed use and asked why that is not the case on all four corners. It is the same situation with Texas and Minnetonka. Mr. Walther explained it was based on lot sizes and what staff thinks can be achieved on the site. Councilmember Rog stated with the parcel at Minnetonka Boulevard and Highway 100, she would like significant neighborhood input as there is a lot of interest in that area. Mr. Walther stated it is currently guided for commercial and there is residual land guided for right-of-way. Councilmember Harris asked whether, when parcels go from commercial to mixed use, it is the intention to maximize the development. Ms. Barton stated it is to allow more flexibility. Mr. Walther explained the change to mixed use would require, not just allow, mixed-use development City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 3e) Page 11 Title: Special Study Session Minutes of April 16, 2018 of the property, so it could not be a single use. In general, it would also result in an increase to what can happen on the site. Mr. Miller added it also presents an opportunity to gain a housing component. Councilmember Harris asked about the timeframe to take effect. Mr. Walther stated the changes will be adopted at the end of the year. Then there is a component to consider whether zoning map or other zoning changes would be required to implement the policies of the plan, which can take at least another six months. Councilmember Brausen asked whether the parcel on the northeast corner of Texas and Minnetonka could be mixed use. Mr. Walther indicated there was a lot of discussion with the planning commission about what was appropriate on that site. The city is undertaking a study of that area and in previous studies, it was suggested as appropriate for medium density multi-family housing, such as townhouses. Councilmember Miller asked how the next steps happen. Mr. Walther stated it will be taken in stages. Mr. Harmening stated it could also be addressed based on the council’s priorities. Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal) None. The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only: None. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Jake Spano, Mayor Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Consent Agenda Item: 4a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve Second Reading and Adopt Ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 12 to the Zoning Code and amending the Zoning Map from C-2 General Commercial to PUD 12 for the land legally described as: Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and approve the Summary Ordinance for publication. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does city council support this proposed redevelopment of the subject property? SUMMARY: Tower Place LLC requests a major amendment to the Park Village PUD to renovate the former Mann Theater building at 5400 Excelsior Boulevard for new uses. The application proposes medical office use on the entire first floor of the existing Mann Theater building, and proposes to keep the second floor vacant in the near term. The application requests that future renovations to the second story for permitted uses in the district, including medical office, be allowed to be approved administratively. A major amendment to the PUD is necessary because the original PUD ordinance included a specific mix of uses that were allowed for the site. The major amendment process includes rezoning the property from C-2 General Commercial to PUD and a zoning code text amendment. As part of this application, the previous PUD resolutions would be rescinded. An affirmative vote of four city council members is needed to approve the PUD. The planning commission held a public hearing on April 18, 2018. No one spoke at this time, and the planning commission recommended approval of the application with the conditions described in the staff report. City Council unanimously voted on May 7, 2018 to approve the resolution rescinding previous resolutions and approve the First Reading of the Ordinance to establish PUD 12. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: PUD Ordinance Summary Ordinance Development Plans Planning Commission Minutes Resolution 11-132 Prepared by: Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Karen Barton, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 2 Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) ORDINANCE NO. ____-18 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY CREATING SECTION 36-268-PUD 12 AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED NORTHEAST OF EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD AND STATE HIGHWAY 100 THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 18-09-PUD) for amending the Zoning Code to create a new Planned Unit Development (PUD) Zoning District. Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Commercial on the future land use map. Sec. 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from C2 - General Commercial to PUD 12: Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place, Hennepin County, Minnesota. Sec. 4. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development Zoning District: Section 36-268-PUD 12. (a) Development Plan The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD signed Official Exhibits: (1) Survey (2) A100 Main Level Plan (3) A101 Upper Level Plan (4) A300 Exterior Elevations (5) A301 Exterior Elevations (6) A302 Exterior Renderings (7) D2.1 Site/Drive Through Layout Plan (8) Planting Plan Area 3 (9) A1 Demo Plan, Patio Plan and Notes (10) A2 Elevations, Wall Section, Finish Plan (11) A2.03R Floor Plan and Elevations (12) Granite City Building Elevations (b) Permitted Uses The following uses are permitted uses: (13) Medical and dental office City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 3 Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) (14) Funeral homes (15) Libraries (16) Museums (17) Office (18) Parks and open spaces (19) Police and fire stations (20) Banks (21) Business/trade school/college (22) Retail shops up to 20,000 square feet (23) Service (24) Studios (25) Public service structures (26) Food service (27) Restaurants with or without intoxicating liquor. (28) More than one principal building located on a single lot. (c) Uses Permitted with Conditions The following uses are permitted if they comply with the conditions specified in this section: (1) Medical, optical and dental laboratories. The use shall not generate any fumes or odors which are detectable at the property lines of the parcel on which the use is located. (2) Private entertainment (indoor) with or without intoxicating liquor. If there is liquor then there shall be no separate bar area within the establishment. (d) Accessory Uses Accessory uses are as follows: (1) Catering if accessory to a restaurant, food service, delicatessen, grocery store or retail bakery. (2) In-vehicle sales or service. The conditions are as follows: a. Stacking shall be provided for six cars per customer service point and shall comply with all yard requirements. b. This use shall only be permitted when it can be demonstrated that the operation will not have a significant adverse effect on the existing level of service on adjacent streets and intersections. c. The drive-through facility shall be designed so it does not impede traffic or impair vehicular and pedestrian traffic movement, or exacerbate the potential for pedestrian or vehicular conflicts. d. Any canopy constructed as part of this use shall be compatible with the architectural design and materials of the principal structure. (3) Parking lots. (4) Parking ramps. (5) Public transit stops/shelters. (6) Outdoor seating with the following conditions: a. Public address (PA) systems are prohibited. b. Additional parking will not be required if the outdoor seating area does not exceed 500 square feet or ten percent of the gross floor area of the principal use, whichever is less. Parking will be required at the same rate as the principal use for that portion of outdoor seating area in excess of 500 square feet or ten percent of the gross building area, whichever is less. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 4 Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) (7) Outdoor storage is prohibited. (e) Special Performance Standards (1) All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this PUD shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking and screening requirements. (2) All solid waste materials containers shall be kept in the manner required by this Code. All solid waste handling and loading areas shall be screened from view. The screening shall be constructed from the same materials as the principal building. (3) Signs shall be allowed in conformance with the requirements found in the C-2 General Commercial zoning district. Sec. 5. The contents of Planning Case File 18-09-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 6. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing April 18, 2018 First Reading May 7, 2018 Second Reading May 21, 2018 Date of Publication May 31, 2018 Date Ordinance takes effect June 15, 2018 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council May 21, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 5 Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD) SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION ORDINANCE NO.____-18 AN ORDINANCE REGARDING PUD FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5400 EXCELSIOR BOULEARD This ordinance states that Section 36-268-PUD 12 will be created as a Planned Unit Development Zoning District for property located at 5400 Excelsior Boulevard. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Adopted by the City Council May 21, 2018 Jake Spano /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: May 31, 2018 EXTERIOR RENDERINGSA302DRAFTORIG. ISSUE DATE:REVISIONS:© 292 design group (2018)18106.00PARK NICOLLET HEALTH SERV.MANN THEATER: RENOVATION5400 EXCELSIOR BOULVEVARDSAINT LOUIS PARK, MN 5541603/13/183533 LAKE STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55406 612 767 3773Date:Reg. No: I hereby certify this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the state of Minnesota 00.00.2018 44897 Thomas J. Betti SHEET FOR REFERENCE ONLY Sheet released for reference only in Bid Package #1 - Structural Steel. All drawing on this sheet are subject to change.PUDSUBMISSIONCity Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 6 T1 S1 P N T RPNTRPNTRTRRE LOBBY UTILITIES UTILITIES TRASH MECH. VEST. ELEC. EXAM 15 EXAM 16 T1 S1 TOILET EXAM 13 EXAM 14 SURG. SCHED. LACTAT. EXAM 2 HYBRID TREAT. A PHOTO ROOM NEW STAIR TO UPPER LEVEL EXAM 1 HYBRID TREAT. B SUPPLY EXAM 3 HYBRID TREAT. C EXAM 4 HYBRID TREAT. D T1S1T1S1TOILET TOILET TREAT. E AESTHET. S1 TRMNT 6 TRMNT 5 TOILET TRMNT 7 TRMNT 8 TOILET SURG. SCHED. FRONTLINE T1 S1 TOILET CLINITEK SURG. SCHED. EXAM 1 T1S1TOILET EXAM 2 INSTR. REPROCESS NURSE MD NURSE MD SUB-WAIT S1 TOILET I.T. MAIL/ PRNT MGR./SUPER. MEDS MFDSEATING SEATING VEST. VEST. FRONTLINE RETAIL EQUIP. EQUIP.MFDTOILET T1S1T1 S1 T1 S1 TOILET TOILET TOILET EXAM 3 EXAM 4 EXAM 5 EXAM 6 TRMNT 1 TRMNT 2 TRMNT 3 TRMNT 4 EXAM 7 EXAM 8 EXAM 9 EXAM 10 EXAM 12 T1 S1 TOILET 62sf 172sf 307sf 80sf 283sf RENEW JAN. EQUIP. NEW WINDOWS EXAM 11T1T1110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 115sf 139sf 139sf139sf 139sf 139sf 158sf 175sf 110sf110sf 132sf 132sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 110sf 132sf 132sf 155sf 155sf 115sf 110sfT1S1TOILET 1 2 3 4 A D G H G F 1098765 A I E B C TPND 1 2 3 4 109765.13.1 B.7PNTR SUPPLY NURSE 201sf ELEV. MECH 136sf ELEV. 126sf UP +139.4" +209.1" H MEDS PNTR NURSE T1 NEW WINDOWS 1.8 2.1 1.8 2.1 7.1 8.1 8.3 8.4 6.4 NURSE MD G.5 E.6 8.7 LOCKER TRANSOM GLASS REF.REF.S4S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S2 S3 S3 S2 S2 S2 S2 S3 S2 S236LAT S2 S2 S2 S3S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 S3 MD BREAK S1 S2 S2S2 S2 S2 S3 S3PANEL PANEL SUMP SUMP RWL 0.7 0.1 0.7 0.1 6.13.2 139sf CR KPAiCRAiCR KPCRCRDBDBDBDBDBC C 1/8" = 1'-0" MAIN LEVEL REMODEL PLAN1 A100 NEW SOLID/PERF. METAL PANEL AWNINGS ABOVE EXISTING WINDOW OPENINGS, ATTACHED TO FRAME, ATTACHED TO WALL NEW PERF. METAL CLAD CANOPY ASSEMBLY, SEE STRUCT. FOR ADDITIONAL DETAILS MODIFY EXISTING CANOPY STRUCTURE FOR NEW PERF. METAL PANEL CLAD CANOPY ASSEMBLY INFILL DOOR OPENING INFILL DOOR OPENING WITH CONSTRUCTION TO MATCH ADJACENT INFILL DOOR OPENING WITH CONSTRUCTION TO MATCH ADJACENT INFILL DOOR OPENING NEW VESTIBULE CONSTRUCTION, SEE STRUCT. FOR ADDITIONAL INFORAMTION INFILL DOOR OPENING INFILL DOOR OPENING EXISTING TRANSFORMERS DRAFTORIG. ISSUE DATE:REVISIONS:© 292 design group (2018)18106.00PARK NICOLLET HEALTH SERV.MANN THEATER: RENOVATION5400 EXCELSIOR BOULVEVARDSAINT LOUIS PARK, MN 5541603/13/183533 LAKE STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55406 612 767 3773Date:Reg. No: I hereby certify this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the state of Minnesota 00.00.2018 44897 Thomas J. Betti MAIN LEVEL PLANA100 SHEET FOR REFERENCE ONLY Sheet released for reference only in Bid Package #1 - Structural Steel. All drawing on this sheet are subject to change.PUDSUBMISSIONCity Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 7 1 2 3 4 A D G H G F 1098765 A I E B C 1 2 3 4 109765.13.1 ELEV. MECH ELEV. DN +258" +209.1" DN B.7 6.4 ROOF ACCESS ABOVE STAIR 1 8 2 ' - 9 1 / 4 " L O N G E S T D I A G O N A L 145'-10 3/8" EGR E S S S E P E R AT EI O N (>13 DIA G O N AL) HVAC SHAFT G.5 E.6 8.71.8 2.1 1.8 2.1 7.1 8.1 8.3 8.4 6.4 G.5 E.6 8.7 +121'-6" +117'-0" +121'-6" +119'-0" +119'-0" 9'-0" CLEAR 15'-1" CLEAR 9'-4" CLEAR9'-10" CLEARFUTURE ELEV. MECH. ROOM 5'-2"DCD C 1/8" = 1'-0" UPPER LEVEL REMODEL PLAN1 A101 INFILL FLOOR OPENING TO MATCH EXISTING INFILL FLOOR OPENING TO MATCH EXISTING FLOOR HEIGHT INFILL FLOOR OPENING TO MATCH EXISTING NOTE: FUTURE INFILL ABOVE EXISTING SLOPED CONCRETE FLOOR TO MATCH 121'-6" FLOOR HEIGHT. DEPTH OF INFILL VARIES - FIELD VERIFY. INFILL TO CONSIST OF FOAM BLOCKING WITH 2" CONCRETE TOPPING FUTURE 2ND FLOOR HVAC UNIT ABOVE NEW 1ST FLOOR HVAC UNIT ABOVE MODIFY EXISTING RWL AS REQUIRED BY NEW LAYOUT EXISTING HVAC UNIT TO REMAIN FOR TEMP HEAT EXISTING HVAC UNIT TO REMAIN FOR TEMP HEAT EXISTING HVAC UNIT TO REMAIN FOR TEMP HEAT EXISTING HVAC UNIT TO REMAIN FOR TEMP HEAT DRAFTORIG. ISSUE DATE:REVISIONS:© 292 design group (2018)18106.00PARK NICOLLET HEALTH SERV.MANN THEATER: RENOVATION5400 EXCELSIOR BOULVEVARDSAINT LOUIS PARK, MN 5541603/13/183533 LAKE STREET MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA 55406 612 767 3773Date: Reg. No: I hereby certify this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Architect under the laws of the state of Minnesota 00.00.2018 44897 Thomas J. Betti UPPER LEVEL PLANA101 SHEET FOR REFERENCE ONLY Sheet released for reference only in Bid Package #1 - Structural Steel. All drawing on this sheet are subject to change.PUDSUBMISSIONCity Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 8 40 SCALE IN FEET Park Nicollet - Angled Parking Concept Parking Spaces: Existing - 234 Spaces Angled Parking Concept - 284 Spaces City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 9 SKYWAY PARK NICOLLET BLVD 39003900 BUILDING LOT (WEST LOT)713471118.5'25.45'63'25.45'18.5'18.5'24'18'24'18.5' 25'9'TYP5.81'DescriptionRev. Date 3900 PARK NICOLLET BLVD. WEST PARKING LOT ADDITIONSheet:Sheet Title:Project #:Drawn By:Checked By:Issue Date:12186000.018KBKGAB01.25.183524 Labore Road White Bear Lake, MN 55110 651.481.9120 (f) 651.481.9201 www.larsonengr.com C 2018 Larson Engineering, Inc. All rights reserved.P:\Projects\Projects - 2018\12186000.018 - Park Nicollet - 3900 Park Nicollet Blvd Parking Addition\C. Design\Drawing Files\CB - 2A.dwg3524 Labore Road White Bear Lake, MN 55110 651.481.9120 (f) 651.481.9201 www.larsonengr.com Larson Engineering, Inc. Project Title: PARK NICOLLET HEALTH SERVICES 5050 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 Client:Greg A. Buchal, P.E.Date: Reg. No.:01.25.18I hereby certify that this plan,specifications or report was preparedby me or under my direct supervisionand that I am a duly licensedProfessional Engineer under the lawsof the state of Minnesota.0NORTH10 20402AOPTION #2ANEW PARKING STALLS = 42REMOVED PARKING STALLS = 3TOTAL ADDITIONAL STALLS = 39PARKING STALL COUNTCity Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 10 D R A F T UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA APRIL 18, 2018 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jacquelyn Kramer, Meg McMonigal, Jay Hall, Mark Hanson, Phillip Elkin OTHERS PRESENT: 1.Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of March 7, 2018 and March 21, 2018 Commissioner Carper made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Person seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0. Commissioner Johnston-Madison arrived at 6:05 p.m. 3.Public Hearings A.Park Village Amendment to Planned Unit Development Location: 5400 Excelsior Blvd. Applicant: Tower Place LLC Case No.: 18-09-PUD Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She explained the amendment is requested to renovate the Mann Theater building. The proposal is for medical office use on the entire first floor of the building. The second floor will be kept vacant in the near term, with possible medical office use in the future. Ms. Kramer provided background on the Planned Unit Development. She reviewed zoning compliance, parking, traffic and signage for the application. She noted that a neighborhood meeting was held on April 3. No residents attended the meeting. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 11 Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission April 18, 2018 Page 2 Commissioner Peilen asked if the Mann Theater was closing regardless of the application. The applicant Ross Hedlund, Frauenshuh Companies, said Mann Theater is closing May 20, 2018, regardless of the proposal. Commissioner Peilen said she understood Chipotle is moving to the Granite City site, McDonald’s stays where it is and Bruegger’s Bagels is closing and may be looking for a new location. Mr. Hedlund said Bruegger’s Bagels was closing and he did not think it would be relocated. He added that Caribou Coffee and Boston Market will remain in the same location. Chipotle will move to the western half of the Granite City building. Health Partners Delta will be going to the eastern 2/3rds of the former Granite City building. Commissioner Peilen asked about the condition of the current parking lot. Mr. Hedlund responded that the asphalt is pretty worn and they do plan to refresh it. He said the lot is 25 years old. Commissioner Tatalovich asked about parking that would be required for the second floor development. Ms. Kramer stated that parking for the second floor does not need to be provided with the current application. She said proof of parking was asked for to make sure it could be added to the site when needed. Chair Robertson asked if there is a potential use for the second floor that would intensify the parking requirement. Ms. Kramer responded that the most likely use would be medical office. She explained how the second floor is a hard space to renovate. Mr. Hedlund said he believes the second floor would be for medical office. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked what kind of a clinic would be located at the first floor site. Mr. Hedlund said it would be a specialty clinic for urology and a specialty clinic for plastic surgery. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak he closed the public hearing. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 12 Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission April 18, 2018 Page 3 Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending rescinding Resolution 11- 132 and recommending approval of a major amendment to the Planned Unit Development subject to staff conditions. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. 4.Other Business: None 5. Communications Ms. McMonigal, Principal Planner, said that May 30 is being held as an additional date for a Planning Commission study session on Comprehensive Plan if needed. Ms. McMonigal noted the upcoming Climate Action Plan Launch Party on April 22. Commissioner Carper stated that the Lenox Foundation, which supports the St. Louis Park senior program, is having a fund raiser on April 24 to be held at Parkway Pizza. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 6:20 p.m. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 13 RESOLUTION NO. 11-132 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 11-033 APPROVED ON MARCH 7, 2011 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 14:6-7 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED "0" OFFICE, C-2 COMMERCIAL AND R -C HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD AND HIGHWAY 100 Amends and Restates Resolution 11-033 Major amendment to allow for site modifications, construction of a new 6,600 square foot building along Excelsior Boulevard, and improvements to the McDonald's building WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received on April 5, 1993 from the applicants, and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was mailed to all owners of property within 350 feet of the subject property plus other affected property owners in the vicinity, and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD Plan was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on May 5, 1993, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary PUD concept at the meeting of May 5, 1993, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the meeting of May 17, 1993 and continued the hearing until June 2, 1993 and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary PUD on a 6-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD at the meeting of November 1, 1993, and WHEREAS, the Planmng Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD on a 6- 0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public heanng or otherwise including comments in the record of decision, WHEREAS, Resolution No. 93-183 approving the PUD was approved by the City Council on November 15, 1993; and WHEREAS, an application for an amendment for a PUD was received on July 26, 1994, and City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 14 Resolution 11-132 - 2 - WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 94-103 approving an amendment to the PUD was approved by the City Council on August 1, 1994, and WHEREAS, an application for an amendment for a PUD was received on November 22, 1994, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 94-180 approving an amendment to the PUD was approved by the City Council on December 5, 1994, and WHEREAS, on June 17, 2002, Frauenshuh Companies filed an application seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow a change in an approved use from a retail use to a restaurant use, and WHEREAS, on July 17, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 6-1 recommended approval of the major amendment to the PUD, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, and WHEREAS, on December 21, 2005, Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd. filed an application seeking a minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow modifications to the exterior of the structure, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, WHEREAS, on December 21, 2005, Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd. filed an application seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow structural alterations at 5500 Excelsior Blvd., and WHEREAS, on February 15, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 6-0 recommended approval of the major amendment to the PUD, and WHEREAS, on January 18, 2011, Granite City Food and Brewery filed an application seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow for the expansion of an outdoor patio at 5300 Excelsior Boulevard, and WHEREAS, on February 16, 2011, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 4-0 recommended approval of the major amendment to the PUD, and City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 15 Resolution 11-132 - 3 - 0WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, WHEREAS, on September 19, 2011, Park Village LLC and McDonald's USA, LLC filed an application seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow for site modifications, construction of a new 6,600 square foot building along Excelsior Boulevard, and improvements to the McDonald's building at 5200 Excelsior Boulevard, and 0 WHEREAS, on November 2, 2011, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 6-0 recommended approval of the major amendment to the PUD, WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Recitals The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein and made part of this resolution. Findings 1. Frauenshuh Companies has made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 14:6-7 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the "0" Office, C-2 Commercial and R -C High Density Multiple Family Residence Districts located at the northeast quadrant of Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 100 for the legal description as follows, to -wit: Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 93 -18 -PUD) and the effect of the proposed Final PUD and amendments thereto on the health, safety, or general welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that approval of a Final PUD and the proposed amendments thereto will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has determined that the proposed Final PUD and amendments thereto are in harmony with the general provisions, purpose and intent of the City's Zoning Ordinance and its Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 14: 6- 7.2(E). City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 16 Resolution 11-132 - 4 - 4. The contents of Planning Case File 93 -18 -PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing and the record of decision for this case. Conditions and Approval A Final PUD at the location described in paragraph 1 of the above findings is approved based on the recitals and findings set forth above, the Approved Final Plans, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of the roadway improvement plans submitted as part of the Indirect Source Permit application by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. 2. Approval by the City and execution of a development agreement between the City and Frauenshuh Companies which identifies responsibilities of each relating to the project. 3. Recording of the final plat of Tower Place by Hennepin County. 4. The Contract for Private Development between the Economic Development Authority EDA) and Frauenshuh Companies is incorporated herein by reference. City Council intent is to implement both the Contract for Private Redevelopment and the development agreement and give effect to all provisions of each, including but not limited to the EDA's right to review and approve Construction Plans as provided in Section 9.2 of said Contract for Private Development. 5. The approval of this Final PUD applies only to those elements listed as Phase I improvements on Exhibit A — Master Plan Phase I to be completed by Frauenshuh Companies on Lots 6 and 7 and the right-of-way adjacent thereto up to the curb of the adjacent road. This condition is subject to the limitation that the total square footage of the retail and theater development shall not exceed the lesser of 47,200 square feet or the square footage allocated to this development in the Indirect Source Permit as may be amended from time to time. 6. The City reserves the right to require the applicant to install a pedestrian access from any bus stop to be located on the north side of Excelsior Boulevard west of Park Nicollet Boulevard to the development site. 7. Development of Lots 6-7 Tower Place and improvements on adjacent right-of-way up to the curb of the adjacent road shall be in accordance with the following exhibits: Exhibit A — Site Layout (Sheets C2.3) Amended by Condition No. 11 approved 8-19-02) Exhibit B — Site Utilities (Sheets C3.3) Exhibit C — Site Grading (Sheets CA .3) Exhibit D — Site Planting (Sheet L2.3) Exhibit E — Site Lighting (Sheet El) Exhibit F — Building Elevations (Sheets A2.00R, A.202R, A2.03R, A2.01R) Amended by Condition No. 11 approved 8-19-02) City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 17 Resolution 11-132 - 5 - The Site Layout (Exhibit A) is approved with the condition that vehicles leaving the site from the driveway on Park Center Boulevard shall be prohibited from making left turns to south bound Park Center Boulevard. The Development Agreement shall make provision for on-going monitoring of the need for the left turn prohibition and removal of the left turn prohibition if such monitoring indicates the prohibition is unnecessary. The Site Layout is based on the assumption the driveway on Excelsior Boulevard will allow both ingress to and egress from the site. The Floor Plans on Exhibit F are illustrative in nature and are subject to modification without amending this resolution. Amended by Condition No. 8 approved 8-1-94) Amended by Conditions 9 and 10 approved 12-5-94) 8. Condition number 7, Exhibit F is amended to delete Building Elevation Sheet A.202R and replace it with Building Elevation Sheet A-2 Amended by Condition No. 9 approved 12-5-94) 9. Condition number 8, Exhibit F is amended to delete Building Elevation Sheet A-2 and replace it with Building Elevations Sheet A-11 dated November 10, 1994. 10. Condition number 7, Exhibits A through D, is amended by deleting sheets C2.3, C3.3, C4.3 and L2.3 and replacing them with Sheets C2.1, C3.1, C4.1 and Planting Plan, all dated November 16, 1994. These exhibits are modified by Exhibit G, McDonalds Dnveway Plan. 11. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 02 -36 -PUD) on August 19, 2002 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow a change in 3,500 sq. ft. of tenant space from retail to restaurant without intoxicating liquor (Chipotle) and add the following conditions: a. The site shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits (Exhibits A Site Layout and F Building Elevations shall be submitted), in the form of an as -built survey with proposed changes shown and shall be revised prior to signing the exhibits to meet the following conditions for the outdoor seating area on the southwest corner of the theater/mixed use building: 1. The outdoor seating area must provide a 5 foot wide sidewalk that is kept free of temporary and permanent obstruction. Such sidewalk must be 6 feet from and parallel to the building (or continue in a straight line from the sidewalk to the east). 2. The outdoor seating area cannot be enclosed with a fence. 3. A maximum of two existing handicap parking stalls may be removed to accommodate the outdoor seating area. 4. The size of outdoor seating area cannot be more than 10% of the indoor restaurant area. b. Official exhibits as revised per condition 11 a. and updated to show as -built conditions on the overall site must be signed by the applicant and owner prior to issuance of a building permit. Such exhibits shall show the approved uses of this development to include: 7,000 square feet as restaurant with intoxicating liquor, 3,400 sq. ft as restaurants without intoxicating liquor and/or food service, retail/service, 3,800 sq. ft. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 18 Resolution 11-132 - 6 - as restaurant with in -vehicle sales/service, and in the Theater/Mixed use building 26,000 sq. ft. for a theater, 900 sq. ft for retail/service, and 5,900 sq. ft for retail or restaurant without intoxicating liquor. c. Required building, plumbing, electrical and other required permits shall be obtained from the City. Such permits may impose additional conditions. d. All required improvements shall be completed pnor to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new restaurant without intoxicating liquor, including: 1. Interior improvements in accordance with permit approval. 2. Compliance with Accessibility Code requirements. 3. Exterior exhaust chase must comply with the MN State Building Code. e. Prior to installation of any new signs the applicant shall obtain sign permits. f. The applicant is responsible for the installation of the on-site regulation signage as recommended by SRF. 12. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 05 -75 -PUD) on February 6, 2006 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow modifications to the exterior of the building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions: a. The exterior of the building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. shall be modified as shown on Sheet A200 of the official exhibits. b. Required permits for construction and installation of signs shall be obtained from the City. Such permits may impose additional conditions. c. Any modifications to the building footprint shall require a Major Amendment to the Tower Place PUD. 13. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 05 -76 -PUD) on February 21, 2006 toincorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow structural alterations to the building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions: a. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits. b. No dining shall take place in the area planned for a brewery. 14. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 11 -02 -PUD) on March 7, 2011 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow for expansion of an outdoor patio at 5300 Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions: a. Prior to use of the patio, the landscaping plan shall be revised to reflect the recommendations of the City's Environmental Coordinator. b. All necessary permits must be obtained. c. Specifications for tree protection and erosion control fencing must be submitted and approved by the City's Environmental Coordinator. Required tree protection and erosion control fencing must be installed prior to grading activities. 15. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 11 -24 -PUD) on December 5, 2011 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow for site modifications, construction of a new 6,600 square foot building along Excelsior Boulevard, and improvements to the McDonald's building at 5200 Excelsior Boulevard and add the following conditions: a. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official Exhibits as referenced herein. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 19 Resolution 11-132 - 7 - b. The PUD approval allows for modifications to the parking and dnve-aisle layout, expansion of the drive-through at McDonald's, and construction of a new 6,600 square foot building along Excelsior Boulevard. c. The PUD approval allows for modifications to the total parking available on the site. Following construction of all proposed improvements, a total of 256 spaces will be located to the south of the buildings; and a total of 383 shared parking spaces will be located in a parking lot to the north of the buildings, owned and shared by Park Nicollet. d. The developer shall submit a financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the costs of public sidewalk and trail installation, repair/cleaning of public streets/utilities, and tree replacement/ landscaping. e. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the plans shall be revised to incorporate a sidewalk, stairs, or other means of direct access to the existing sidewalk along Excelsior Boulevard immediately to the west of the proposed new 6,600 square foot retail building. f. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Zoning Administrator shall review the original conditions of approval for the entire PUD site. In order to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy, the developer shall ensure compliance with all previous PUD conditions, including site plan requirements pertaining to landscaping. g. Revie A total of 45 bicycle parking spaces are required. Bicycle parking may be provided internally and externally. Proof of bicycle parking is acceptable for outdoor bicycle parking, but a minimum of 20 outdoor bicycle parking spaces must be provided. for Administration: City Attest: t tfCityClerk Adopted by the City Council December 5, 2011 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Park Village Planned Unit Development (PUD)Page 20 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Consent Agenda Item: 4b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities and City Council Norms RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the strategic priorities and Council norms as developed at the January Council workshop and May follow up session. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Is Council prepared to approve the strategic priorities and Council norms? SUMMARY: On January 18 and 19, 2018, Council participated in a workshop facilitated by consultants ML Rice and Bridget Gothberg. Discussions included Carver Governance, four stages of team development, Council norms/unwritten rules and relational learning. The second day was focused on St. Louis Park past, present and future, Vision 3.0 and developing strategic priorities. Retreat outcomes: •Build a foundation for a high functioning/high performing City Council. •Understanding of where we have been and are at today as an organization and community. •Understanding of each Councilmember’s own vision, ideas and priorities for the future. •Begin to discuss and possibly reach consensus on big bowl priorities for the next ten years. At the conclusion of the two day workshop, Council reviewed and updated its norms/unwritten rules and also created groupings of ideas and priorities for the future. Council directed staff as follows: •Staff is to take the information developed from discussions on priorities and strategic priorities and propose big bowl priorities/goals for Council review. •City Council met with consultant ML Rice at May 7 Study Session where they discussed and finalized strategic priorities. •Council also reviewed and discussed updated norms. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: This action puts into place the city councils strategic priorities for the next ten years. These priorities and focus areas will be reviewed annually and updated as necessary. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Strategic Priorities with Focus Areas Updated Council Norms Prepared by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 2 Title: St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities and City Council Norms DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: Council participates in a workshop each year to allow for a deeper discussion on business, general communication and learning. This workshop was held on January 18 and 19, 2018 and facilitated by consultants ML Rice and Bridget Gothberg. Discussions included Carver Governance, four stages of team development, Council norms/unwritten rules and relational learning. The second day was focused on St. Louis Park past, present and future, Vision 3.0 and developing strategic priorities. Council workshop outcomes: • To build a foundation for a high functioning/high performing City Council. • Understanding of where we have been and are at today as an organization and community. • Understanding of each Councilmember’s own vision, ideas and priorities for the future. • Begin to discuss and possibly reach consensus on big bowl priorities for the next ten years. Strategic priorities development process by reviewing: • The past 25 years: 1990-2015 where the City has been • The present: 2016-2017 and 2018 in process, where the City is currently • The future: 2018-2028 - 10 year concepts, vision, opportunities, challenges - What the future might look like - Overview of strategic priorities - Council discussion and commitment A follow up workshop session was held May 7, 2018 and facilitated by ML Rice. The purpose was to review the draft of the strategic priorities and finalize for approval. After significant work and discussion, the following strategic priorities were agreed upon: • St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. • St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. • St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood- oriented development. • St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the City comfortably, safely and reliably. • St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. Attached is the full document showing strategic priorities and also includes focus areas under each to be used as guides by staff to support each area. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 3 Title: St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities and City Council Norms Important Note: The five strategic priorities are intended to articulate and provide direction to staff on those things the City Council feels will have the most powerful/positive impact on the St. Louis Park community by 2028. This will allow staff to create work plans and assign resources accordingly. These five strategic priorities will be reviewed annually to make sure they are still relevant, and course corrections will be made by Council as necessary. Finally, staff should recognize that above all else, it must continue to provide collaborative, high quality and responsive services to insure that St. Louis Park is the most desirable place to live, work and do business. Next Steps: After City Council approval of strategic priorities, they will be communicated to staff and also included in Council reports. Strategic priorities will be used in conducting and planning City business and will also be reviewed each year by Council. 5/21/18 – St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities 2018 - 2028 City of St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities Adopted May 21, 2018 St. Louis Park is committed to being a leader in racial equity and inclusion in order to create a more just and inclusive community for all. • Creating pipelines and opportunities for communities of color and indigenous people to be part of City leadership roles. • Investing in small business and services owned by people of color and indigenous people. • Expanding racial equity as an ongoing discussion within all areas of City business. • Creating awareness and a learning environment where consequences and unintentional impact of our work and decisions are addressed. St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental stewardship. • Supporting Climate Action Plan strategies and goals through planning, education, resources, communication and implementation of programs and initiatives. • Increasing opportunities to connect with nature in the City. • Continuing to protect and improve the quality of natural resources, parks, lakes, creek, wetlands and surface water planning, and using green spaces effectively. • Continuing to provide quality water to residents. St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of housing and neighborhood-oriented development. • Providing more diverse and creative housing choices to meet the needs of current and future residents while preserving existing affordable housing. • Fostering and facilitating reinvestment and redevelopment of neighborhood-oriented businesses and services. • Promoting locally owned small business, especially in indigenous, immigrant and communities of color. • Conducting research to further understand what people want and need access to in the community, i.e., food, services, housing options, business opportunities, gathering spaces. St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for people to make their way around the City comfortably, safely and reliably. • Continuing to expand the network of sidewalks, trails and bike facilities. • Researching and implementing multiple and affordable mobility solutions for all. • Fostering smart growth and transit-oriented housing development. • Increasing pedestrian safety through crosswalk improvements and increased park and trail lighting. • Expanding the number of north-south and east-west transit options. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities and City Council Norms Page 4 5/21/18 – St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities 2018 - 2028 St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build social capital through community engagement. • Fostering and facilitating transparency between community and the City of St. Louis Park. • Building strategies and opportunities to reach historically unheard voices and unseen communities within St. Louis Park. • Building trust and deeper connections within communities of color and indigenous people. • Connecting and engaging with St. Louis Park School District and other community organizations to meet the needs of current and future community. • Continuing to support youth and future generations. • Encourage Neighborhood Associations to deepen their reach and connections within the community. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities and City Council Norms Page 5 5/21/18 – Council Norms City of St. Louis Park City Council Norms Adopted May 21, 2018 Norms: The rules of behavior that are part of the ideology of the St. Louis Park City Council. The norms are standards of behavior and performance that were developed and agreed upon by the city council, and followed by the council. City Council Meetings and Study Sessions • Let everyone speak. • No side-conversations. • Be respectful, open, and honest. • Agree to disagree. (When we disagree, we assume we are all working hard for what we think is best for the community.) • Always assume the best of intentions from each councilmember. • Don’t personalize. • Don’t criticize staff in public; privately inform city manager of your concerns. • Once the vote is taken, we all work to “make it work.” • Remember, we represent the office, we are not the office. • Make sure to provide staff sufficient time in advance of a meeting to answer questions you might have. • Study sessions are primarily intended to allow for in-depth conversations between councilmembers and staff on items that are on the agenda. Mayor • Does not make motions. • Will help us focus on Carver Governance. • Will nudge us when we need nudging. Mayor and Councilmembers • We “go out” after meetings to connect and socialize; no business is discussed (attendance is optional). • If at-large councilmembers or the mayor get a call about a city issue, the ward councilmember should be informed about the call. • If an at-large councilmember or mayor goes to a ward meeting, let the ward councilmember know in advance. • If all council receives an email, typically it will be the ward councilmember that will handle the reply (unless it is forwarded to the city manager to respond). • When council is contacted by a constituent with a service request or complaint, they should try to work through the city manager so that the constituent doesn’t have to go back and forth between the councilmember and staff. • At-large councilmembers fill in for ward councilmembers at meetings upon request. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities and City Council Norms Page 6 5/21/18 – Council Norms • National Night Out does not apply to the mayor or an at-large councilmember having to inform the ward councilmember of the visits they plan to make. We all go. The same is true with public gatherings and elections. • The position of a ward councilmember on a topic in their ward will be given consideration by the rest of the council. • If there is a motion to be made about something specific to a ward, the ward councilmember shares their perspectives and typically makes the motion. • Pay attention to requests from the media. Inform the city manager, who will assist with the response and communicate with the mayor and council as needed. • Talk directly to the other councilmember when there is a problem. • If the mayor or a councilmember desires to take a personal public position on a city related matter, it should be voiced at a study session or city council meeting and not through other means such as the media, social media, etc. City Manager • Let the city manager know ahead of time if we want something pulled off of the consent agenda. The city manager will then inform the rest of the council. • Let the city manager know if you are unable to attend a meeting. • Copy city manager on dealings with staff. • Go to city manager for “big bowl” questions. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Title: St. Louis Park Strategic Priorities and City Council Norms Page 7 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Consent Agenda Item: 4c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Resolution Amending the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution amending and restating Resolution No. 16-027 approving Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council want to amend the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions to add a provision prohibiting family members of council from serving on city advisory boards and commissions? SUMMARY: At the special study session on April 30 council discussed implementing a rule that would prohibit a councilmember’s immediate family, registered domestic partner, or members of the same household from serving on a city advisory board or commission. Membership requirements are set by council and are outlined in Section C of the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions. Following discussion, council directed staff to move forward with an amendment to the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions that would prohibit the immediate family, registered domestic partner, or members of the same household of a current seated council member from serving on an advisory board or commission. The term “immediate family” is currently defined in the Rules and Procedures to include: a spouse or registered domestic partner, mother, father, siblings, step relatives, and grandparents. The Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions apply to the following city advisory boards and commissions: Board of Zoning Appeals, Community Education Advisory Council, Environment and Sustainability Commission, Housing Authority, Human Rights Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, Planning Commission, Police Advisory Commission, Telecommunications Advisory Commission, and other boards as created by or determined by council. Charter Commission members are appointed by the district court and operate under statutory authority. The city can advise the court of the existence of any policy related to membership; however, the court would not be bound such a policy. The city attorney’s office provided the opinion that the city could implement such a policy because board and commission members are not city employees and antidiscrimination rules base upon marital status, etc. would not apply. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Exhibit A Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Page 2 Title: Resolution Amending the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions RESOLUTION NO. 18-_____ RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION NO. 16-027 ADOPTED FEBRUARY 1, 2016 APPROVING RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Council has established certain boards and commissions to serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes its various boards and commissions to comply with all regulations to which they are subject concerning conduct of meetings, including those provisions contained in Minnesota State Statutes, the City Charter and the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the attached rules and procedures serve as a guideline for operating those boards and commissions and they set standards for the conduct of staff and board and commission members; and WHEREAS, the City Council has established guidelines and standards related to the membership of its advisory boards and commissions to ensure conflicts of interest do not arise. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of St. Louis Park hereby amends the “Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions”, attached as Exhibit A, by adding the underlined language to Section C, Membership and Terms, and shall adhere to the rules as stated therein unless revised by a majority vote of the City Council. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 21, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Page 3 Title: Resolution Amending the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions Exhibit A – Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions Amended by City Council May 21, 2018 Resolution No. 18-____ A.Boards The St. Louis Park City Charter grants the Council authority to form various boards and commissions by ordinance. Boards and commissions serve in an advisory capacity to the City Council and are conferred various degrees of decision making power. The City Council is the sole policy making body of the city. Some boards and commissions include in their membership persons appointed by the school board. Boards and commissions of the City which are governed by the provisions of these rules and procedures are as follows: •Board of Zoning Appeals •Community Education Advisory Council •Environment and Sustainability Commission •Housing Authority •Human Rights Commission •Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission •Planning Commission •Police Advisory Commission •Telecommunications Advisory Commission •And other boards as created by or determined by Council In addition, other ad hoc groups may be formed as needed by resolution of the council. B.Staff Liaisons Each board and commission is assigned a staff liaison. Duties of the staff liaison are, in general, to facilitate or assist in the meetings, record attendance, provide information and direction as requested by the commission, and to serve as a conduit for information and assignments from the City Council and the City Manager. Staff liaisons shall communicate all requests from a board or commission to the City Manager, appropriate Department Director, and the Council, as requested. It is also the responsibility of the staff liaison to inform the City Council of any problems or issues that may arise. C.Membership and Terms i)Membership requirements are set by Council. All board and commission members are appointed by the Council or, in some cases, by the school board. ii)Board and commission members (except members of the Housing Authority) shall be appointed to 3 year terms unless otherwise determined by the City Council. Members of the Housing Authority shall be appointed to 5 year terms in accordance with M.S. 469.003, Subd. 6, unless otherwise determined by the City Council. iii)The terms of board and commission members shall be staggered and shall expire on May 31st. iv)Members may be removed, with or without cause, by the City Council. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Page 4 Title: Resolution Amending the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions v)The city council will not appoint a board or commission member to serve concurrently on more than one board or commission, not including the Charter Commission. vi)Members may only serve one (1) consecutive year as the chair of any board or commission. vii)Members cannot serve on the same board or commission as a member of their immediate family, registered domestic partner, or members of the same household. Youth members are exempt from this provision. viii)The city council will not appoint a member of their immediate family, registered domestic partner, or members of the same household to a board or commission. For the purposes of this section the term “immediate family” shall include the following: -A spouse or registered domestic partner -Mother, father, siblings, step relatives, and grandparents - Members of the same household. D.Youth Membership and Terms i)The following boards and commissions shall appoint Youth Members: Environment & Sustainability Commission, Human Rights Commission, Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission, Planning Commission, Police Advisory Commission, and Telecommunications Advisory Commission ii)Youth members shall be appointed to one (1) year terms unless otherwise specified at the time of appointment. iii)The terms of youth members shall be concurrent with the school year, and shall expire annually on August 31st. iv)Youth members are conferred voting status, except in the case of the Planning Commission and Board of Zoning Appeals. v)Youth members shall reside in the City and be a high school student. For the purposes of this section, the definition of “high school student” shall be a student currently in or entering grades 7-12. E.Qualifications i)Members must be St. Louis Park residents, but need not have expertise in any particular area. Willingness to serve and be involved are the most important attributes of members. ii)Per Resolution No. 01-078, the City Council will not consider applications for appointment to advisory boards or commissions from regular full-time or part-time St. Louis Park employees (as defined in the City’s personnel manual). iii)The city council will not consider applications for appointment to a board or commission from other employees working for the City such as seasonal, temporary, part-time, paid-on-call firefighters or contract employees if such appointment could cause a conflict of interest. F.Attendance Regular attendance at meetings is a requirement for continued membership on any board or commission. Irregular attendance and frequent absences are detrimental to the entire group and put undue pressure on those members who do attend meetings. Regular attendance allows members to learn about and discuss issues in depth, which contributes to more collaborative decision making and effective recommendations to the City Council. Continued absenteeism is considered grounds for dismissal by the Council. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Page 5 Title: Resolution Amending the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions G. By-Laws Each board and commission shall create and maintain by-laws and meeting procedures. By-laws must be consistent with the City Code and should follow the City Council’s template for by-laws. Whenever changes are proposed, a draft copy of the new by-laws should be forwarded to the City Clerk’s office for the City Council’s review. As per the City Code, the Council has 30 days to review and amend the proposed by-laws. H. Meetings Meeting times and locations are set according to each commission’s by-laws. Each commission should defer to the Council’s meeting policy for meetings which occur on or near recognized holidays. A quorum of the board is made up of a majority of members currently appointed. All meetings will be conducted in accordance with the Minnesota Open Meeting Law, the City Charter and the Municipal Code of Ordinances. The proceedings of meetings should be conducted using standard parliamentary procedure. The City Council has adopted The Standard Code of Parliamentary Procedure as their guide. A copy of this publication is available for review in the City Clerk’s office. A simplified summary of these procedures is also available for use by board or commission chairs and staff liaisons. I. Minutes and other Records i) Minutes of each board or commission meeting shall be prepared and maintained by the staff liaison or other designated representative. ii) Following board or commission approval, minutes shall be forwarded to the city clerk’s office for placement on a city council agenda. iii) Approved minutes shall be published on the city’s website no later than two (2) days following formal acceptance by the city council. iv) Meeting agendas shall be published on the city’s website no later than three (3) days prior to a scheduled meeting. v) All board and commission records, including minutes and agendas, must be maintained in accordance with the city’s records retention policy. Please contact the city clerk’s office if you have questions regarding retention and preferred storage medium. J. Annual Meeting with Council Program Council has established a process whereby all participating boards and commissions (identified below) will meet collectively to present their annual report to the city council at the “Boards and Commissions Annual Meeting”. The following boards and commissions are subject to the requirements for participation in the program: • Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA) • Environment & Sustainability Commission • Housing Authority • Human Rights Commission • Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission • Planning Commission • Police Advisory Commission • Telecommunications Advisory Commission City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Page 6 Title: Resolution Amending the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions Annual Written Report – Each board and commission listed above shall prepare a written report for the council which includes activities undertaken in the past year, a progress report on the previous year’s goals, and goals for the coming year. Annual reports should also include any areas in which the board or commission requests council direction, assistance, or other reaction. Annual reports must be submitted to staff liaisons no later than January 31st. Annual Meeting and Presentation Instructions • The annual meeting with the city council will take place each calendar year as outlined in the procedures on file with the city manager. • All current members of each participating board and commission will be invited to attend the annual meeting. • Each board and commission will select one (1) representative to present their annual report. • Each board and commission will be allotted a specified amount of time, as determined by the city manager, for presentation of their annual report and discussion with the city council. K. Vacancies • The expiration of a member’s term on a board or commission shall be deemed a vacancy on that board or commission. A member may continue to serve beyond the expiration date of their term until a successor is appointed. • Resignation by a member of a board or commission prior to the expiration of their term must be submitted in writing to the staff liaison. The staff liaison shall forward a copy of the written notice of resignation to the city clerk’s office. At the time of resignation, a vacancy for the unexpired portion of the term shall be deemed to exist and the recruitment process shall be initiated unless otherwise determined by the city manager. • If a member of a board or commission is not able to serve the full length of their term due to unexpected circumstances (illness, relocation, death, etc.) a vacancy for the unexpired portion of the term shall be deemed to exist and the recruitment process shall be initiated unless otherwise determined by the city manager. • All vacancies will be advertised at City Hall, in the Sun Sailor, Park Perspective, neighborhood newsletters, on the City’s website and social media outlets. L. Reappointment Board or commission members seeking reappointment to another term shall be subject to the application, interview, and appointment processes unless otherwise determined by the city council. Overall performance and attendance by board and commission members requesting reappointment will be considered by the council. M. Application Process • All individuals interested in serving on a board or commission, including those seeking reappointment, shall complete an online application available on the city’s website. A paper application is available, upon request, by contacting the city clerk’s office. • Upon receipt of an application, a representative of the Administrative Services department will confirm receipt of the application and provide the applicant with information regarding the interview and appointment process. • All completed applications will be reviewed and evaluated by the city council to determine which candidates will move forward in the process. • Applications shall be retained for the period of 1 year following receipt. N. Interview Process • Candidates may be asked to participate in an interview at the first study session in April (unless otherwise determined by council), at the discretion of the city council. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Page 7 Title: Resolution Amending the Rules and Procedures for Boards and Commissions • The Administrative Services department will be responsible for scheduling candidate interviews. • Following the completion of candidate interviews, the city council will evaluate the status of each applicant and inform the Administrative Services department of their recommendations for appointment. • The Administrative Services department will notify each candidate of the status of their application and information regarding the next steps in the process. O. Appointment Appointments shall be made annually by the city council at the second regularly scheduled meeting in May (unless otherwise determine by council). The city clerk’s office will provide written notification of appointment to new members and inform them of the details of their appointment. A copy of this information will also be provided to the staff liaison. The staff liaison for each board or commission will provide the new member with meeting information, discuss expectations, and review pertinent issues with them prior to the next meeting of the board or commission. P. Orientation Staff liaisons, in conjunction with the Administrative Services department, will provide orientation for new board and commission members. Q. Rosters The Administrative Services Department is responsible for keeping an updated roster for each board and commission which should include contact information, term of office, and date of appointment. The staff liaison is responsible for notifying the Administrative Services Department about any membership changes. R. Recognition On an annual basis, the council will formally recognize members who have left their position on a board or commission during the previous year. S. Conflict of Interest No member of a board or commission shall: (1) Enter into any contractual arrangement with the city during the term serving as an appointed board or commissioner member and for a period of one year after leaving office, unless authorized by Minnesota statutes § 471.88. (2) Use their position to secure any special privilege or exemption for themselves or others. (3) Use their office or otherwise act in any manner which would give the appearance of or result in any impropriety or conflict of interest. Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Consent Agenda Item: 4d EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Amendment to Consultant Contract for Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 - Project No. 4019-9007 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to authorize execution of an amendment to a professional services contract with Short Elliott Hendrickson in the amount of $140,073 for Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 - Project No. 4019-9007. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to proceed with modifications to the Wooddale Bridge? SUMMARY: Construction work is proposed on the Wooddale Bridge in the summer of 2018. The improvements are intended to construct 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) and the PLACE Development project 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. As part of the coordination efforts with the adjacent projects and the enhancement to the bridge design there are additional tasks that were not foreseen during the initial contract approval. The additional design tasks are covered in the following report. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET 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. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Prepared by: Jack Sullivan, Sr. Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4d) Page 2 Title: Amendment to Consultant Contract for Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 - Project No. 4019-9007 DISCUSSION BACKGROUND: The modifications to the Wooddale Bridge are broken down in to two phases. •Phase 1 is work led by the city to widen each side of the bridge deck to enhance the pedestrian and bicycle facilities and sight lines across the bridge. •Phase 2 is work led by SWLRT to add traffic signals at the top of both ramps on the Wooddale Bridge and to restripe the bridge deck from two lanes to four lanes. Additional work adjacent to the interchange will be to build the Cedar Lake Regional Trail underpass at Wooddale Avenue to separate pedestrians and bicyclists from Wooddale Avenue. Phase 1 Project overview: The first phase of the project will include widening of the bridge deck by about 7 feet on each side. This widening will allow additional space for more comfortable pedestrian and bicycle facilities across the bridge. The new sidewalks will be 12 foot wide and the bike lanes will be 6 foot wide. In addition, it pulls the concrete walls back to provide better sight lines for drivers as they approach Wooddale Avenue from the Highway 7 ramps. 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. The installation of the various underground components necessary to build the traffic signals that are proposed in Phase 2 are included in this plan set. This will provide minimum disruption to the newly installed roadway when Phase 2 begins and is expected to reduce the construction duration. Phase 2 Phase 2 is not part of this project scope. The intent of this section is to inform the community about the potential upcoming work and schedule of the SWLRT. Project overview: Phase 2 is work led by and paid for by SWLRT to add traffic signals at the top both ramps on the Wooddale Bridge and to restripe the bridge deck from two lanes to 4 lanes. This work is expected to be completed sometime between 2019 and 2022. More information on this schedule will be available after the award of the SWLRT project in later 2018. Contract Amendment: Short Elliott Hendrickson (SEH) was awarded the original contract for this project on December 19, 2016 for $244,582. This contract was for preliminary and final design services. Since the original contract there have been a number of additional services that SEH has completed that were outside of the original scope such as landscaping, visual design graphics, additional environmental review with regulatory agencies, a revised MnDOT Cooperative Agreement Program and continued coordination with SWLRT for the installation of the signal foundations for Phase 2. As a result, we believe that the contract cost is consistent with the scope and demands of this project. Please see contract total below: AMOUNT Original Contract $244,582 Amendment #1 $140,073 Total SEH Contract $384,655 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4d) Page 3 Title: Amendment to Consultant Contract for Wooddale Bridge at Highway 7 - Project No. 4019-9007 The estimated construction cost for this project is $2,030,000. The contract for engineering services with this amendment will be approximately 20% of the estimated construction cost. Industry standard for engineering costs on construction projects can range from 20% to 35% depending on the complexity of the project. An additional contract will be presented to council with the award of the project for construction administration and inspection services. Schedule: Approve Plans and Authorize Ad for Bid May 7, 2018 Open Bids June 6, 2018 Award Construction Contract June 18, 2018 Construction of Phase 1 July to November 2018 Construction of Phase 2 (By SWLRT) Anticipated to begin in late 2018 thru 2022 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Consent Agenda Item: 4e EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License – Beth El Synagogue RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for Beth El Synagogue. Event to take place on June 17, 2018 at Beth El Synagogue located at 5225 Barry Street West. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Has Beth El met the requirements for the issuance of a temporary liquor license? BACKGROUND: Beth El Synagogue has made application for a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for their event taking place on June 17, 2018. The Common Sound Festival will take place in the parking lot of the Beth El Synagogue, 5225 Barry Street West, from 3 – 9:30 p.m. This festival will have food, beer, and live music from a variety of artists. Beth El Synagogue has partnered with Steel Toe Brewing to be the exclusive beer provider. The Police Department has completed the background investigation on the principals of Beth El Synagogue and has found no reason to deny the temporary license. The applicant has met all requirements for issuance of the license, and staff is recommending approval. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The fee for a temporary liquor license is $100 per day of the event. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not Applicable. Attachments: None Prepared by: Chase Peterson-Etem, Office Assistant – City Clerk’s Office Reviewed by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Consent Agenda Item: 4f OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION with Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission and Environment and Sustainability Commission St. Louis Park, Minnesota April 4, 2018 6 p.m. Council Chambers Planning Commission Members present: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich Planning Commission Members absent: Ethan Rickert (youth member) (unexcused) Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Members present: Rich Bluma, Bruce Cantor, Elizabeth Griffin, George Hagemann, Tiffany Bushland Park and Recreation Advisory Commission Members absent: George Foulkes, Peter May, Rachel Salzer Environment and Sustainability Commission Members present: Susan Bloyer, Nicole Ciulla, Stefan Collinet, Terry Gips, Ryan Griffin, Claire Lukens, Bridget Rathsack, Lukas Wrede, Katherine Christiansen Environment and Sustainability Commission Members absent: Julie Rappaport, Keir Stiegler Staff present: Sean Walther, Meg McMonigal, Jacquelyn Kramer, Cindy Walsh, Jim Vaughan, Shannon Pinc, Jason West, Mark Oestreich, Kala Fisher, Jennifer Monson, Jason West, Xinci Tan 1. Comprehensive Plan Discussion A. Welcome and Introductions Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner, welcomed commissioners and introduced Carl Robertson, Planning Commission Chair. Commissioners from the three commissions introduced themselves. B. Westwood Nature Center Jason West, Recreation Superintendent, and Mark Oestreich, Nature Center Manager, gave a presentation on the concept plans for the Westwood Nature Center expansion. Commissioner Peilen asked if the funding has been approved for the project. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 2 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2018 Mr. West responded it has not yet been approved. City Council is tentatively scheduled to consider approval on May 7. Commissioner Peilen said she supports the expansion. Commissioner Carper asked about projected operating costs for the new building. Mr. West responded that staffing and programming will be very similar, but will be done in a more efficient space. The facility will be larger. Commissioner Carper asked about the function of the solar panels. Mr. Oestreich said solar panels will be used for power generation. It will not be used for water heating. Commissioner Carper asked if there would be changes to paid staff and using more volunteers. Mr. West spoke about the great existing volunteer group. The city is now looking at the future staffing model. Mr. Oestreich stated the center has 35 adult volunteers. In the summer months they have 65 middle school and high school volunteers. The school program of volunteer naturalists could grow with the new facility. He said the programming won’t triple but it will be more efficient. The city will be looking at maintenance staff needs as the building will be larger. Commissioner Gips asked if the projected per household cost of $37/year is for the $12 million portion of the project or the $9 million portion. Mr. West responded that projection per household is for the $12 million portion. Commissioner Gips asked how many trees will need to be removed for the project. Mr. West stated a lot of trees will not be removed as the project site is currently a parking lot. There will be some disturbance on the sides and back of the building site. Jim Vaughan, Natural Resources Coordinator, said the largest trees to be removed are 6-8 cottonwoods. Some lower condition trees include box elder and Siberian elms. He said staff can provide total number of trees to be removed. Commissioner Gips asked how many trees will be removed for solar access. Mr. West said he thought zero because of the open parking lot location. He added that a tree survey and tree study have taken place as part of this project. Chair Robertson added that the butterfly roof puts the solar gain on the opposite side and you already have a clear area in the front. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 3 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2018 Commissioner Gips asked if the $12 million expenditure will prevent other environmental sustainability projects and capital investment efforts, including Climate Action Plan, from going forward. Shannon Pinc, Environment and Sustainability Coordinator, stated she believed this would not preclude any other projects from going forward, and in fact, it is the one opportunity to build a demonstration project as an example of what can be done, as there aren’t any other buildings the city will be building in the near future. Commissioner Gips asked about the full life cycle costs of taking down the building and constructing the new building. He asked if there were numbers about projected revenue rentals and possible sponsorships yet. Mr. West said that would be part of the cost analysis to be discussed with City Council at its upcoming study session. Ryan Griffin, ESC Chair, said he is also concerned about tree removal and offsetting that impact. He said the ESC has suggested implementing the inch per inch public tree replacement policy that commercial contractors are held to. Sean Walter, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said the nature center project is subject to that regulation. Commissioner Gips said the last question the ESC has regards social equity such as where the center is located, who lives around it, what happens in terms of current usage, future usage and socioeconomic factors. He asked if the center would really be as accessible to lower income people in the community. Mr. Oestreich said the building and programming will be accessible to everyone. He said currently they have the issue of accessibility from the parking lot. There is a whole population that can’t even find the building. They come to parking lot, see the picnic shelter which is closed and they leave. Being able to see the raptor cages from an ADA perspective will be another improvement. Mr. Oestreich said staff is meeting with city schools to ask what the barriers are and figure out ways the center can be a teaching tool. He said the city school population is very diverse and far different from a weekend population or a summer camp. There have been discussions about having the building sustainability, resiliency and green technology be a part of middle school and high school programming. Mr. Oestreich spoke about the bike lane coming to the center. He said additional connections and relationships will occur through outreach. Commissioner Gips asked if it’s possible to have some goals in terms of diversity. Mr. Oestreich said the city’s racial equity coordinator is part of the planning team. Staff are also participants in the city’s Race Equity program. C. Solid Waste Section City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 4 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2018 Kala Fisher, Solid Waste Program Coordinator, gave a presentation. Commissioner Person asked what is known about commercial and multi-family garbage and recycling amounts. Ms. Fisher responded since those buildings contract outside of the city staff does not have data on their recycling rates. She said most of the larger buildings are in compliance, but the actual numbers are harder to determine. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked what other cities are doing regarding commercial/multi-family solid waste. Ms. Fisher said throughout the metro area different cities have a varying degree of outreach. For the most part the connection comes at the county level. She said she is not aware of cities that have a solid waste ordinance in place for businesses. D. Parks, Open Space and Natural Resources Jennifer Monson, Planner, gave a presentation. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she would like to add the possibility of affordable housing at the 40th and France property, as well as parks and single family residential. Commissioner Gips spoke about Minnehaha Creek and asked how surface water runoff and pollution is covered in the Comp Plan. Ms. Monson responded that there is a separate component of the plan dealing with surface water management. Commissioner Person asked if the paved trails are the same as the regional trails. Ms. Monson said the city has its own system. She showed city trails and regional trails on the map. She said the Mobility chapter will cover the Connect the Park trail network. In response to a question about park sidewalks, Ms. Monson said those are also part of the Mobility chapter and will be discussed at a later date. A question was asked about community gardens and equity. Mr. Vaughn stated a community garden has just been added to Shelard Park which is high density housing. There is one near TexaTonka. He said the gardens are scattered around the city and are within walking distance. The city is also looking at additional locations. A comment was made that the executive director of STEP would be a good connection for staff to make regarding opportunities for people in affordable housing to have access to community gardens. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 5 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2018 Ms. Monson said the proposed comprehensive plan language looks at this holistically; such as the city will add additional community gardens if the need arises and there is community input. She said other policies say capital improvements will be looked at through a racial equity lens to make sure city investment dollars are going where they are most needed. Commissioner Griffin asked about the strategy of not adding new neighborhood parks. Ms. Monson said that comes as kind of a policy from the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission. Instead of new, publicly maintained and owned parks, one of the strategies the city has employed is working with developers to provide privately owned and maintained park space which is also open to the public. An example is in the West End development area. She also said that expansion of existing parks and improving connectivity between parks would be considered as opportunities arise. Commissioner Griffin asked if urban micro parks have been considered which would decrease the average walk to green space. Ms. Monson said that is a good questions for the Parks and Recreation Commission. She said that can be discussed at one of the Park & Rec commission future meetings. She added that park/sidewalk/trail connections will be discussed at a future meeting. E. Climate Action and Energy Conservation Shannon Pinc, Environmental and Sustainability Coordinator, gave a presentation. Commissioner Peilen asked if electric vehicles are still the wave of the future. She commented that their growth seems to have slowed. Ms. Pinc said that it is always ever changing. She said the demand is still increasing for electric and hybrid vehicles and tax incentives still exist. She said part of the city’s planning includes supplying the charging stations at public facilities. In response to Commissioner Peilen’s question about renewable electricity, Ms. Pinc said renewable electricity is sourced from renewable resources such as wind, solar or geothermal rather than finite resources such as coal, oil, and natural gas. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about the thermal energy grid. Ms. Pinc stated that is a district heating system that produces energy. It is cheaper, more efficient and less polluting. An example is St. Paul District Heating which burns waste wood. Another example would be the use of solar storage. Commissioner Carper spoke about carbon capture and burning materials for energy. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 6 Title: Planning Commission Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2018 There was a discussion about the Minneapolis Green Business Solar Project. Ms. Pinc said the city has been looking at this project, and many other great projects, to determine if they could work for St. Louis Park. Commissioner Bloyer asked if the comprehensive plan includes a section about food access and food security. Ms. McMonigal responded that is addressed in the health section of the comprehensive plan. 2. Wrap Up and Adjourn Commissioner Griffin said the ESC is interested in meeting together again with the opportunity for more interaction among commissioners. The meeting was adjourned at 9 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Action Agenda Item: 5a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to appoint citizen representatives to the Boards and Commissions as listed in Exhibit A. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to appoint the citizen representatives listed in Exhibit A to serve on the boards and commissions listed for the respective terms? SUMMARY: The City received a great response from individuals interested in serving on a Board or Commission. A total of 39 applications were received for open positions on the Environment & Sustainability Commission, Housing Authority, Human Rights Commission, Planning Commission, and Police Advisory Commission. Currently there are no open positions on the Board of Zoning Appeals, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, or the Telecommunications Advisory Commission. The City Council evaluated all applications that were submitted and conducted candidate interviews. Because there are more applicants than positions available, not all candidates will be able to be appointed to a Board or Commission at this time. Applications for candidates not selected will be kept on file for the period of 1 year. Should additional positions become available during that time period the City Council will attempt to fill the open positions from the already established candidate pool. Each of the individuals appointed by the City Council will receive notification of their appointment and will participate in an orientation program with their staff liaison prior to the start of their terms on May 31, 2018. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Exhibit A Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 5a) Page 2 Title: Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions EXHIBIT A Name Board/Commission Term Expiration Jim Leuthner Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/20 Stefan Collinet-Adler Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/21 Ryan Griffin Environment & Sustainability – Regular Member 5/31/21 Richard Webb Housing Authority 5/31/23 Maria Eustaquio Human Rights Commission 5/31/21 Matt Eckholm Planning Commission 5/31/21 Jessica Kraft Planning Commission 5/31/21 David Ault Police Advisory Commission 5/31/21 Matthew Erickson Police Advisory Commission 5/31/21 Matt Kinney Police Advisory Commission 5/31/21 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Action Agenda Item: 8a EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to Adopt Resolution Awarding the Sale of General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council wish to undertake the projects that will be funded by the bond proceeds? SUMMARY: At the March 26, 2018 study session, staff reviewed with the council the 2018 bond issue. In addition, on April 16, 2018 council approved providing for the sale of the bonds. The Charter General Obligations Bonds of $2,020,000 will fund the current year Sidewalk and Trails projects, fiber and a portion of the Aquila softball field project. The G.O. Revenue Bonds of $6,780,000 will finance all or a portion of capital projects within the Water and Sewer funds this year including the remaining portion for WTP #4 project. On May 14, 2018 City staff conducted a credit review with Standard and Poor’s and at the time of writing the staff report S&P has not released its report. The competitive bids for the bonds will be received and tabulated by the City’s municipal advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. on Monday May 21, 2018 at 12:00pm. Ehlers will present the competitive bids received and recommendation to the City Council at the May 21, 2018 Council meeting. The bond resolution will be filled out with the final bond sale information received on Monday. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The proposed bond issues will be consolidated into one for potential investors to bid. The Charter G.O. Bonds, which are 10 years and repaid with tax levy, are estimated at a True Interest Cost (TIC) of 2.72%. The G.O. Revenue Bonds, which are 15 years and repaid with water and sewer rates, are estimated at a TIC of 2.96%. NEXT STEPS: June 14, 2018 – Close on the Bonds – No City Council action required VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Resolution Prepared by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 Extract of Minutes of Meeting of the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, was duly held in the City Hall in said City on Monday, May 21, 2018, commencing at 7:30 P.M. The following members were present: and the following were absent: * * * * * * * * * The Mayor announced that the next order of business was consideration of the proposals which had been received for the purchase of the City’s General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A, to be issued in the original aggregate principal amount of $________. The City Manager presented a tabulation of the proposals which had been received in the manner specified in the Terms of Proposal for the Bonds. The proposals were as set forth in EXHIBIT A attached. After due consideration of the proposals, Member ___________ then introduced the following written resolution, the reading of which was dispensed with by unanimous consent, and moved its adoption: City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 2 2 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 RESOLUTION NO. 18-____ A RESOLUTION AWARDING THE SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS, SERIES 2018A, IN THE ORIGINAL AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $________; FIXING THEIR FORM AND SPECIFICATIONS; DIRECTING THEIR EXECUTION AND DELIVERY; PROVIDING FOR THEIR PAYMENT; AND PROVIDING FOR THE REDEMPTION OF BONDS REFUNDED THEREBY BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council (the “City Council”) of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”) as follows: Section 1. Sale of Bonds. 1.01. Authorization of Bonds. Pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on April 16, 2018, the City Council authorized the sale of the City’s General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A (the “Bonds”), in order to provide for (i) the construction of projects related to sidewalks, trails, fiber extension, and softball fields in the City (collectively, the “Capital Projects”), pursuant to Section 6.15 of the City Charter (the “Charter”) and Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 475, as amended (the “Municipal Debt Act”); and (ii) the construction of various improvements to the City’s water and sewer systems, including improvements to the water treatment plant filter #4, water rehabilitation and infrastructure projects, and sanitary sewer capital projects (collectively, the “Utility Improvements”), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 444 and the Municipal Debt Act (collectively, the “Utility Revenue Act”). 1.02. Award to the Purchaser and Interest Rates. The proposal of __________________ (the “Purchaser”) to purchase the Bonds is hereby found and determined to be a reasonable offer and is hereby accepted, the proposal being to purchase the Bonds at a price of $_____________ (par amount of $________, [plus original issue premium of $__________,] [less original issue discount of $__________,] less underwriter’s discount of $__________), plus accrued interest to date of delivery, if any, for Bonds bearing interest as follows: Year Interest Rate Year Interest Rate 2019 % 2027 % 2020 2028 2021 2029 2022 2030 2023 2031 2024 2032 2025 2033 2026 True interest cost: ___________% 1.03. Purchase Contract. The amount proposed by the Purchaser in excess of the minimum bid shall be credited to the accounts in the Debt Service Fund hereinafter created or deposited in the accounts in City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 3 3 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 the Construction Fund hereinafter created, as determined by the Chief Financial Officer of the City in consultation with the City’s municipal advisor. The Chief Financial Officer is directed to retain the good faith check of the Purchaser, pending completion of the sale of the Bonds, and to return the good faith checks of the unsuccessful proposers. The Mayor and City Manager are directed to execute a contract with the Purchaser on behalf of the City. 1.04. Terms and Principal Amounts of the Bonds. The City will forthwith issue and sell the Bonds pursuant to the Charter, the Municipal Debt Act, and the Utility Revenue Act (collectively, the “Act”), in the total principal amount of $________, originally dated June 14, 2018, in the denomination of $5,000 each or any integral multiple thereof, numbered No. R-1, upward, bearing interest as above set forth, and maturing serially on February 1 in the years and amounts as follows: Year Amount Year Amount 2019 $ 2027 $ 2020 2028 2021 2029 2022 2030 2023 2031 2024 2032 2025 2033 2026 (a)$_______________ of the Bonds (the “Charter Bonds”), maturing on February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below, will be used to finance the Capital Projects: Year Amount Year Amount 2020 $ 2025 $ 2021 2026 2022 2027 2023 2028 2024 2029 (b)The remainder of the Bonds in the amount of $____________ (the “Utility Revenue Bonds”), maturing on February 1 in the years and in the amounts set forth below, will be used to finance the Utility Improvements: Year Amount Year Amount 2019 $ 2027 $ 2020 2028 2021 2029 2022 2030 2023 2031 2024 2032 2025 2033 2026 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 4 4 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 1.05. Optional Redemption. The City may elect on February 1, 2026, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2027. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify DTC (as defined in Section 7 hereof) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant’s interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. [TO BE COMPLETED IF TERM BONDS ARE REQUESTED 1.06. Mandatory Redemption; Term Bonds. The Bonds maturing on February 1, 20____ and February 1, 20____ shall hereinafter be referred to collectively as the “Term Bonds.” The principal amount of the Term Bonds subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption on any date may be reduced through earlier optional redemptions, with any partial redemptions of the Term Bonds credited against future mandatory sinking fund redemptions of such Term Bond in such order as the City shall determine. The Term Bonds are subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption and shall be redeemed in part at par plus accrued interest on February 1 of the following years and in the principal amounts as follows: Sinking Fund Installment Date February 1, 20___ Term Bond Principal Amount ____________________ * Maturity February 1, 20___ Term Bond Principal Amount ____________________ * Maturity Section 2. Registration and Payment. 2.01. Registered Form. The Bonds will be issued only in fully registered form. The interest thereon and, upon surrender of each Bond, the principal amount thereof, is payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein. 2.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Each Bond will be dated as of the last interest payment date preceding the date of authentication to which interest on the Bond has been paid or made available for payment, unless (i) the date of authentication is an interest payment date to which interest has been paid or made available for payment, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of authentication, or (ii) the date of authentication is prior to the first interest payment date, in which case the Bond will be dated as of the date of original issue. The interest on the Bonds is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 2019, to the registered owners of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the immediately preceding month, whether or not such day is a business day. 2.03. Registration. The City will appoint a bond registrar, transfer agent, authenticating agent and paying agent (the “Registrar”). The effect of registration and the rights and duties of the City and the Registrar with respect thereto are as follows: City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 5 5 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 (a)Register. The Registrar must keep at its principal corporate trust office a bond register in which the Registrar provides for the registration of ownership of Bonds and the registration of transfers and exchanges of Bonds entitled to be registered, transferred or exchanged. (b)Transfer of Bonds. Upon surrender for transfer of a Bond duly endorsed by the registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar will authenticate and deliver, in the name of the designated transferee or transferees, one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may, however, close the books for registration of any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each interest payment date and until that interest payment date. (c)Exchange of Bonds. When Bonds are surrendered by the registered owner for exchange the Registrar will authenticate and deliver one or more new Bonds of a like aggregate principal amount and maturity as requested by the registered owner or the owner’s attorney in writing. (d)Cancellation. Bonds surrendered upon transfer or exchange will be promptly cancelled by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the City. (e)Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When a Bond is presented to the Registrar for transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the Bond until the Registrar is satisfied that the endorsement on the Bond or separate instrument of transfer is valid and genuine and that the requested transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar will incur no liability for the refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or unauthorized. (f)Persons Deemed Owners. The City and the Registrar may treat the person in whose name a Bond is registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of the Bond, whether the Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on account of, the principal of and interest on the Bond and for all other purposes, and payments so made to a registered owner or upon the owner’s order will be valid and effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability upon the Bond to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. (g)Taxes, Fees and Charges. The Registrar may impose a charge upon the owner thereof for a transfer or exchange of Bonds sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to the transfer or exchange. (h)Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If a Bond becomes mutilated or is destroyed, stolen or lost, the Registrar will deliver a new Bond of like amount, number, maturity date and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of the mutilated Bond or in lieu of and in substitution for any Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon the payment of the reasonable expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case of a Bond destroyed, stolen or lost, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that the Bond was destroyed, stolen or lost, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar an appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance and amount satisfactory to it and as provided by law, in which both the City and the Registrar must be named as obligees. Bonds so surrendered to the Registrar will be cancelled by the Registrar and evidence of such cancellation must be given to the City. If the mutilated, destroyed, stolen or lost Bond has already matured or City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 6 6 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 been called for redemption in accordance with its terms it is not necessary to issue a new Bond prior to payment. (i)Redemption. In the event any of the Bonds are called for redemption, notice thereof identifying the Bonds to be redeemed will be given by the Registrar by mailing a copy of the redemption notice by first class mail (postage prepaid) to the registered owner of each Bond to be redeemed at the address shown on the registration books kept by the Registrar and by publishing the notice if required by law. Failure to give notice by publication or by mail to any registered owner, or any defect therein, will not affect the validity of the proceedings for the redemption of Bonds. Bonds so called for redemption will cease to bear interest after the specified redemption date, provided that the funds for the redemption are on deposit with the place of payment at that time. 2.04. Appointment of Initial Registrar. The City appoints Bond Trust Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, as the initial Registrar. The Mayor and the City Manager are authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, a contract with the Registrar. Upon merger or consolidation of the Registrar with another corporation, if the resulting corporation is a bank or trust company authorized by law to conduct such business, the resulting corporation is authorized to act as successor Registrar. The City agrees to pay the reasonable and customary charges of the Registrar for the services performed. The City reserves the right to remove the Registrar upon thirty (30) days’ notice and upon the appointment of a successor Registrar, in which event the predecessor Registrar must deliver all cash and Bonds in its possession to the successor Registrar and must deliver the bond register to the successor Registrar. On or before each principal or interest due date, without further order of the City Council, the Chief Financial Officer must transmit to the Registrar moneys sufficient for the payment of all principal and interest then due. 2.05. Execution, Authentication and Delivery. The Bonds will be prepared under the direction of the City Manager and executed on behalf of the City by the signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager, provided that those signatures may be printed, engraved or lithographed facsimiles of the originals. If an officer whose signature or a facsimile of whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be such officer before the delivery of a Bond, that signature or facsimile will nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if the officer had remained in office until delivery. Notwithstanding such execution, a Bond will not be valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under this resolution unless and until a certificate of authentication on the Bond has been duly executed by the manual signature of an authorized representative of the Registrar. Certificates of authentication on different Bonds need not be signed by the same representative. The executed certificate of authentication on a Bond is conclusive evidence that it has been authenticated and delivered under this resolution. When the Bonds have been so prepared, executed and authenticated, the City Manager will deliver the same to the Purchaser upon payment of the purchase price in accordance with the contract of sale heretofore made and executed, and the Purchaser is not obligated to see to the application of the purchase price. 2.06. Temporary Bonds. The City may elect to deliver in lieu of printed definitive Bonds one or more typewritten temporary Bonds in substantially the form set forth in EXHIBIT B attached hereto with such changes as may be necessary to reflect more than one maturity in a single temporary bond. Upon the execution and delivery of definitive Bonds the temporary Bonds will be exchanged therefor and cancelled. Section 3. Form of Bond. 3.01. Execution of the Bonds. The Bonds will be printed or typewritten in substantially the form set forth in EXHIBIT B. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 7 7 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 3.02. Approving Legal Opinion. The City Manager is authorized and directed to obtain a copy of the proposed approving legal opinion of Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and cause the opinion to be printed on or accompany each Bond. Section 4. Payment; Security; Pledges and Covenants. 4.01. Debt Service Fund. The Bonds will be payable from the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Debt Service Fund (the “Debt Service Fund”) hereby created. The Debt Service Fund shall be administered and maintained by the Chief Financial Officer as a bookkeeping account separate and apart from all other funds maintained in the official financial records of the City. The City will maintain the following accounts in the Debt Service Fund: the “Capital Projects Account” and “Utility Improvements Account.” Amounts in the Capital Projects Account are irrevocably pledged to the Charter Bonds, and amounts in the Utility Improvements Account are irrevocably pledged to the Utility Revenue Bonds. (a)Capital Projects Account. The Chief Financial Officer shall timely deposit in the Capital Projects Account of the Debt Service Fund the ad valorem taxes hereinafter levied (the “Taxes”) and allocated to the payment of debt service on the Charter Bonds, which Taxes are pledged to the Capital Projects Account. There is also appropriated to the Capital Projects Account a pro rata portion of (i) capitalized interest financed with proceeds of the Bonds, if any; and (ii)amounts over the minimum purchase price paid by the Purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the Debt Service Fund in accordance with Section 1.03 hereof. (b)Utility Improvements Account. The City will continue to maintain and operate its Water Fund and Sewer Fund, to which will be credited all gross revenues of the water system and sewer system, respectively, and out of which will be paid all normal and reasonable expenses of current operations of such systems. Any balances therein are deemed net revenues (the “Net Revenues”) and will be transferred, from time to time, to the Utility Improvements Account of the Debt Service Fund, which Utility Improvements Account will be used only to pay principal of and interest on the Utility Revenue Bonds and any other bonds similarly authorized. There will always be retained in the Utility Improvements Account a sufficient amount to pay principal of and interest on all the Utility Revenue Bonds, and the Chief Financial Officer must report any current or anticipated deficiency in the Utility Improvements Account to the City Council. There is also appropriated to the Utility Improvements Account a pro rata portion of (i) capitalized interest financed with proceeds of the Bonds, if any; and (ii) amounts over the minimum purchase price paid by the Purchaser, to the extent designated for deposit in the Debt Service Fund in accordance with Section 1.03 hereof. 4.02. Construction Fund. The City hereby creates the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Construction Fund (the “Construction Fund”). The City will maintain the following accounts in the Construction Fund: the “Capital Projects Account” and “Utility Improvements Account.” Amounts in the Capital Projects Account are irrevocably pledged to the Charter Bonds, and amounts in the Utility Improvements Account are irrevocably pledged to the Utility Revenue Bonds. (a)Capital Projects Account. Proceeds of the Charter Bonds, less the appropriations made in Section 4.01(a), together with Taxes and any other funds appropriated for the Capital Projects collected during the construction of the Capital Projects, will be deposited in the Capital Projects Account of the Construction Fund to be used solely to defray expenses of the Capital Projects and the payment of principal and interest on the Charter Bonds prior to the completion and payment of all costs of the Capital Projects. When the Capital Projects are completed and the cost City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 8 8 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 thereof paid, the Capital Projects Account of the Construction Fund is to be closed and any funds remaining may be deposited in the Capital Projects Account of the Debt Service Fund. (b)Utility Improvements Account. Proceeds of the Utility Revenue Bonds, less the appropriations made in Section 4.01(b) hereof, will be deposited in the Utility Improvements Account of the Construction Fund to be used solely to defray expenses of the Utility Improvements. When the Utility Improvements are completed and the cost thereof paid, the Utility Improvements Account of the Construction Fund is to be closed and any funds remaining may be deposited in the Utility Improvements Account of the Debt Service Fund. 4.03. City Covenants with Respect to the Utility Revenue Bonds. The City Council covenants and agrees with the holders of the Bonds that so long as any of the Bonds remain outstanding and unpaid, it will keep and enforce the following covenants and agreements: (a)The City will continue to maintain and efficiently operate the water system and sewer system as public utilities and conveniences free from competition of other like municipal utilities and will cause all revenues therefrom to be deposited in bank accounts and credited to the Water Fund and Sewer Fund, respectively, as hereinabove provided, and will make no expenditures from those accounts except for a duly authorized purpose and in accordance with this resolution. (b)The City will also maintain the Utility Improvements Account of the Debt Service Fund as a separate account and will cause money to be credited thereto from time to time, out of Net Revenues from the water system and sewer system in sums sufficient to pay principal of and interest on the Utility Revenue Bonds when due. (c)The City will keep and maintain proper and adequate books of records and accounts separate from all other records of the City in which will be complete and correct entries as to all transactions relating to the water system and sewer system and which will be open to inspection and copying by any Bondholder, or the Bondholder’s agent or attorney, at any reasonable time, and it will furnish certified transcripts therefrom upon request and upon payment of a reasonable fee therefor, and said account will be audited at least annually by a qualified public accountant and statements of such audit and report will be furnished to all Bondholders upon request. (d)The City Council will cause persons handling revenues of the water system and sewer system to be bonded in reasonable amounts for the protection of the City and the Bondholders and will cause the funds collected on account of the operations of such systems to be deposited in a bank whose deposits are guaranteed under the Federal Deposit Insurance Law. (e)The City Council will keep the water system and sewer system insured at all times against loss by fire, tornado and other risks customarily insured against with an insurer or insurers in good standing, in such amounts as are customary for like plants, to protect the holders, from time to time, of the Bonds and the City from any loss due to any such casualty and will apply the proceeds of such insurance to make good any such loss. (f)The City and each and all of its officers will punctually perform all duties with reference to the water system and sewer system as required by law. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 9 9 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 (g)The City will impose and collect charges of the nature authorized by Section 444.075 of the Utility Revenue Act, at the times and in the amounts required to produce Net Revenues adequate to pay all principal and interest when due on the Utility Revenue Bonds and to create and maintain such reserves securing said payments as may be provided herein. (h)The City Council will levy general ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City when required to meet any deficiency in Net Revenues. 4.04. General Obligation Pledge. For the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds, as the same respectively become due, the full faith, credit and taxing powers of the City will be and are hereby irrevocably pledged. If the balance in the Debt Service Fund is ever insufficient to pay all principal and interest then due on the Bonds and any other bonds payable therefrom, the deficiency will be promptly paid out of monies in the general fund of the City which are available for such purpose, and such general fund may be reimbursed with or without interest from the Debt Service Fund when a sufficient balance is available therein. 4.05. Pledge of Taxes. For the purpose of paying the principal of and interest on the Charter Bonds, there is levied a direct annual irrepealable ad valorem tax upon all of the taxable property in the City, which will be spread upon the tax rolls and collected with and as part of other general taxes of the City. The Taxes will be credited to the Capital Projects Account of the Debt Service Fund above provided and will be in the years and amounts as attached hereto as EXHIBIT C. 4.06. Certification to Taxpayer Services Division Manager as to Debt Service Fund Amount. It is hereby determined that the estimated collection of the foregoing Taxes and Net Revenues will produce at least five percent (5%) in excess of the amount needed to meet when due the principal and interest payments on the Bonds. The tax levy herein provided is irrepealable until all of the Bonds are paid, provided that at the time the City makes its annual tax levies the Chief Financial Officer may certify to the Taxpayer Services Division Manager of Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “Taxpayer Services Division Manager”) the amount available in the Debt Service Fund to pay principal and interest due during the ensuing year, and the Taxpayer Services Division Manager will thereupon reduce the levy collectible during such year by the amount so certified. 4.07. Registration of Resolution. The City Manager is authorized and directed to file a certified copy of this resolution with the Taxpayer Services Division Manager and to obtain the certificate required by Section 475.63 of the Act. Section 5. Authentication of Transcript. 5.01. City Proceedings and Records. The officers of the City are authorized and directed to prepare and furnish to the Purchaser and to the attorneys approving the Bonds certified copies of proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds and to the financial condition and affairs of the City, and such other certificates, affidavits and transcripts as may be required to show the facts within their knowledge or as shown by the books and records in their custody and under their control, relating to the validity and marketability of the Bonds, and such instruments, including any heretofore furnished, will be deemed representations of the City as to the facts stated therein. 5.02. Certification as to Official Statement. The Mayor, the City Manager, and the Chief Financial Officer are authorized and directed to certify that they have examined the Official Statement prepared and circulated in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and that to the best of their City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 10 10 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 knowledge and belief the Official Statement is a complete and accurate representation of the facts and representations made therein as of the date of the Official Statement. 5.03. Other Certificates. The Mayor, the City Manager, and the Chief Financial Officer are hereby authorized and directed to furnish to the Purchaser at the closing such certificates as are required as a condition of sale. Unless litigation shall have been commenced and be pending questioning the Bonds or the organization of the City or incumbency of its officers, at the closing the Mayor, the City Manager, and the Chief Financial Officer shall also execute and deliver to the Purchaser a suitable certificate as to absence of material litigation, and the Chief Financial Officer shall also execute and deliver a certificate as to payment for and delivery of the Bonds. 5.04. Payment of Costs of Issuance. The City authorizes the Purchaser to forward the amount of Bond proceeds allocable to the payment of issuance expenses to KleinBank, Chaska, Minnesota on the closing date for further distribution as directed by the City’s municipal advisor, Ehlers & Associates, Inc. Section 6. Tax Covenant. 6.01. Tax -Exempt Bonds. The City covenants and agrees with the holders from time to time of the Bonds that it will not take or permit to be taken by any of its officers, employees or agents any action which would cause the interest on the Bonds to become subject to taxation under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), and the Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, in effect at the time of such actions, and that it will take or cause its officers, employees or agents to take, all affirmative action within its power that may be necessary to ensure that such interest will not become subject to taxation under the Code and applicable Treasury Regulations, as presently existing or as hereafter amended and made applicable to the Bonds. 6.02. Rebate. The City will comply with requirements necessary under the Code to establish and maintain the exclusion from gross income of the interest on the Bonds under Section 103 of the Code, including without limitation requirements relating to temporary periods for investments, limitations on amounts invested at a yield greater than the yield on the Bonds, and the rebate of excess investment earnings to the United States. 6.03. Not Private Activity Bonds. The City further covenants not to use the proceeds of the Bonds or to cause or permit them or any of them to be used, in such a manner as to cause the Bonds to be “private activity bonds” within the meaning of Sections 103 and 141 through 150 of the Code. 6.04. Qualified Tax-Exempt Obligations. In order to qualify the Bonds as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code, the City makes the following factual statements and representations: (a)the Bonds are not “private activity bonds” as defined in Section 141 of the Code; (b)the City designates the Bonds as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code; (c)the reasonably anticipated amount of tax-exempt obligations (other than private activity bonds that are not qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) which will be issued by the City (and all subordinate entities of the City) during calendar year 2018 will not exceed $10,000,000; and City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 11 11 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 (d)not more than $10,000,000 of obligations issued by the City during calendar year 2018 have been designated for purposes of Section 265(b)(3) of the Code. 6.05. Procedural Requirements. The City will use its best efforts to comply with any federal procedural requirements which may apply in order to effectuate the designations made by this section. Section 7. Book-Entry System; Limited Obligation of City. 7.01. DTC. The Bonds will be initially issued in the form of a separate single typewritten or printed fully registered Bond for each of the maturities set forth in Section 1.04 hereof. Upon initial issuance, the ownership of each Bond will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee for The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, and its successors and assigns (“DTC”). Except as provided in this section, all of the outstanding Bonds will be registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC. 7.02. Participants. With respect to Bonds registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, the City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent will have no responsibility or obligation to any broker dealers, banks and other financial institutions from time to time for which DTC holds Bonds as securities depository (the “Participants”) or to any other person on behalf of which a Participant holds an interest in the Bonds, including but not limited to any responsibility or obligation with respect to (i) the accuracy of the records of DTC, Cede & Co. or any Participant with respect to any ownership interest in the Bonds, (ii) the delivery to any Participant or any other person (other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown by the registration books kept by the Registrar), of any notice with respect to the Bonds, including any notice of redemption, or (iii) the payment to any Participant or any other person, other than a registered owner of Bonds, of any amount with respect to principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds. The City, the Registrar and the Paying Agent may treat and consider the person in whose name each Bond is registered in the registration books kept by the Registrar as the holder and absolute owner of such Bond for the purpose of payment of principal, premium and interest with respect to such Bond, for the purpose of registering transfers with respect to such Bonds, and for all other purposes. The Paying Agent will pay all principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds only to or on the order of the respective registered owners, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, and all such payments will be valid and effectual to fully satisfy and discharge the City’s obligations with respect to payment of principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds to the extent of the sum or sums so paid. No person other than a registered owner of Bonds, as shown in the registration books kept by the Registrar, will receive a certificated Bond evidencing the obligation of this resolution. Upon delivery by DTC to the City Manager of a written notice to the effect that DTC has determined to substitute a new nominee in place of Cede & Co., the words “Cede & Co.” will refer to such new nominee of DTC; and upon receipt of such a notice, the City Manager will promptly deliver a copy of the same to the Registrar and Paying Agent. 7.03. Representation Letter. The City has heretofore executed and delivered to DTC a Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations (the “Representation Letter”) which will govern payment of principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds and notices with respect to the Bonds. Any Paying Agent or Registrar subsequently appointed by the City with respect to the Bonds will agree to take all action necessary for all representations of the City in the Representation Letter with respect to the Registrar and Paying Agent, respectively, to be complied with at all times. 7.04. Transfers Outside Book-Entry System. In the event the City, by resolution of the City Council, determines that it is in the best interests of the persons having beneficial interests in the Bonds that they be able to obtain Bond certificates, the City will notify DTC, whereupon DTC will notify the Participants, of the availability through DTC of Bond certificates. In such event the City will issue, transfer City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 12 12 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 and exchange Bond certificates as requested by DTC and any other registered owners in accordance with the provisions of this resolution. DTC may determine to discontinue providing its services with respect to the Bonds at any time by giving notice to the City and discharging its responsibilities with respect thereto under applicable law. In such event, if no successor securities depository is appointed, the City will issue and the Registrar will authenticate Bond certificates in accordance with this resolution and the provisions hereof will apply to the transfer, exchange and method of payment thereof. 7.05. Payments to Cede & Co. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution to the contrary, so long as a Bond is registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, payments with respect to principal of, premium, if any, and interest on the Bond and all notices with respect to the Bond will be made and given, respectively in the manner provided in DTC’s Operational Arrangements, as set forth in the Representation Letter. Section 8. Continuing Disclosure. 8.01. Execution of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. “Continuing Disclosure Certificate” means that certain Continuing Disclosure Certificate executed by the Mayor and City Manager and dated the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds, as originally executed and as it may be amended from time to time in accordance with the terms thereof. 8.02. City Compliance with Provisions of Continuing Disclosure Certificate. The City hereby covenants and agrees that it will comply with and carry out all of the provisions of the Continuing Disclosure Certificate. Notwithstanding any other provision of this resolution, failure of the City to comply with the Continuing Disclosure Certificate is not to be considered an event of default with respect to the Bonds; however, any Bondholder may take such actions as may be necessary and appropriate, including seeking mandate or specific performance by court order, to cause the City to comply with its obligations under this section. Section 9. Defeasance. When all Bonds and all interest thereon have been discharged as provided in this section, all pledges, covenants and other rights granted by this resolution to the holders of the Bonds will cease, except that the pledge of the full faith and credit of the City for the prompt and full payment of the principal of and interest on the Bonds will remain in full force and effect. The City may discharge all Bonds which are due on any date by depositing with the Registrar on or before that date a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full. If any Bond should not be paid when due, it may nevertheless be discharged by depositing with the Registrar a sum sufficient for the payment thereof in full with interest accrued to the date of such deposit. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 13 13 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by City Council Member _______________, and, after full discussion thereof and upon a vote being taken thereon, the following City Council Members voted in favor thereof: Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 21, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 14 A-1 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 EXHIBIT A PROPOSALS City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 15 B-1 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 EXHIBIT B FORM OF BOND No. R-_____ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA $_________ STATE OF MINNESOTA COUNTY OF HENNEPIN CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND SERIES 2018A Rate Maturity Date of Original Issue CUSIP February 1, 20__ June 14, 2018 Registered Owner: Cede & Co. The City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, a duly organized and existing municipal corporation in Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”), acknowledges itself to be indebted and for value received hereby promises to pay to the Registered Owner specified above or registered assigns, the principal sum of $__________ on the maturity date specified above, with interest thereon from the date hereof at the annual rate specified above (calculated on the basis of a 360 day year of twelve 30 day months), payable February 1 and August 1 in each year, commencing February 1, 2019, to the person in whose name this Bond is registered at the close of business on the fifteenth day (whether or not a business day) of the immediately preceding month. The interest hereon and, upon presentation and surrender hereof, the principal hereof are payable in lawful money of the United States of America by check or draft by Bond Trust Services Corporation, Roseville, Minnesota, as Bond Registrar, Paying Agent, Transfer Agent and Authenticating Agent, or its designated successor under the Resolution described herein. For the prompt and full payment of such principal and interest as the same respectively become due, the full faith and credit and taxing powers of the City have been and are hereby irrevocably pledged. The City may elect on February 1, 2026, and on any day thereafter to prepay Bonds due on or after February 1, 2027. Redemption may be in whole or in part and if in part, at the option of the City and in such manner as the City will determine. If less than all Bonds of a maturity are called for redemption, the City will notify The Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) of the particular amount of such maturity to be prepaid. DTC will determine by lot the amount of each participant’s interest in such maturity to be redeemed and each participant will then select by lot the beneficial ownership interests in such maturity to be redeemed. Prepayments will be at a price of par plus accrued interest. This Bond is one of an issue in the aggregate principal amount of $________ all of like original issue date and tenor, except as to number, maturity date, redemption privilege, and interest rate, all issued pursuant to a resolution adopted by the City Council on May 21, 2018 (the “Resolution”), for the purpose of providing money to aid in financing certain capital projects and improvements to the City’s water system and sewer system, pursuant to and in full conformity with the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes, Chapters 475 and Chapter 444, as amended, and the principal hereof and interest hereon are payable in part from ad City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 16 B-2 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 valorem taxes and in part from net revenues from the water system and sewer system of the City, as set forth in the Resolution to which reference is made for a full statement of rights and powers thereby conferred. The full faith and credit of the City are irrevocably pledged for payment of this Bond and the City Council has obligated itself to levy additional ad valorem taxes on all taxable property in the City in the event of any deficiency in taxes and net revenues pledged, which taxes may be levied without limitation as to rate or amount. The Bonds of this series are issued only as fully registered Bonds in denominations of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof of single maturities. The City Council has designated the issue of Bonds of which this Bond forms a part as “qualified tax-exempt obligations” within the meaning of Section 265(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) relating to disallowance of interest expense for financial institutions and within the $10 million limit allowed by the Code for the calendar year of issue. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED That in and by the Resolution, the City has covenanted and agreed that it will continue to own and operate the water system and sewer system free from competition by other like municipal utilities; that adequate insurance on said systems and suitable fidelity bonds on employees will be carried; that proper and adequate books of account will be kept showing all receipts and disbursements relating to the Water Fund and Sewer Fund, into which it will pay all of the gross revenues from the water system and sewer system, respectively; that it will also create and maintain a Utility Improvements Account within the General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Debt Service Fund, into which it will pay, out of the net revenues from the water system and sewer system, a sum sufficient to pay principal of the Utility Revenue Bonds (as defined in the Resolution) and interest on the Utility Revenue Bonds when due; and that it will provide, by ad valorem tax levies, for any deficiency in required net revenues of the water system and sewer system. As provided in the Resolution and subject to certain limitations set forth therein, this Bond is transferable upon the books of the City at the principal office of the Bond Registrar, by the registered owner hereof in person or by the owner’s attorney duly authorized in writing upon surrender hereof together with a written instrument of transfer satisfactory to the Bond Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner or the owner’s attorney; and may also be surrendered in exchange for Bonds of other authorized denominations. Upon such transfer or exchange the City will cause a new Bond or Bonds to be issued in the name of the transferee or registered owner, of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the same date, subject to reimbursement for any tax, fee or governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. The City and the Bond Registrar may deem and treat the person in whose name this Bond is registered as the absolute owner hereof, whether this Bond is overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment and for all other purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar will be affected by any notice to the contrary. IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED, RECITED, COVENANTED AND AGREED that all acts, conditions and things required by the home rule charter of the City and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen and to be performed preliminary to and in the issuance of this Bond in order to make it a valid and binding general obligation of the City in accordance with its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened and have been performed as so required, and that the issuance of this Bond does not cause the indebtedness of the City to exceed any constitutional, charter, or statutory limitation of indebtedness. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 17 B-3 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 This Bond is not valid or obligatory for any purpose or entitled to any security or benefit under the Resolution until the Certificate of Authentication hereon has been executed by the Bond Registrar by manual signature of one of its authorized representatives. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, by its City Council, has caused this Bond to be executed on its behalf by the facsimile or manual signatures of the Mayor and City Manager and has caused this Bond to be dated as of the date set forth below. Dated: June 14, 2018 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA (Facsimile) (Facsimile) Mayor City Manager ______________________________________ CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION This is one of the Bonds delivered pursuant to the Resolution mentioned within. BOND TRUST SERVICES CORPORATION By Authorized Representative ______________________________________ ABBREVIATIONS The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this Bond, will be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM -- as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT _________ Custodian _________ (Cust) (Minor) TEN ENT -- as tenants by entireties under Uniform Gifts or Transfers to Minors Act, State of _______________ JT TEN -- as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. ________________________________________ City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 18 B-4 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 ASSIGNMENT For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto ________________________________________ the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint _________________________ attorney to transfer the said Bond on the books kept for registration of the within Bond, with full power of substitution in the premises. Dated: Notice: The assignor’s signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as it appears upon the face of the within Bond in every particular, without alteration or any change whatever. Signature Guaranteed: NOTICE: Signature(s) must be guaranteed by a financial institution that is a member of the Securities Transfer Agent Medallion Program (“STAMP”), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program (“SEMP”), the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. Medallion Signatures Program (“MSP”) or other such “signature guarantee program” as may be determined by the Registrar in addition to, or in substitution for, STEMP, SEMP or MSP, all in accordance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The Registrar will not effect transfer of this Bond unless the information concerning the assignee requested below is provided. Name and Address: (Include information for all joint owners if this Bond is held by joint account.) Please insert social security or other identifying number of assignee ________________________________________ City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 19 B-5 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 PROVISIONS AS TO REGISTRATION The ownership of the principal of and interest on the within Bond has been registered on the books of the Registrar in the name of the person last noted below. Date of Registration Registered Owner Signature of Officer of Registrar Cede & Co. Federal ID #13-2555119 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 20 C-1 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 EXHIBIT C TAX LEVY SCHEDULE YEAR * TAX LEVY 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 __________________________________ * Year tax levy collected. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 21 523492v1 MNI SA140-124 STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) COUNTY OF HENNEPIN ) SS. ) CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ) I, the undersigned, being the duly qualified and acting City Clerk of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the “City”), do hereby certify that I have carefully compared the attached and foregoing extract of minutes of a regular meeting of the City Council of the City held on May 21, 2018, with the original minutes on file in my office and the extract is a full, true and correct copy of the minutes insofar as they relate to the issuance and sale of the City’s General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A, in the original aggregate principal amount of $________. WITNESS My hand officially as such City Clerk and the corporate seal of the City this ____ day of __________, 2018. City Clerk City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (SEAL) City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: General Obligation Bonds, Series 2018A Page 22 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Action Agenda Item: 8b EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD RECOMMENDED ACTION: • Motion to Adopt Resolution approving the Preliminary and Final Plat subject to conditions (requires 4 affirmative votes); and • Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance adding Section 36-268-PUD 13 to the Zoning Code and amending the Zoning Map from C-2 General Commercial and R-4 Multiple Family Residential to PUD 13 for the property located at 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Boulevard and 3743 Monterey Drive, and set the second reading for June 4, 2018 (requires 5 affirmative votes). POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the proposed Preliminary and Final Plat and Planned Unit Development to allow for the Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center redevelopment? SUMMARY: Bridgewater Bank requests Preliminary and Final Plat and Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development approval for the redevelopment of 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Boulevard, and 3743 Monterey Drive. Bridgewater Bank proposes to demolish the existing 1-story commercial building and construct a 4-story, 84,000 square foot office building with a 7,152- square-foot commercial bank branch, 7,530 square feet of retail and service space, including a 4,000 square foot restaurant and three levels of structured parking. The first floor will include Bridgewater Bank's customer branch, a restaurant and retail space. The second and third floors will include the bank's executive offices and the fourth floor will be a co-working entrepreneurial hub, servicing new business start-ups. The proposal includes a public plaza at the corner of Excelsior Boulevard and Monterey Drive, with outdoor seating, space for artwork or an artist designed structure, and landscaping. The building height, setbacks, stepbacks, site circulation, and the plaza are designed to respond to comments raised during a previous development review process in 2015 for the same site. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: There are extraordinary costs associated with the proposed redevelopment site that prevent the project from being financially feasible. Consequently, the developer submitted an application for tax increment financing to defray a portion of these expenses. The developer intends to purchase the EDA owned parcel for the appraised value of $400,000. VISION CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion, Zoning Map, Plat Resolution, Draft PUD Ordinance, Draft Planning Commission Minutes, Development Plans, Monterey Multi-modal Study, Bridgewater Traffic Study, Parking Study, Travel Demand Management Plan. Prepared by: Jennifer Monson, Planner Reviewed by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Karen Barton, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 2 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD DISCUSSION SITE INFORMATION: The proposed redevelopment site is located at 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Boulevard, and 3743 Monterey Drive. The site is located in the Wolfe Park neighborhood at the northeast quadrant of Excelsior Boulevard and Monterey Drive. The proposed redevelopment is east of Excelsior & Grand and Trader Joes. Site Area: 2.42 acres Current Uses: Vacant and occupied commercial buildings Comprehensive Plan: MX-Mixed Use Current Zoning: C-2 General Commercial & R4 Multi-family Residential Proposed Zoning: PUD-Planned Unit Development Surrounding Land Uses: North: Multi-family and nursing home uses East: Small scale commercial West: Excelsior & Grand / Trader Joes South: Small scale commercial BACKGROUND: In 2015, the city approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to guide the properties at 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Boulevard, and 3743 Monterey Drive for Mixed Use. Also in 2015, Dominium Development proposed a mixed-use development for the site. The Dominium development proposal included a 6-story building with 148 dwelling units, 17,500 square feet of commercial space, 10,000 square feet for the bank, and three levels of structured parking. The city council denied the Dominium development proposal. Bridgewater Bank now proposes an office and commercial development at this site to locate the Bridgewater Bank Headquarters in St. Louis Park. The development’s design was influenced by comments raised during the development review process in 2015 for the same site. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 3 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD PRESENT CONSIDERATIONS: The applicant proposes to construct a 4 story, 84,000 gross square foot office building, with three levels of structured parking. The plan includes a pedestrian plaza at the corner of Excelsior Boulevard and Monterey Drive with extensive landscaping, outdoor seating, and space for public art. The plaza provides open space and a protected area underneath a portion of the building. Ground floor retail and restaurant storefronts are designed to face Excelsior Boulevard on the east side of the site and the public plaza, and 4,700 square feet will be used as a shared lobby. The remaining 7,152 square feet of the ground floor will be used as a commercial branch for Bridgewater Bank. Floors two through four are each approximately 20,000 square feet in size and will be home to the office headquarters of Bridgewater Bank, and an entrepreneurial co-working hub. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT ANALYSIS: Bridgewater Bank seeks approval to combine the property located at 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Boulevard, and 3743 Monterey Drive, and subdivide a portion of 4400 Excelsior Boulevard to remain as a separate lot for the existing two-story commercial building currently occupied by Bridgewater Bank. The plat will be named Bridgewater Bank Addition. Lots: Lot 1, Block 1, Bridgewater Bank Addition will have a lot area of 2.072 acres. This lot will be the location of the proposed Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center. Lot 2, Block 1, Bridgewater Bank Addition will have a lot area of 0.197 acres and the existing two-story commercial building will remain. Right-of-Way Dedication: The plat dedicates 0.4 acres (17,450 square feet) for additional right- of-way along Monterey Drive and Excelsior Boulevard. A portion of that additional right-of-way is to accommodate on-street bike lanes and a future U-turn movement at the intersection of Monterey Drive and Excelsior Boulevard, which are part of the Monterey Multi-Modal study recommended improvements, independent of the Bridgewater development. The bike lanes and intersection improvements will be installed as part of the Connect the Park Capital Improvement Program in 2019/2020. Easements: The plat dedicates drainage and utility easements along Excelsior Boulevard and Kipling Avenue, including a 4-foot wide easement along Excelsior Boulevard and a 10-foot wide easement along Kipling Avenue. Permanent sidewalk easements or agreements will be recorded along Excelsior Boulevard and Monterey Drive to allow public access on private property. PUD ANALYSIS: Description: The developer requests approval of a preliminary and final planned unit development (PUD). A PUD is a zoning map and zoning text amendment that establishes the regulations for a specific property. A PUD generally requires a minimum of 2 acres of land. The development proposal site is 2.072 acres, excluding 0.4 acres of dedicated right-of-way. The overall PUD is 2.27 acres, including the existing two-story building that remains on Lot 2. A PUD approach for this property allows for conditions and requirements that fit the context and character of the individual site and the proposed development. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 4 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan designates the site for mixed use. This category would allow for a mix of office and commercial uses. The PUD would create a new zoning district and zoning regulations for uses and dimensional standards that are unique to this site. Staff finds this site suitable for the proposed development and finds the development meets many of the objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The site provides a mixture of office, retail, and service spaces, and promotes an active street frontage along Excelsior Boulevard, while maintaining a building scale appropriate to the surrounding commercial and residential uses. The original plans for Excelsior & Grand/Park Commons East anticipated an office development at the location of the existing mixed-use building that includes Trader Joes. An office development has not yet been constructed within Park Commons East. The proposed Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center development would complete this vision, and establish a new daytime employment center within the Excelsior & Grand/Park Commons East development area that complements and supports the existing land uses. Building and Site Design Analysis: The Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center meets the PUD ordinance goals for building and site design. The ordinance requires the city to find that the quality of building and site design will substantially enhance aesthetics of the site and implement relevant goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff finds the plan meets these requirements. ZONING ANALYSIS: The following table provides the development metrics. The property will be rezoned to a Planned Unit Development (PUD). The proposed performance and development standards, as indicated in the development plans, establish the development requirements for this property if approved. Zoning Compliance Table. Factor Required Proposed Met? Use Mixed-Use Office, Retail, Restaurant Yes Lot Area 2 acres needed for PUD 2.072 acres/90,259 s.f. *excludes right-of-way dedication Yes Height Less of 6 stories in height of 75 feet 62 feet (including parapet) Yes Building Materials Minimum of 60% Class I materials Class I: 77% Class II: 23% Yes Floor Area Ratio Maximum 2.0 0.8 Yes Off-Street Parking Existing Commercial Bank: 15 New Retail Bank: 25 Restaurant: 60 Retail: 12 Office: 180 Total Required: 292 spaces Existing Commercial Bank: 5 Surface Parking: 45 P-1: 114 P-2: 113 On street: 5 Total Provided: 282 spaces A parking study was completed by SRF and the parking provided is adequate to serve the development. Yes Bicycle Parking 10% of parking Total Required: 30 spaces 28 bicycle spaces in ramp 7 bicycle spaces outside Total Provided: 35 Yes Open Area/DORA Minimum 12% required 21.7 % Provided Yes Setbacks None with PUD South: 6’ East: 6’ West: 14’-25’ North: 27’ Yes City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 5 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Uses: The proposal includes three floors of office space, a 4,000 square foot restaurant, 3,530 square feet of retail space, and a 7,152 square foot commercial bank. Each floor of office use is approximately 20,000 square feet in size. The ground level includes the retail bank, restaurant, and retail space, and floors two through four are Bridgewater Bank’s Corporate Headquarters. The fourth floor will be a co-working entrepreneurial center for small business start-ups. Architectural Design: The building is designed to reduce the overall impact along Excelsior Boulevard and Monterey Drive, and to fit within the surrounding mixed-use context of the area. The building setbacks and step backs reduce the perceived mass of the building. Relatively large first floor setbacks have been provided along Monterey Drive. The upper floors of the building fronting Excelsior Boulevard are each stepped back to lessen the overall massing of the building and to provide rooftop amenity space. Street Facing Ground Floor Transparency: The PUD ordinance will require 70% transparency for street facing ground floor facades. Active permitted uses shall be maintained for a minimum depth of 15 feet. Storage areas and utility closets are prohibited in within that minimum depth of 15 feet. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum depth of ten feet. Lighting: The exterior photometric plan meets the recommended level of 0.5-1 foot candle at the property line. The lighting within the parking garage is an average of 0.98 foot candles, and meets the required lighting levels for parking areas. Internal parking garage lighting fixtures will be shielded and will not cause glare issues off-site. Parking: The plan provides a total of 282 parking stalls. Five of the spaces are located on Lot 2. A shared parking and access easement will be recorded allowing the existing commercial building on Lot 2 to access 10 parking stalls on the new corporate headquarters property. The city’s zoning code requires a total of 292 parking stalls to accommodate the development’s uses if a restaurant use is included. The plans propose 282 spaces, therefore, a parking study was completed to analyze overall parking demand based on different restaurant sizes and types. The parking study shows 282 parking spaces is adequate to serve the mix of building uses, including a variety of 4,000 square foot restaurant types. Access: The development proposal provides four access points into the site. Access A is a right- in/right-out onto Excelsior Boulevard at an existing curb cut. Access B is a 3/4 intersection across from Park Commons Drive. Access A and Access B both serve the surface parking lot and Level P1, which is connected via a down-only ramp. Access C is a right-in/right-out from Monterey Drive, which provides the only egress from Level P1. Access D is a full access intersection on 36- 1/2 Street servicing the ingress and egress for Level P2 only. There are no internal connections between Levels P2 and P1 of the parking structure. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 6 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Bridgewater Bank Traffic Study: SRF Consulting Group conducted a traffic study of the Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center development proposal. The study found that the proposed development is expected to have a relatively minimal impact on traffic in the area. The study looked at existing roadway conditions, no-build conditions in 2020 assuming city improvements are installed along Monterey Drive, and 2020 build conditions. The proposed development is expected to have a relatively minimal impact on the traffic in the study area, and all intersections operate at an overall level of service of C or better. The 2018 Bridgewater Office proposal generates fewer trips than the 2015 Dominium proposal. The overall traffic impact from the 2018 Bridgewater development proposal is also less than then D A B C City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 7 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD 2015 Dominium proposal as the traffic patterns are predominantly in the opposite directions during the p.m. peak hour, when traffic demand is highest at adjacent intersections, especially southbound Monterey Drive and eastbound Park Commons Drive. It also generates very low traffic on the weekends when Trader Joe’s is busier. Travel Demand Management Plan: To encourage people to use alternate travel modes and to further reduce the development’s impact on public roadways and on-site parking demand, Bridgewater Bank agrees to implement a Travel Demand Management Plan (TDMP). The bank agrees to have a designated transportation coordinator to work with employees and visitors to promote walking, biking, and transit service. The bank will work with Metro Transit to establish a Metropass system for employees and will promote car sharing and carpooling. They will also encourage service vehicles to deliver outside of the weekday peak traffic hours, and will manage parking and assign parking spaces for visitors and bank employees. Loading/Service Areas: A commercial loading zone is located on the north side of the site with access from 36-1/2 Street. Trash will be collected in Level P2, and will be fully enclosed within the parking structure. Space for trash, recycling, and organic materials will be provided. A restaurant trash room is also conveniently located on the main floor of the building, with a pickup door located near Access A. Landscaping: All of the existing trees on the site will be removed during demolition. The landscape plan indicates 34 new canopy trees, 6 new ornamental trees, 9 new evergreen trees, 481 new shrubs, and 1,719 new perennials. The project does not meet the city’s planting and tree replacement requirements, which requires 84 trees and 504 shrubs. However, the plan includes a variety of allowed alternative landscaping measures in order to meet the city landscaping requirements. Also, the developer will pay a fee into the city tree fund for the balance of the tree replacement requirement. The landscape planting areas along Excelsior Boulevard are designed as rain gardens to collect stormwater during the summer, and allow for snow storage during the winter. The plan includes a place-holder location for art. The actual location and type of art work will need to be determined at a later date. The city’s expectation is for the owner to have city and public involvement in the selection of the art location, artist, and artwork. Designed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA): The plan exceeds the city’s minimum 12% DORA requirements, and provides approximately 21.7%. Signs: A sign plan was not submitted for review. Signs will require permits and shall comply with the same sign regulations as applied to sites zoned General Commercial. Utilities: All utility services to the building will be placed underground and the development will provide the necessary infrastructure to take advantage of fiber-optic service lines in the vicinity of the development. Maintenance: The property is located within Special Service District #2. The property owner pays a special assessment annually, and the city provides landscaping and maintenance above and beyond standard city services for the Excelsior Boulevard streetscape. The property will remain in Special Service District #2. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 8 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Climate Action Plan: Bridgewater Bank is dedicated to providing a building that will contribute to St. Louis Park’s goals of having all electric cars by 2030 and energy neutrality by 2040. The bank will install several electric vehicle charging stations and infrastructure to install additional stations as market demands increase. The applicant also agrees to make the building’s roof solar ready. Another component of the Climate Action Plan is reducing vehicle miles traveled to reduce vehicle emissions. Bridgewater Bank is dedicated to encouraging and promoting employees and visitors to utilize alternate modes of travel, and agrees to implement a robust Travel Demand Management Plan. Landscaping areas along Excelsior Boulevard are also designed as rain gardens, which can also be used for winter snow storage. Public Input: A neighborhood meeting was held on February 15, 2018 in City Council Chambers to present the Bridgewater Bank Corporate Headquarters development proposal and receive and respond to questions and comments from the community. About 30 people were in attendance. In general, people seemed to like the overall design of the building, and the proposed design of Monterey Drive. There continued to be some skepticism of the benefits of the proposed future design of Monterey Drive with regard to convenience and time it takes automobiles to get through the area. Planning Commission: The commission held a public hearing on May 2, 2018. Three people expressed concerns regarding traffic, and two representatives from LIV Apartments expressed concerns regarding the location of Access C, including stormwater questions and retaining wall height and setbacks. One person spoke in favor of the development. The planning commission voted 6 to 1 to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat and preliminary and final PUD subject to conditions recommended by staff. The staff conditions have been incorporated into the draft resolution, draft ordinance, and would be incorporated into the Planning Development Contract, if approved. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 9 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Existing and Proposed Zoning Map City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 10 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD RESOLUTION NO. 18-____ RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF BRIDGEWATER BANK ADDITION 4424 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, 4400 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD AND 3743 MONTEREY DRIVE BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. 36th Street LLC, subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as Bridgewater Bank Addition has submitted an application for approval of preliminary and final plat in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder. 2. The proposed preliminary and final plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park. 3. The proposed plat is situated upon the lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, legally described in “Exhibit A” attached hereto. Conclusion The proposed preliminary and final plat of Bridgewater Bank Addition is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this ordinance, approved Official Exhibits, and City Code. 2. All utility service structures shall be buried. If any utility service structure cannot be buried (i.e. electric transformer), it shall be integrated into the building design and 100% screened from off-site with materials consistent with the primary building façade materials. 3. Prior to the City signing and releasing the final plat for filing with Hennepin County: a. A financial security in the form of a cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $1,000 shall be submitted to the City to insure that a signed Mylar copy of the final plat is provided to the City. b. A Planning Development Contract shall be executed between the City and Developer that addresses, at a minimum: i. The installation of all public improvements including, but not limited to: sidewalks, boulevards, and the execution of necessary easements related to such improvements. ii. A performance guarantee for 1.25 times the estimated costs for the installation of all public improvements, placement of iron monuments at property corners, and the private site stormwater management system and landscaping. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 11 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD c. The applicant shall reimburse City Attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the final plat approval. d. Assent Form and Official Exhibits shall be signed by the applicant and property owner. 4. Prior to starting any land disturbing activities, the following conditions shall be met: a. Proof of recording the final plat shall be submitted to the City. b. Assent Form and Official Exhibits shall be signed by the applicant and property owner. c. A preconstruction meeting shall be held with the appropriate development, construction, private utility, and City representatives. d. All necessary permits shall be obtained. e. A performance guarantee in the form of cash escrow or irrevocable letter of credit shall be provided to the City of St. Louis Park for all public improvements (street, sidewalks, boulevards, utility, street lights, landscaping, etc.) and landscaping. 6. The on-site underground storm water management system shall be privately-owned and privately maintained. Access to the system shall be provided to the City for clean-out and inspection purposes when warranted. Access points shall be covered by a drainage and utility easement, as provided on the final plat. 7. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the above- named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth have been fulfilled. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section 26- 123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council ___________ Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 12 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD ATTACHMENT “A” LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 1: Parcel 1: Lots 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14, Block 2, “Minikahda Vista 2nd Addition, Hennepin County”. Parcel 2: That part Lot 34, Block 2, “Minikahda Vista 2nd Addition, Hennepin County,” lying South of a line drawn Westerly at right angles to the East line of Lot 35, said Block 2, at a point 350 feet South of the Northeast corner of said Lot 35. Parcel 3: That part of Lot 35, Block 2, “Minikahda Vista 2nd Addition, Hennepin County,” except that part of the Easterly 15 feet of said Lot, lying between the Westerly extensions of the Northerly line of Lot 8, said Block 2, and of the Southerly line of Lot 9, said Block 2, and except that part of said Lot 35 lying North of a line drawn Westerly at right angles to the East line of said Lot 35, at a point 350 feet South of the Northeast corner of said Lot 35. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1429745. Parcel 2: Tract B Lots 15, 16 and 17, Block 2, “Minikahda Vista 2nd Addition, Hennepin County”. Being Registered land as is evidenced by Certificate of Title No. 1429747. Parcel 3: Trace C Parcel 1: Lot 18, Block 2, Minikahda Vista 2nd Addition, Hennepin County, except that part thereof lying Southwesterly of a line 35 feet Northeasterly of and parallel with a line described as beginning at a point 30 feet Southwesterly from the most Southerly corner of Lot 17, Block 2, “Minikahda Vista Second Addition, Hennepin County”, as measured at right angles from the Southwesterly line of said Lot 17, thence Northwesterly parallel with said Southwesterly line 142.63 feet and there terminating. Parcel 2: Lots 19 and 20, Block 2, Minikahda Vista, Second Addition, Hennepin County, except that part of said lots lying Southwesterly of a line 35 feet Northeasterly of and parallel with a line described as beginning at a point 30 feet Southwesterly from the most Southerly corner of Lot 17, Block 2, “Minikahda Vista Second Addition, Hennepin County”, as measured at right angles from the Southwesterly line of said Lot 17; thence Northwesterly parallel with said Southwesterly line 142.63 feet; thence along a tangential curve to the left having a tangent length of 120 feet, delta angle of 3 degrees, 18 minutes and 55 seconds for a distance of 239.95 feet and there terminating. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 13 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. ____-18 ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY CREATING SECTION 36-268-PUD 13 AS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 4424 AND 4400 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD AND 3743 MONTEREY DRIVE THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 18-08-PUD) for amending the Zoning Ordinance Section 36-268-PUD 13. Sec. 2. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Mixed Use. Sec. 3. The Zoning Map shall be amended by reclassifying the following described lands from C2 General Commercial and R4 Multiple Family Residence to PUD 13: Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Bridgewater Bank Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota Sec. 4. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 36-268 is hereby amended to add the following Planned Unit Development Zoning District: Section 36-268-PUD 13. (a) Development Plan The site located on property legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Bridgewater Bank Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota, shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the following Final PUD signed Official Exhibits: 1) G000P – Cover Sheet 2) G001P - Renderings 3) G002P – Shadow Study 4) C0.0 – Title Sheet 5) V1.0 – Site Survey 6) V1.1 – Final Plat Page 1 7) V1.2 – Final Plat Page 2 8) C1.0 – Removals Plan 9) C2.0 – Site Plan 10) C2.1 – Site Plan – Northern Drive 11) C2.2 – Vehicle Turning Movement Plan 12) C2.3 – Right of Way Dedication 13) C3.0 – Grading Plan 14) C3.1 Grading Plan – Northern Drive 15) C4.0 – Utility Plan 16) C5.0 – Civil Details City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 14 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD 17) C5.1 – Civil Details 18) C5.2 – Civil Details 19) C5.3 – Civil Details 20) SW1.0 – SWPPP – Existing Conditions 21) SW1.1 – SWPPP – Proposed Conditions 22) SW1.2 – SWPPP – Details & Narrative 23) SW1.3 – SWPPP – Attachments 24) SW1.4 – SWPPP - Attachments 25) SW1.5 – SWPPP – Attachments 26) L001 – Tree Preservation Plan 27) L100 – Landscape Plan 28) L400 – Landscape Enlargement 29) L500 – Landscape Details and Notes 30) AS100P – Architectural Site Plan 31) A090P – Floor Plan – Level P2 32) A100P – Floor Plan – Level P1 33) A110P – Floor Plan – Level 1 34) A120P – Floor Plan – Level 2 35) A130P – Floor Plan – Level 3 36) A140P – Floor Plan – Level 4 37) A160P – Roof Plan 38) A200P – Exterior Elevations 39) A201P – Exterior Elevations 40) A202P – Exterior Elevations 41) A203P – Exterior Elevations 42) A300P – Building Sections 43) AL100 – Photometric Plan 44) AL100 – Photometric P1 Plan 45) AL102 – Photometric P2 Plan The site shall also conform to the following requirements: 1) The property shall be developed with 84,000 square feet of building space. 2) At least 277 off-street parking spaces shall be constructed. At least five (5) public on-street parallel parking spaces shall be constructed on Excelsior Boulevard. Parking will be provided off-street in a surface lot (50 spaces), on-street parallel parking (5 spaces), and in below grade structured parking (227). 10 spaces shall be shared parking via a shared parking easement with Lot 2 Block 1 Bridgewater Addition. An off-street parking management plan shall be approved by the city and managed by the property owner, with the goal of avoiding spill over parking into surrounding streets in the neighborhood and maximizing the benefits of mixed use development and shared parking. 3) A commercial loading bay shall be located 6 feet from the east property line on the north side of the building. Access shall be provided from 36-1/2 Street. 4) The maximum building height shall not exceed 62 feet and four stories, plus up to an additional ten (10) feet for stair and elevator penthouses. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 15 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD 5) The development site shall include a minimum of 12 percent designed outdoor recreation area based on private developable land area. (b) Permitted Uses The following uses are permitted on Lot 2 Block 1, Bridgewater Bank Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota: (1) Office. (c) Permitted with Conditions The following uses are permitted with conditions on Lot 1 Block 1, Bridgewater Bank Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota: (1) Office. Office uses shall be limited to the upper floors. The following uses are permitted with conditions on Lot 1 and Lot 2 Block 1, Bridgewater Bank Addition, Hennepin County, Minnesota: (1) Commercial uses. Commercial uses shall be limited to the following: medical and dental offices, libraries, museums, banks, and studios. a. In vehicle sales is prohibited. (2) Retail and service facilities. The conditions are as follows: a. No single use retail or service facility establishment over 4,000 square feet is permitted. The use shall be located on the ground floor and shall be permitted only as a part of a larger development which contains at least one other permitted principal use or as a part of a mixed use PUD. b. All refuse shall meet the requirements of chapter 22 regulating refuse. c. In vehicle sales is prohibited. (3) Restaurants with or without intoxicating liquor license. The conditions are as follows: a. A maximum of 4,000 gross square feet shall be used for restaurants. This use shall be permitted as part of a larger development which contains at least one other principal use or as part of a PUD. b. A Travel Demand Management Plan shall be implemented and shall provide ongoing mitigation while a restaurant use is present. c. These uses shall not result in any exterior building modifications, including truck docks or freestanding signage, overnight truck parking or similar features. d. If there is a wine, beer, and/or intoxicating liquor license, the Restaurant uses shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential or has an occupied institutional building including but not limited to a school, religious institution or community center. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 16 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD e. In vehicle sales is prohibited. (4) Civic and institutional uses. Civic and institutional uses are limited to education/academic, library, museums/art galleries, indoor public parks/open space, police service substations, post office customer service facilities, public studios and performance theaters. The conditions are as follows: a. All parking requirements must be met for each use. b. In vehicle sales is prohibited. (d) Accessory Uses Accessory uses are as follows: (1) Parking lots. (2) Parking structures. Facades that are visible from off-site shall display and integration of building materials, building form, textures, architectural motifs, and building colors with principal building. (3) Public transit stops/shelters. (4) Catering, if accessory to food service, delicatessen or retail bakery. (5) Outdoor seating, public address (PA) systems are prohibited. (6) No outdoor uses or storage allowed. (7) Solar panels. Roof or building mounted solar systems shall not exceed the maximum allowed height in PUD 13. (8) In vehicle sales is prohibited. (e) Special Performance Standards (1) All general zoning requirements not specifically addressed in this ordinance shall be met, including but not limited to: outdoor lighting, architectural design, landscaping, parking and screening requirements. (2) Each commercial, civic or institutional tenant space on the ground floor shall have a direct and primary access to and from the Excelsior Boulevard (south) building façade and the access shall remain open during business hours. (3) All trash, garbage, waste materials, trash containers, and recycling containers shall be kept in the manner required by this Code. All trash handling and loading areas shall be screened from view within a waste enclosure. (4) Signage shall be allowed in conformance with the C-2 General Commercial Zoning District and shall comply with the following: a. Pylon signs shall be prohibited. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 17 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD (5) Façade. a. Composite wooden paneling a minimum of ten (10) millimeters thick shall be considered a Class I Material. b. The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground floor street-facing facades: i. Minimum ground floor transparency shall be 70% at the pedestrian level. ii. No more than 10% of total window and door area shall be glass block, mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass, finishes or material including window painting and signs. The remaining 90% of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted glass, allowing views into and out of the interior. iii. Active permitted uses shall be maintained for a minimum depth of 15 feet. Storage areas and utility closets are prohibited within this 15 feet. iv. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum depth of ten feet. This requirement shall not prohibit the display of merchandise. (6) Awnings. a. Awnings shall be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. b. Backlit awnings are prohibited. Sec. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 18-08-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec. 5. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Public Hearing May 2, 2018 First Reading May 21, 2018 Second Reading June 4, 2018 Date of Publication June 14, 2018 Date Ordinance takes effect June 29, 2018 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council _________, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 18 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD D R A F T UNOFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA MAY 2, 2018 – 6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Torrey Kanne, Lisa Peilen, Richard Person, Carl Robertson, Joe Tatalovich MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther; Jennifer Monson, Meg McMonigal, Jack Sullivan 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of April 4, 2018 Commissioner Carper made a motion to recommend approval of the April 4, 2018 minutes. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 7-0. 3. Public Hearings A. Bridgewater Bank Corporate Headquarters Preliminary and Final PUD; Preliminary and Final Plat Location: 4424 and 4400 Excelsior Blvd., 3743 Monterey Drive Applicant: Bridgewater Bank Case Nos.: 18-07-S, 18-08-PUD Jennifer Monson, Planner, presented the staff report. She discussed the request, site information and background. She reviewed proposed access points. Ms. Monson gave an analysis of the preliminary and final plat request. Ms. Monson provided analysis of the PUD request. She spoke about zoning compliance, uses, architectural design, height, lighting, parking and access. She also discussed the traffic study, Travel Demand Management Plan, landscaping, Climate Action Plan components, Designed Outdoor Recreation Area and public input. Ms. Monson noted that staff has received input from a representative of LIV Apartments, the apartment complex directly to the north. Concerns include landscaping, location and height of the access C driveway and retaining wall, and stormwater. Commissioner Peilen asked if the outdoor plaza area was a public space. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 19 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Ms. Monson responded that it is a publicly accessible space. Commissioner Peilen asked about traffic patterns at Monterey and Park Commons Drive. Matt Pacyna, SRF traffic consultant, discussed current conditions. Commissioner Peilen and Jack Sullivan, Engineering Project Manager, spoke about the proposed roundabout design at Monterey and the Rec Center. Commissioner Peilen asked about the location of the proposed U turn. Mr. Sullivan showed and spoke about the location of U turn at Monterey and Excelsior Blvd. Commissioner Kanne asked if there would be physical barriers preventing left turns at the right in/right out access point driveway. Mr. Sullivan said physical barriers are proposed. Commissioner Carper asked about restaurant location and walkway to the patio. Dean Dovolis, DJR Architecture, indicated the location of the wrap around patio design and the plaza. Commissioner Carper thanked the developer for including infrastructure for charging stations. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about need for additional parking with outdoor seating. She stated there are existing Excelsior Blvd. restaurants whose patrons park in neighborhoods. Ms. Monson responded that the parking study indicated there is adequate parking to serve a 4,000 sq. ft. restaurant. She said the parking study shows even at peak time there is still additional capacity for restaurant parking. Sean Walther, Parking and Zoning Supervisor, explained the formula used in zoning code for parking and outdoor seating. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she loves the building but everything depends upon the traffic impact. She commented that the new plan has more daily trips than the previous proposal. She said the City Council voted down the previous proposal. Mr. Pacyna explained from a total site trips perspective it is less than what was previously proposed. He stated that the primary difference is the fact that when the data was collected previously the former uses were still active so there was a credit applied for those current uses. With the latest traffic count update those businesses were no longer active and the credit was not applied, which results in the reported net new system trips. He referenced where that information could be found in the traffic study. Mr. Dovolis, architect, gave a presentation on the development. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 20 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked about Access B and the amount of traffic exiting from ramp. Mr. Pacyna said there would be approximately 10-15 peak hour vehicles making a right turn to go north on Excelsior Blvd. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the proposed U turn would double the amount of traffic on that stretch of Monterey. Mr. Pacyna said that U-turns had been accounted for in the traffic analysis. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. Paul Jennings, 3925 Joppa Ave. S., spoke about the choke point at Excelsior and Monterey. He said the only way he can get out of his neighborhood is at Wooddale or Excelsior/Monterey. He spoke about parking at Trader Joe’s complicating the choke point problem. He said it doesn’t make sense to him to grade traffic. He said it is up to the applicant to design the access points. Mr. Jennings said traffic questions need to be addressed with anything that is built on that corner. Patti Carlson, 3801 Inglewood Ave. S., said the building has a lot of great ideas but she is concerned about traffic. Monterey is her family’s single primary route to multiple destinations. She spoke about her concern of the change to a single lane being the primary route for emergency vehicles. She spoke about bike lanes and bus stops in addition to one lane. She said she is able to walk for many of her errands and she is concerned about roundabout design and pedestrian safety. She said she thought the proposed changes to Monterey road design are dangerous, elaborate and expensive. Janet Grimes, 4530 Park Commons Dr. #309, said she lives above Trader Joe’s parking lot. She spoke about accidents she has seen at Monterey and Park Commons Dr. She said to create more driveways on to Monterey is insane. She commented that if she does not leave her parking lot by 3 p.m. she is not able to leave the lot. She spoke about the number of pedestrians going to the bank, stores, post office and apartment buildings currently encountering heavy traffic. Ms. Grimes said she likes the proposed building design but doesn’t feel a roundabout is the solution to Park Commons Dr. and Monterey. Jonathan Saliterman, representing LIV Apartments, 4505 W. 36th ½ St., provided background on LIV Apartments. He said the Bridgewater design is good but it is a strange site with incongruent pieces which neglect the existence of the LIV complex. Access C is currently on city-owned property. The land is being contributed to the development so it can be a driveway with a one foot setback and built on a substantial graded wall. He said it isn’t a normal driveway. He said he is concerned about water retainage with the new development. LIV doesn’t have any drainage naturally. Mr. Saliterman said as neighbors LIV should have been incorporated into the design of Access C. He said traffic concerns of neighbors are legitimate. Yvette LaCroix, building manager, LIV Apartments, 4505 W. 36 1/2 St., stated that LIV Apartments has been in the neighborhood since 1968. Additional traffic, Access C, landscaping, and setback are concerns. She added there is no consideration for neighbors City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 21 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD to enjoy their right to quiet. Ms. LaCroix said there is also concern about construction hours and measures to protect residents. Alberto Bertomeu, property owner of several properties on Excelsior Blvd., said the traffic issues are a reality in urban areas. He said signage can be improved and there should be greater enforcement of traffic rules. He stated that the development is being wrongly mixed up with traffic further west on Excelsior Blvd. Mr. Bertomeu stated the community is missing the opportunity to discuss the project and bring employment to St. Louis Park. He commented that weekend traffic will be lighter than work week traffic which is a plus for neighborhoods. No one is mentioning weekend traffic. Mr. Bertomeu said the traffic flow needs to be enforced as well as enforcing respectful driving in the neighborhoods. As no one else was present wishing to speak and the Chair closed the public hearing. Chair Robertson asked staff to address setback concerns from LIV Apartments. Ms. Monson said the site is zoned C-2 and the zoning ordinance allows a driveway to be built there. It is not an accessory structure. It is an engineered retaining wall with a driveway on top. She spoke about wall requirements and noted the PUD creates the height and setback regulations for the site. Mr. Walther added Access C was designed in that location to locate the driveway farther north away from Excelsior/Monterey and Access B. Commissioner Tatalovich asked about LIV Apts. and water retainage. Ms. Monson said the Water Resource Manager has explained to LIV Apartments how the stormwater works in that area. Currently where LIV property abuts the EDA property is at one of the low points of the site so the surface water is coming from LIV Apts and the EDA property and there is likely pooling currently in that area. There are no existing stormwater mitigations on the EDA site. She stated that the Bridgewater development has multiple areas for capturing and managing stormwater, including the plaza and Access A, which would improve the stormwater conditions in the area. Commissioner Peilen said the comments were excellent. She said the building is beautiful. She said there are pedestrian and traffic issues everywhere in the metro area. She stated she is concerned about the proposed U turn. She spoke about congestion with bike lanes. Overall she said she feels the project is lovely and worthy of the commission’s consideration. Commissioner Carper said the roundabout concerns stand apart from the Bridgewater development. Chair Robertson said the project is well designed and thoughtful. He commented that it’s been a long time since an office use has come to the city which is very exciting. Traffic issues are real but separate from the project. He said he felt the future road improvements will improve traffic flow. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 22 Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Commissioner Kanne said she agreed with traffic concerns. She stated she encounters traffic issues everywhere in the metro area. She said the development is ultimately an improvement, good for livability and property values. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she likes the building but is concerned about traffic issues on Excelsior Blvd. She stated she is concerned about the number of driveways on Monterey. She said this part of St. Louis Park is different from other communities in that it doesn’t have a grid road design. Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending approval of the preliminary and final plat, and preliminary and final Planned Unit Development subject to staff recommendations. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-1 (Johnston-Madison no). 4. Other Business 5. Communications 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 p.m. A study session followed. PROJECT SUMMARY AMENITY SF BANK CORE OFFICE PUBLIC AREA PARKING RETAJC TOTAL (OUTDOOR) SF SF SF SF SFSTALLS SF GSF LEVELP2 1,430 44,478 113 ..... LEVELP1 1,430 44478 ..... LEVELL1 7,152 1,232 ..,., NIA '·"' ...... L.EVELL.2 4744 1232 19 775 691 219" LEVELL3 1,232 19,ns 691 ,,. .. LEVELL4 1,965 1.232 17,810 691 18,733 TOTAL 6,709 7,152 7,788 "·"' 6,778 88,95tl "' 7,530 175,82-4 ABOVE GRADE "DOES NOT INCLUDE AMENITY 84,008 BELOW GRADE 91,816 PARKING SUMMARY BIKE SUMMARY NJA VAN MJA STANDARD COMPACT TOTAL STALLS STALLS STALLS STALLS STALLS BOKE (NON VAN) STALLS LEVELP2 86 22 113 LEVEL P1 .. 114 LEVELP2 14 L 1 SURFACE PARKING .. 50 LEVELP1 14 ON STREET PARKING LEVEL L1 TOTAL "' TOTAL PROJECT TEAM OWNER Bl1dgewaler BMk1BttdgewaterBenC8tl0re9,lnc. 3B00AmericanBou1BYard Wesl Suite#100 Bloomington, MN 55431 Contact:Peter B rodd 952.893.4277 peter.brodd@bwbenk.com ARCHtTECT CMC DJR A rdlitect\Jre, lnc. 333WuhinglonAvenueN UnlonPlaza,Su�e210 Mlnl'l80p0ils,MN 55401 Contact:DeanDovolls 612.676.2700 612.676.2727{fa)I) ddovolls@dJr-lnc.com CMISlteGroup,ll'lC. 4931 W 35thstraet Suite#200 S1.LoulsP811<..MN 55416 Contact:Patrtck&irver 612.615.0060 psa rver@ciYils�eg roup.com LANDSCAPE ARCHrrECT SHEET INDEX -PUD GENERAL GOOOP COVERSHEET G001P RENDERINGS G002P SHADOW STUDY CIVIL co.o TTTl.ESHEET V1.0 SITE SURVEY V1.1 FINAL Pl.AT -PAGE 1 V1.2 FINAL Pl.AT -PAGE 2 C1.0 REMOVALS PLAN C2.0 SITE PLAN C2.1 SITE PLAN -NORTI-IERN DRIVE C2.2 VEHICI.£ T\JRNING MOVEMENT PLAN C2.3 RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION EXHIBtT C3.0 GRADING PLAN C3.1 GRADING Pl.AN -NORTHERN DRIVE C4.0 UTIUTYPLAN C5.0 DETAILS C5.1 DETAILS C5.2 DETAILS C5.3 DETAILS SW1.0 SWPPP-EXISTING CONDmONS SW1.1 SWPPP -PROPSED CONDtTIONS SW12 SWPPP-DETAILS SW1.3 SWPPP-NARRATIVE SW1.4 SWPPP · ATIACHMENTS SW1.5 SWPPP-ATIACHMENTS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE L400 LANDSCAPE ENLARGEMENT Conftuenoe AS100P ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN 530 N Third SlrBBt Suite#120 Mlnl'l80p0ils,MN 55401 Contact:B radAldr1ch 612,333.3702 baldrich@thinkconftuence.com LIGHTING CONSULTANT Schuler Shook 219 MainStnlBISE Suite#200 Mlnl'l80p0ils,MN 55414 Contact:Mlcheel Whlte 612,339.5958 mdwh�e@schulershook.oom CURRENT ZONING: C-2/R4 MAXt,.1UM FAR=2.0(210,634SF) BULDI\IG AREA GROSS MAXt,.1UM BUILDING HEIGHT FAR MAX1t1UM BUILDING COVERAGE PARKING (PER SEC 36-361A) (PERSEC 36-4) .,,,... ITECTURE FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL P2 100P FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL P1 1111' FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 1 A120P FLOOR PL.AN -LEVEL 2 ""' FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 3 1411' FLOOR PLAN -LEVEL 4 1611' ROOFPCAN EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS '201P EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS A203P EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS BUILDING SECTIONS 101 PHOTOMETRIC P1 PARKING ZONING SUMMARY PROPOSED ZONING: PUD 060282A430187 -68,763SF 1.53ACRES NIA LESSER OF 6 STORIES OR 75 FEET IN HEIGHT {36-194f.1) MAXIMUM 2.0 (206,481 SF) {36-194f.2) NIA �20K�O 175,B24GSF 0.8(84,008SF) NIA EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN 4,123SF LOADING BERTHS (PER SEC. 36-361 M) 20K• = 1 LOADING DOCK (12' X 55') 1 LOADING DOCK (12'X55') 50'AWAY FROM R DISTRICT MUST BE SCREENED WITH 10'HIGH WAl.l. INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK SIDE YARD BICYCLE PARKING PARKING LOT DIMENSIONS (PER SEC. 36-361) 5' MIN .• EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD 5' MIN. -MONTEREY DRIVE {36-194F-4) 15' + 1' FOR EACH FOOT ABOVE 35' (36-194F-5) BUILDING HEIGHT (36-194 F-6 BUILDING ABOVE 351 5'MINIMUM {36-194F-3) 10% OF AUTOMOBILE PARKING (36-361 3-C) 90 DEG. STANDARD: 8.5' X18' COMPACT: 8' X 16' 5'-EXCELSIOR BLVD. 5' -MONTEREY DR 28(10%) 8.5'X18' 8'X16' ABUTIING R DISTRICT GENERAl.l. Y WITHIN 50' OF ENTRY � w 1-z w 0 w 0 a. � ,0 0 � z � w I-i ; � w LL 1 C) ...J 4: z C � m � � ii ii � J ! 111 ''1 '" m u:: 0 :::::) a.. GOOOP City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 23 �,,0 ,: ,: ll ;;I ,, � 0 ,, � m � � z i;i < < ffi ffi ::;; :ll J :ll 0 0 ,: ,: "' � C ,, " ll !;; " m i5 � " '" Q 0 z � G) § � 0 PUD FINAL FORMAT C, 0 0 ..,I, -a BRIDGEWATER BANK CORPORATE CENTER 4400 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 Date: 05.15.2018 Drawn by: !AIMP Ctleckedby: ACJ :5 lll :ll 0 ,: �"� 0 ,, '" 0 I= m ";o 0 < ffi ::;; :ll 0 ,: � " !;; i5 " '" 0 � � 0 � 0 ,: 0 z ;;I ,, � 0 � lhetebyaudlyth811hlsplatl, ll)edftcadoo,«r-,i--f'lod by meor underrrr,dn<'laupervlola'land thatlamecUyUceraec!Ardi1ec:1under -��;;;;CONSTRUCTION ��{;a.�_______Qs.J5..2£._l.f ,_ .. Bridg-rBaflk.lloid�rBal\Clalns,lr.: 3800�nlllvd.W,SUite#100 ==MNSM31 ""'-CMISiteGnlup,lnc.. �931W351hS11'9et,SU1te#200 ���-=MN55-116 LANDSCAPEARCHITECT -­mNll*dS1tfft,Suite#120 �1���M1155-401 DJR ARCHITECTURE, INC 333 Washington Ave N, Suite 210 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 612.676.2700 www.d1_r-inc.com LIGHTING CONSULTANT SchuerShoolc 218Me1nStreetSE,SUile#200 �=�MIIS5414 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 24 May / August 21 ,._�---. t, n�I c:' D , o�i:i- ' September/ March 21 � . I -'1 ''-J�( --=�-==--r , I I / November/ January 21 December 21 Perspectives �...._-=-----'.:-_�-----1!?!•-=--=� ---�---------. ./ 11 AM 38% SHADOW COVERAGE ------�-----.,�::�-�---�--::.:..-•· ����fr I 3PM 27% SHADOW COVERAGE Note: Shadow study above shows that the proposed structure does not cast a shadow that covers more than 50 percent of the adjacent buildings south facade for a period greater than two hours between 9:00 am and 3:00 pm for more than 60 days of the year. �w1-z w0w i 0C.�00�z �w � � � �LL , C)C�m 111 ''1 '" m ...J <t: z u:: 0 ::::, a.. G002P City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 25 L ARCHITECT: DJR ARCHITECTURE J.IC. 333 N WASHNGTON AVE #210 MNNEAPOUS, MN 55401 ((112).676.2700 PROJECT SCOPE � DEVELOPER I PROPERTY OWNER: BRClGEWATER BANK 4400 EXCELSDR BLVD ST.LOU6 PARK. MN 55416 (952).263.3737 ENGINEER I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: Ct,/L SITE GROUP 4931 W 35 TH STREET SUITE200 ST.LOU6 PARK, MN 55416 (612)-615-0060 SURVEYOR: SUNDE LAND SURVEYIIIG 9001 EBLOOMNGTON FWY#11B BLOOMNGTON. MN 55420 (952).681.2455 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: NORTHERN TECHNOLOGES IIIC. 6586 141 ST AVE NW RAMSEY, MN 55303 (763).433.9175 5 MASTER LEGEND: '---•1.26 891.00 G 691.00TC 891.00 BS/TS EOF=1135.52 EX.1'CONTOUR ELEVATDN NTERVAL EXl3TNO SPOT GfWlE ELEVATDN 1D'CONTOURELEVATDH MERVAL SPOT GRADE ELEVATDN (GUTTER/FLOW Lt£ UNLESS OTHERW13E NOTED) SPOT GRADE ELEVATDN TOP OF CURB (GUTIER TOP) SPOT GRADE ELEVATDH TOP OF WALL SPOT GRADE ELEVATDH BOTTOM OF WALL DRANAGE ARROW EMERGENCY OVERFLOW SlT FENCEfBDROU. -GRAD NG Lt.ill" NLET PROTECTON STABLl'EDCONSTRUCTON ENTRANCE SOL BORNG LOCATON CURB ANO GUTIER(T.O" Tl' OUT) BRIDGEWATER BANK CORPORA TE CENTER ;:, --->-----»----1-- 0 EX6TNG MANHOLE 0 EX6TNG CATCH BASN :.: EX6TNG HYDRANT ST LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA ISSUED FOR: CITY SUBMITTAL ..... { �.;,(�:9 ·"' !,,�·� -.....1 f 1-........ ,�,...,..J \ �·o \ ,.,.- ··, t;,,,,, '�SITE LOCATIO� ¥,(p"'� PROPOSED MANHOLE STORM PROPOSED CATCH BASN OR CATCH BASN MANHOLE STORM PROPOSED GATE VALVE PROPOSED FRE HYDRANT PROPOSED MANHOLE SAN If ARY PROPOSED Sl3N PROPOSED Ll311T PROPOSED SAN .. ARY SEWER PROPOSED STORM SEWER PROPOSED WATER MAN EXETNG SMIT ARY SEWER EXETNG STORM SEWER EXl:iTNG WATER MAN EXl:iTNG GAS MAN EXl:iTNG UIIDERGROUND ELECTRC EXl:iTNG UIIOERGROUNO CABLE o, EX6Tt.lG STOPBOX -i} EX6TNG Lk,HT t M EXBTt.lG GATE VALVE m EX6Tt.lG ELECTRC BOX tiil EXBTIIIG GAS METER • EX6TIIIG GASVALVE II :' J i: ., .,..,,r:"' l ii •/II II r SITE LOCATION \ GOPHER STATE ONE CALL &\, WN"¥V.GOPHERSTATEONECALL.ORG ,\ (B00)2 52.1166TOLLFREE (651) 45 4-0002 LOCAL • .� � s ,, �. I I 1: 11 .,.,..� .. .... ,.kr. !111 . �:i ] 1 SHEET INDEX SHEET NUMBER SHEET TITLE CO.O TITLE SHEET V1 .0 SITE SURVEY V1.1 FNAL PLAT. PAGE 1 V12 FNAL PLAT. PAGE 2 C1 .0 REMOVALS PLAN C2.0 SITE PLAN C2.1 SITE PLAN. NORTHERN DRIVE C22 VEHK::LE TURNING MOVEMENT PLAN C2.3 Rk3HT OF WAY DEDICATION EXHBIT C3.0 GRAONG PLAN C3.1 GRADNG PLAN -NORTHERN DRIVE C4.0 UTLITY PLAN cs.a DETALS C5.1 DETALS C52 DETALS C5.3 DETALS SW1 .0 SWPPP. EXISTNG CONDITkJNS SW1.1 SWPPP -PROPOSED CONDITIONS SW12 SWPPP. DETALS SW1 .3 SWPPP. NARRATIVE SW1.4 SWPPP. ATTACHMENTS SW1 .5 SWPPP. ATTACHMENTS CivilSite G R O U P ,931W."1'HST.SU11"E200 ST.LOUEPARK.MN 56116 CivilB.l.o<GupS>lffl DJR ARCHITECTURE. l',IC Sl1.1DGEWJ\TEl1. Sh\1!.i'li.: c:::wI-z w 0 �w "' I-z "' z ui :. " � 0 0 a:: w Q. <( <( Q. It:: w c:::<J) :::::, z 5 z 0 0 I-�0 ...J 0 0 ti w ;;; ::.:: I-.. � � w z � <( ID 0 z m a:: It:: 0 0 c( I-c:::i15 It:: z w w -, xQ I-w � ;z ......� w m I IHEREBY CERTFY THAT Tli6 Pl.AN, �=rJ:!t�1;;rt�YCT LCENSEO PROFESSDNAI.. ENG NEER ,���mo, f.1ewR.Pevek o.•:r�LCENSENO� ISSUE/SUBMITTAL SUMMARY REV150N SUMMARY TITLE SHEET co.a @IX>l'"rN£.HT2Cll5C .. LS1"EOl<Wl'ltC City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 26 ., .......... , �t}'-� .... :�t-- V1.0 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 27 BRIDGEWATER BANK ADDfflON I Pareri I: Labs 10. ]!, 12, 13 t,1'1,J 1"11 9� i, •wfth;hckl Vf-t.a �ut �. H;t'Y.ll'flr, �ty'. Pc.'Cri !c 'nut. p,;aii LD\ "4,. Dlixk 2_ � '4'.l:z :.rJ k:ldW<in, w.� ... ColM'ihL N t,\i'ig b'lh of C fN dra,v;1 w-:.t1y al rtlht tj�H U,. th• Eart lfr..• cl � ,a d;l I!� 2, lit • pm: :40 :..t a..,e. vf Im '-thwd CVl/lo91' cir ud Ull � ����� � :f �-�=�·=.2:1 ��·�:ttl:11-� ��n:, 0�,?o1r.;:':Z :::.:srca:1��1 uict pe,t e:r -� l.at � 1,t,,iii Niritl or ao lfr• o-wn w.:m17 4't rt/It -� hi t,c (ta"t 11'1.c cP edld Lat l5, at a pctit J!:iO 1Nt Sa.Jth m ttus M<.,it!u,ciill'l ui.v11CI' ;rt a.>id Lot� ttc:ia; M�All»od kllHI VI la IS',(d� b)' C.tifk.rrl,jj 'M Titli! � 1�7.(-S., :�� O(�t.w Bcsik, ll M�l'ilMdo or.,rpoca&n, QW)UW etf th� fal!O\Mltg dm� prs.lpW'ty duat.d ill LU CC\:'"•t)' 01 }M'!n,tp/r!, siat• O'I Ml'lfMl!'M>tl:, r""" • Loil: IS, 118 11/td 17, Bl.x:k 2,, •"ln!l!.ahda lf'il1a 2nd Adlltlan, Het1flil{lf,"I Ccurri.('. Batli f'1�tn.t kl!nd c.i, k-. a'&ffflc$CI b)I Cwtlfic:dUI ,;)f litln N4-lil1CM7, Am.I thm St. L.n.i� � i� l>t'n!l!o�en.t Alllhuity. ..! W�tsz P<,titicd c;uWMMlif'I, �M IDf �ti'ii fOI� iiK�lMki ,r.oi,l«tr lil!\\Hll!i:;i i,i N Ct:urll'ly @f HYf'lr:!llpt\, St.lJ"..r ot li'Mtliflt(:, tG lflf"..: TmM t =01�� ��:d���:,���.�c:a��r.� �m �lths:��*'cS::t=�� ���.3:, � 17. � �=����l:'lf�<;._�.,;! � hm V1415wbarhrl,llr,e gf Id' Ld 17, Ularim ;,�2:�7 of��w::�1n:�IM� �������� �:���"\���°!/t!\-17. II°'"' .2. ..-,kfld.la "'l!!'ta � hdifflm tieti'i'WCo �lo/', • � irt r!<ftt anllw "hm � 3'wthntlltw1F I'll• of Ddli LOI: 17; thtnot ==��t it:n�!::.!,�'�cdn��mai:!n«:' :�k���tt = t�:?�hGffl9 '7i �t 1cm1lh ,;;1 120 �t, 'STMC CF------­ CtuilY OF --- ----- The la'�" '1jolMM'!«t\ •"' tclcnffl�l4 Mt«1 mo \hie __ «.y 11-f -----.e_ ir,y i.1 "l<ftnDZfi 1.t.:� :ditf i31'1� B:mi... o �t®tu corpor.rtietl. 002 COi.lsed it!� p.re�JJ to be �Ql'lt'd by ltrs �roper ot1icd' itd1 --· doy of -----· 'ji(J__. ··-----···-·----·----------- !HA.If.. OF --=----------- COLJ-iTf OF _____ _ ��p=�'---=--=----_-_···::""c..."""""•�c-_-_-_--_-_-_--_--­Yy Cominlnlm �- -------- 1" "',tr;"" llli'!� eotd St- l.e..ill Pe,,: �fc �O!'ffl"4nt 6.uttu.Y·>ty, C' ,Jll11..,.ote, po1,11ci,1 �el�. � eouffl 'thffC p��• tc-be 11!:il'!ad by Ha PfQP,it offcor tnfa __ dey m �-----lO.-. �r,.,r Of'------­= "" -------- The �; lri�?Nfflmi vma �lf'tmli� !)a� me tt:M __ MY o1 -----2'L-hy Del..«! tili.s - - ·-day,.,.,-----·""- s,� I.Cl�'! � rit,,."ltES}JA Hi.rtr,ry f"!.� _ �l'!ty., Wh",1� Mi �Wlfflfi Exritm. Jts'lUG,Y 31, a,_ T1il! ol!rt er 8RDG't/A1l'll Mil �noo l(OIJ eppr1;1""1 c.'14 wc;ei,ooJ n:, uu1 Qty Gwnci ot m. Lall" P<.n.. Mb»caotci, ot a rtOJi<lr 1r.eeilr\= ttl•Ad MU INt --- HY t'!,f ---�-- - �- If Cl.jip'�-. � llll'lttt:P. OUl'lffl,ffltil Cll'ld �MdatfMa of 'it';a l!'l:mlNll!!b".« ,c,t T-.,crb'.rlJo)rl end th« Cwnt:r H!t:11\ffG:Y �o!lf,r h,;;iw �I'! � hy lh°' tit.,-m l+r'II �&d :!'.O d4:, pl".l"'bd hM �� �JlO'.it Nte'.4,t ,pf iYc:h �'!flt.i and ,-�;na1ooti;,r,;:. Qi# prtll�� by Mir,n, St,,wtC4, Sei::tton !!05.0� �� 2. etT"f �I. OF ST. LOJIS PNM, �!,£SOTA ""----------�)'RF" "1-----------a"'* ltESI'OIT AID fiEA!.. ESTATE SEIMCl!S, Har,r*?fi Cnl.lTity. Y� i 1\1!:rl!!-f "'1:ff)' t:.ict t£MM �y.:11,t� ti zo_ Mt! ;:iriOt' )11:,0tS M� UM i,1\d !er ltftd &.� M m11 p,1'11. t!ictbd tM,a __ .,,, "' ----�20� "'------------·-011pt,1t, SJ..f;\ol'( r»V!SON, H.nm,plfl Ca.urt:,. l\flnnK",,ota f'l,jrMi'Cf'.'t to M!i'lnliOW $tn;\19i: $M. j� (1"109). �. ;ale:\ h-1• """ CW,,VW'O Ul!t -- GO;; Gt --a,Q_ Oiril f. lhJ\iA, Ca.w,t,y SJ!w)t)I" 6y -------·-------- R:!afflM OF t1TU'.I, .... 1:nf''.1• �t10 u� I !,lil"d;,1 Q!rlif)· fflcit tho ,o;!f:h� plat :,-1" !:IRV<E#ATER i3AJil( ADDfTlot4 IKB rVisd h tim: -ttffi� th* __ tkl)I ,of ·--- '1IL_ •t ---ci'docl; _Ii. B1 ------------Dqrn1l> rlE.';hSION SUMMARY :.l�Jtll'.c3CRPTICt/ FINAL PLAT -PAGE 1 V1.1 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 28 BRIDGEWATER BANK ADDmON I ---� I I I � I � I / / / / R. T. DOC. NO. .IV * DeMta fa.ind 1/'J mah h:n manumMt • �=�: t ��l�"!;�ffldabn�ctl�tl 9 ='TtDl�� = � �":=.-tam� L5-15'SO PRELIMINARY SUBJECT TO REVISION &EET 2 OF 2 SH3:TS REVEiClN SUMMARY FINAL PLAT -PAGE2 V1.2 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 29 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 30 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 32 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 34 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 35 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 36 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 38 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 39 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 40 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 41 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 42 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 43 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 44 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 45 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 46 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 47 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 48 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 49 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 50 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 51 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 52 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 53 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 54 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUDPage 55 SRF No. 10962,00 To: Jack Sullivan, Senior Engineering Project Manager City of St. Louis Park From: Matt Pacyna, PE, Principal Emily Gross, PE, Associate Date: March 13, 2018 Subject: Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study Introduction SRF has completed a multimodal corridor study for Monterey Drive between Beltline Boulevard and Excelsior Boulevard in the City of St. Louis Park. The City is considering modification to Monterey Drive between Beltline Boulevard and Park Commons to improve multimodal transportation within this area. Planned multimodal improvements include the addition of on-street bike lanes, sidewalk enhancements, and roadway/traffic control modifications to better accommodate all modes of transportation within the area. Therefore, the main objectives of this study are to review existing operations within the study area, evaluate transportation changes if Monterey Drive was converted to a three-lane roadway, and develop a corridor layout to illustrate the various multimodal improvements. The following sections provide the assumptions, analysis, and study findings and recommendations offered for consideration. Data Collection Various data collection efforts have been conducted in the study area since October 2014, which has allowed opportunities for comparison and a better understanding of differences between traffic volumes during multiple times of the year. Most recently, SRF collected 13-hour vehicular turning movement, pedestrian, and bicyclist counts in July 2017 at the following study intersections: 1)Excelsior Boulevard and Monterey Drive 2)Monterey Drive and Park Commons Drive 3)Monterey Drive and 36th-1/2 Street 4)Monterey Drive and Beltline Boulevard City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 56 Memorandum Hourly Traffic Volume Profile Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes along Monterey Drive currently range from approximately 9,000 to 13,000 vehicles per day (vpd). The 13-hour counts collected on Monterey Drive at Park Commons Drive, 36-1/2 Street, and Beltline Boulevard were further reviewed to better understand the hourly volume profile along the corridor. As shown in Figure 1, volumes peak between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. while other hours of the day are lower than this peak period. www.srfconsulting.com One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 | Minneapolis, MN 55447-4453 | 763.475.0010 Fax: 1.866.440.6364 An Equal Opportunity Employer Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study Figure 1. Hourly Traffic Volumes on Monterey Drive Roadway Characteristics In addition to the intersection turning movement counts, observations were completed to identify roadway characteristics within the study area (i.e. roadway geometry, posted speed limits, and traffic controls). Currently, Excelsior Boulevard is a four-lane divided roadway with a posted speed limit of 35 miles per hour (mph). Monterey Drive, north of Park Commons Drive, is a four -lane undivided roadway. South of Park Commons Drive, Monterey Drive is a two-lane divided roadway with turn lanes. The posted speed limit along Monterey Drive is 30 mph. The Monterey Drive intersections at Excelsior Boulevard and Beltline Boulevard are signalized, while the 36-1/2 Street and Park Commons Drive intersections are unsignalized with side-street stop control. Existing geometrics, traffic controls, and volumes are shown in Figure 2. Observations The following safety and operational issues were observed and are important to note: 1)Southbound queues from the Excelsior Boulevard/Monterey Drive intersection have been observed to queue beyond the Park Commons Drive intersection anywhere between 15 and 75 percent of the p.m. peak period over the past few years. This variability is due to fluctuations in traffic volumes and recent signal timing modifications implemented in 2017, which reduced the time southbound queues impact the eastbound left- and northbound left-turn maneuverability. a)Motorists turning into/out of Park Commons Drive were observed to only be able to make these turns when the intersection was blocked and motorists would allow these movements. b)The southbound queue from the Excelsior Boulevard/Monterey Drive intersection obstructs the view of oncoming traffic, creating a safety concern. c)The delays/congestion at the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection led to motorists making aggressive movements and/or not obeying traffic laws. 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM10:00 AM11:00 AM12:00 PM1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PM4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PMTwo-Way Traffic Volumesat Park Commons at 36-1/2 Street "at Beltline Blvd" City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 57 March 13, 2018 Page 2 celsio r Bl v d Mont e r e y D r 36th-1/2 S t Kipling AvePark C o m m o n s D r 13,100 9,30010962.00 March 2018 Existing Conditions Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study City of St. Louis Park Figure 2NORTHNorthH:\Projects\10000\10962\TS\Three-Lane Monterey Memo\Figures3 8 t h S t Exc elsi or Blv d 181 (224)548 (531)3 (6)0 ( 3)(19) 7 (149) 63 (911) 36 9 (57) 36 2 ( 2 ) 1 7 4 ( 1 4 6 ) 5 9 ( 3 1 ) ( 3 8 5 ) 1 3 3 ( 3 4 4 ) 1 1 7 ( 1 4 1 ) 9 2Mo n t e r e y D r Park C o m m o n s D r Mont e r e y D r (50) 6 3 (103) 4 0 3 7 8 ( 4 3 2 ) 4 0 ( 8 7 ) ( 7 6 7 ) 3 0 2 ( 1 4 3 ) 6 136th-1/2 St SLP Rec Center Mo n t e r e y D r(56) 37(6) 0(36) 32218 (117)1 (6)12 (8)2 ( 7 ) 4 2 5 ( 4 5 2 ) 1 4 ( 2 3 ) ( 7 7 ) 2 9 ( 8 6 6 ) 3 1 9 ( 4 ) 1 -A.M. Peak Hour Volume (7:45 - 8:45 A.M.) - P.M. Peak Hour Volume (4:45 - 5:45 A.M.) -Year 2017 Average Daily Traffic Volumes - Side-Street Stop Control -Traffic Signal Control Excelsior Blvd 270 (297) 410 (328) (325) 175 (497) 187 190 (250)162 (450)Beltline BlvdCity Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 58 2)Eastbound queues at the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection impacted the Trader Joe’s driveway approximately 35 percent of the p.m. peak hour. 3)Westbound queues on Park Commons Drive were observed to extend to Monterey Drive, which was a result of eastbound queues blocking access to the Trader Joe’s driveway. a)When these queues extended to Monterey Drive, motorists making a southbound right- or northbound left-turn from Monterey Drive had to wait until the queues cleared. In addition, eastbound left-turning motorists along Park Commons Drive were observed turning in-front of northbound left-turning motorists, which is an illegal maneuver. 4)Several north/south pedestrian and/or bicyclist conflicts were observed during the p.m. peak period at the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection along the west approach. Two pedestrians were observed crossing Monterey Drive (east/west) during the p.m. peak hour. 5)The City recently installed a rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB) at the north approach of the Monterey Drive/36th-1/2 Street intersection. Based on observations when a pedestrian activated the RRFB, motorist compliance was low. Monterey Drive Three-Lane Facility The City is considering modifying Monterey Drive (between Beltline Boulevard and Park Commons Drive) to a three-lane facility (i.e. a two-lane roadway with a center left-turn lane or a divided two-lane roadway with turn lanes) to accommodate on-street bike lanes and a widened sidewalk on the east side of Monterey Drive. In addition, a three-lane facility would improve the pedestrian-crossing condition at 36-1/2 Street by reducing the crossing distance and the potential for multiple-threat-collisions (i.e. when a vehicle in one through lane is stopped for a pedestrian and obstructs the vision of a motorist in the adjacent through lane). The effectiveness (i.e. driver compliance) of the current RRFP at the Monterey Drive/36th-1/2 Street intersection would be improved under a three-lane condition. Furthermore, a three-lane configuration has the potential to lower average travel speeds compared to a multi-lane configuration, which improves the multimodal environment. ADT volumes within this segment of Monterey Drive currently range from approximately 9,000 vpd near Excelsior Boulevard to 13,000 vpd west of Beltline Boulevard. Based on planning-level thresholds, these volumes are within the acceptable capacity range for a three-lane facility. Per FHWA’s Road Diet Informational Guide, ADTs under 20,000 vpd may be good candidates for a Road Diet. In addition, from a planning level perspective, hourly volumes along Monterey Drive were reviewed to determine where and how often the directional volumes would be expected to exceed the guidance thresholds identified in FHWA’s Road Diet Informational Guide, which state: •Probably feasible at or below 750 vehicles per hour per direction (vphpd) during the peak hour •Consider cautiously between 750 and 875 vphpd during the peak hour •Feasibility less likely above 875 vphpd during the peak hour City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 59 Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study March 13, 2018 Page 4 A review of the hourly traffic volumes by direction on Monterey Drive indicates that traffic volumes are below 750 vphpd except during the weekday p.m. peak period where they exceed 900 vpdpd in the southbound direction. While the traffic volumes exceed the recommended thresholds for one to two hours a day, further analysis is needed to understand the delays/queues expected on Monterey Drive if converted to a three-lane facility. To understand the changes, an intersection capacity analysis was conducted during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours to compare traffic operations under the existing and three-lane roadway configuration. Intersection Capacity Analysis An intersection capacity analysis was completed for the existing roadway configuration and the three- lane roadway configuration on Monterey Drive between Beltline Boulevard and Excelsior Boulevard. The capacity analysis was completed for the a.m. and p.m. peak hours at the study intersections and was analyzed using Synchro/SimTraffic software. It should be noted that the signal timing on Excelsior Boulevard was updated in the Fall of 2017 and was included in this capacity analysis. Capacity analysis results identify a Level of Service (LOS) which indicates how well an intersection is operating. Intersections are ranked from LOS A through LOS F. The LOS results are based on average delay per vehicle, which correspond to the delay threshold values shown in Table 1. LOS A indicates the best traffic operation, while LOS F indicates an intersection where demand exceeds capacity. Overall intersection LOS A though LOS D is generally considered acceptable in the Twin Cities area. Table 1. Level of Service Criteria for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections LOS Designation Signalized Intersection Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) Unsignalized Intersection Average Delay/Vehicle (seconds) A ≤ 10 ≤ 10 B > 10 - 20 > 10 - 15 C > 20 - 35 > 15 - 25 D > 35 - 55 > 25 - 35 E > 55 - 80 > 35 - 50 F > 80 > 50 For side-street stop controlled intersections, special emphasis is given to providing an estimate for the level of service of the side-street approach. Traffic operations at an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control can be described in two ways. First, consideration is given to the overall intersection level of service. This takes into account the total number of vehicles entering the intersection and the capability of the intersection to support these volumes. Second, it is important to consider the delay on the minor approach. Since the mainline does not have to stop, the majority of delay is attributed to the side-street approaches. It is typical of intersections with higher mainline traffic volumes to experience high levels of delay (i.e. poor levels of service) on the side-street approaches, but an acceptable overall intersection level of service during peak hour conditions. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 60 Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study March 13, 2018 Page 5 Results of the intersection capacity analysis shown in Table 2 indicate that all study intersections operate at an acceptable overall LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours under both the existing and three-lane roadway configurations. However, access from Park Commons Drive to Monterey Drive is challenging under both the existing and three-lane configurations during the p.m. peak period (generally between 4:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m.). This results in average delays of approximately one-minute for all Park Commons Drive motorists to access Monterey Drive, with some maneuvers (e.g. the eastbound left-turn) taking longer. Table 2. Intersection Capacity Analysis (Existing 4-Lane versus 3-Lane Configuration Comparison) Monterey Drive Intersections Existing (4-Lane) Proposed (3-Lane) LOS Delay LOS Delay A.M. Peak Hour Beltline Boulevard A 9 sec. B (2) 10 sec. (2) 36th-1/2 Street (1) A/A 8 sec. A/A 9 sec. Park Commons Drive (1) A/A 8 sec. A/B 10 sec. Excelsior Boulevard C 20 sec. C 20 sec. P.M. Peak Hour Beltline Boulevard B 16 sec. B (2) 19 sec. (2) 36th-1/2 Street (1) A/C 23 sec. A/C 20 sec. Park Commons Drive (1) B/F 70 to 75 sec. B/F 70 to 75 sec. Excelsior Boulevard C 25 sec. C 24 sec. (1)Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control, where the overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay. (2)Includes revised intersection geometry to facilitate the three-lane transition, which is identified later in this document. Comparing the intersection capacity analysis for the existing four-lane and three-lane roadway configurations indicates that both are expected to operate acceptably. Similar southbound queues on Monterey Drive at the Excelsior Boulevard intersection are expected for the existing four- and three- lane roadway configurations during the p.m. peak hour. This is primarily a result of minor changes to the current Excelsior Boulevard/Monterey Drive intersection lane configurations (i.e. the 3-lane configuration has more influence north of Park Commons Drive). The southbound queues north of Park Commons Drive increase by three to four vehicles as a result of the three-lane modification. Therefore, the three-lane roadway configuration on Monterey Drive is reasonable and will function well from a traffic capacity perspective. Additional review of the access, traffic control, and turn lane needs at the key intersections are summarized in the following sections to better understand the most appropriate roadway, access, and traffic control configurations along the Monterey Drive corridor. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 61 Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study March 13, 2018 Page 6 Rec Center Access City staff has indicated a desire to provide improved access to the Rec Center. Therefore, a new Rec Center access, located opposite of Beltline Boulevard was reviewed as part of this corridor study. This access, which is currently enter only, would be modified to allow traffic to exit the Rec Center via the Beltline Boulevard intersection. The following Beltline Boulevard section incorporates this access. Beltline Boulevard Intersection Two traffic control options were considered at the Monterey Drive/Beltline Boulevard intersection; a traffic signal and a hybrid roundabout, in addition to the existing configuration. Both traffic control options facilitate the transition between the four-lane 36th Street and potential 3-lane Monterey Drive, albeit in different configurations. The two traffic control options (and following analysis) include the modified Rec Center access previously noted. The existing 4-lane signal is provided for reference. An intersection capacity analysis was conducted for both traffic control options using Synchro/ SimTraffic to illustrate the operational differences between the two options. Results of the intersection capacity analysis shown in Table 3 indicate that both traffic control options are expected to operate at an acceptable LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. The hybrid roundabout is expected to have lower average vehicle delay during the both peak and non-peak periods. However, further discussion with project staff should occur to evaluate other factors related to the hybrid roundabout option, such as pedestrian access, off-peak operations, right-of-way impacts, and costs, amongst others. Table 3. Intersection Capacity Analysis at Beltline Boulevard Monterey Drive Intersection 4-Lane Signal (Existing) 3-Lane Signal 3-Lane Hybrid Roundabout LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay A.M. Peak Hour Beltline Boulevard A 9 sec. B 12 sec. A 7 sec. P.M. Peak Hour Beltline Boulevard B 16 sec. C 26 sec. B 12 sec. Under the three-lane signal traffic control option during the p.m. peak hour, eastbound left-turn queues are expected to extend approximately 300 feet, and westbound left- and right-turn queues are expected to extend approximately 50 feet and 185 feet, respectively. The turn lanes for the traffic signal alternative should be designed to accommodate these queues. No queuing issues are expected with the roundabout traffic control option. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 62 Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study March 13, 2018 Page 7 36-1/2 Street Intersection Two traffic control options were considered at the Monterey Drive/36-1/2 Street intersection: an unsignalized side-street stop control and a single-lane roundabout. A cursory intersection capacity analysis was conducted for both traffic control options. The results indicate that with the side-street stop control option, the side-street approaches (i.e. 36-1/2 Street) are expected to operate at an acceptable LOS C or better during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. With the single-lane roundabout option, the southbound approach is expected to be near capacity during the existing p.m. peak hour, which facilitates a need to continue two southbound lanes into the 36th-1/2 Street roundabout. This creates an additional complex conflict location with the desired on- street bike lanes. Therefore, since the side-street stop control intersection is expected to provide better traffic operations, the Monterey Drive/36-1/2 Street intersection is recommended to remain as an unsignalized side-street stop intersection. Park Commons Drive Intersection As noted within the observations section, there are existing safety and operational issues for eastbound left-turning motorists at the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection. The average eastbound delay at Park Commons Drive for both the existing and three-lane roadway configurations is expected to be approximately one-minute. Therefore, to address the safety/operational issues, as well as to create a safer/more cohesive pedestrian/bicyclist network, a three-quarter access at the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection was evaluated, which restricts the eastbound left- turn movement but allows all other movements. Existing traffic volumes were modified to restrict eastbound left-turn movements at the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection. Motorists were rerouted to either make a southbound left- turn at the Excelsior Boulevard/Grand Way intersection to an eastbound left-turn at the Monterey Drive/Excelsior Boulevard intersection or to make a southbound U-turn at the Monterey Drive/ Excelsior Boulevard intersection. To accommodate the southbound U-turn at the Monterey Drive/ Excelsior Boulevard intersection modifications will be needed to the intersection. For purposes of this analysis, 50 percent of the eastbound left-turning vehicles from Park Commons Drive were rerouted as southbound U-turns along Monterey Drive at Excelsior Boulevard. An intersection capacity analysis was conducted to compare a full- and three-quarter access at the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection. Results of this analysis shown in Table 4 indicate that the average eastbound delay at Park Commons is expected to improve with the three-quarter access. A comparison of the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection under the full- and three-quarter access conditions indicates that the 95th percentile eastbound approach queues are expected to extend approximately 235 feet and 180 feet, respectively. Average queues are expected to extend approximately 115 feet and 80 feet, respectively. The Trader Joe’s access to Park Commons Drive is approximately 100 west of Monterey Drive. Therefore, the three-quarter access is not expected to impact operations at the Monterey Drive/Excelsior Boulevard intersection. Therefore, to address both the safety and operational issues, the three-quarter access is recommended. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 63 Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study March 13, 2018 Page 8 Table 4. Intersection Capacity Analysis (Full-Access versus 3/4-Access) Monterey Drive Intersections 3-Lane (Full Access) 3-Lane (3/4 Access) LOS Delay LOS Delay A.M. Peak Hour Park Commons Drive (1) A/B 10 sec. A/A 4 sec. Excelsior Boulevard C 20 sec. C 20 sec. P.M. Peak Hour Park Commons Drive (1) B/F 70 to 75 sec. B/D 34 sec. Excelsior Boulevard C 24 sec. C 25 sec. (1)Indicates an unsignalized intersection with side-street stop control, where the overall LOS is shown followed by the worst approach LOS. The delay shown represents the worst side-street approach delay. Southbound Monterey Drive U-Turns at Excelsior Boulevard To further understand impacts of potential U-turns resulting from the Park Commons Drive three- quarter access modification, sensitivity tests were conducted that assumed zero (0) percent, 50 percent, and 100 percent of existing eastbound left-turn motorists at the Monterey Drive/Park Commons Drive intersection would reroute to make a southbound U-turn at the Monterey Drive/Excelsior Boulevard intersection. As mentioned earlier, the previous analysis results shown in Table 4 assumed 50 percent would make a U-turn. Results of the sensitivity tests indicate that the Monetary Drive/ Excelsior Boulevard intersection will operate similarly (i.e. within one overall second of each other) under each of the U-Turn sensitivity tests. Southbound queues lengths will vary by approximately one to two vehicles under each of these sensitivity tests. Therefore, allowing the southbound U-Turns does not have a significant impact from a capacity perspective. Preliminary Multimodal Corridor Layout Based on the capacity analysis results, a three-lane roadway configuration along Monterey Drive is reasonable and not expected to significantly change overall corridor or intersection operations from a vehicular capacity perspective. Therefore, a preliminary layout was developed to illustrate the corridor vision incorporating the various multimodal, traffic control, and access improvements. The preliminary corridor layout is shown in Figure 3. Year 2040 Conditions Historical traffic volume trends were reviewed to develop year 2040 traffic volumes at the key intersections along the corridor to understand how the proposed three-lane roadway configuration will operate in the future. A review of the historical trends indicates that traffic volumes along Monterey Drive have not significantly changed since 2000. It should be noted that there were years when the traffic volumes were higher than year 2017 conditions, as well years when traffic volumes were lower. In general, traffic volumes have remained relatively steady for the last decade or more and are expected to remain relatively steady into the future. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 64 Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study March 13, 2018 Page 9 Therefore to provide a conservative review, a one-half percent per year growth rate was applied to the existing traffic volumes to develop year 2040 traffic volumes. Based on these volumes, an additional capacity analysis was completed. Results of the analysis indicate that all key intersections will continue to operate at acceptable overall LOS C or better under year 2040 conditions with the proposed layout. Queues and approach delays are expected to be relatively similar to existing conditions, with minor increases as a result of the assumed growth. H:\Projects\10000\10962\TS\Documents\10962_Final_MontereyDrive_MultimodalCorridorStudy_180313.docx City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 65 Jack Sullivan, City of St. Louis Park Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study March 13, 2018 Page 10 PRELIMINARY CONCEPT 10962.00 March 2018 Monterey Drive Layout Monterey Drive Multimodal Corridor Study City of St. Louis Park Figure 3H:\Projects\10000\10962\TS\Three-Lane Monterey Memo\FiguresCity Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Title: Bridgewater Bank Corporate Center Preliminary & Final Plat and Preliminary & Final PUD Page 66 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Action Agenda Item: 8c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: Westwood Hills Nature Center Project RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the results of the Design Development Phase and authorize staff and consultants to move to the next phase of preparing Construction Documents for the Westwood Hills Nature Center project. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does Council wish to move to the Construction Document Phase and direct staff and consultants to prepare Plans and Specifications? SUMMARY: On December 18, 2017, the city council approved the schematic design and authorized staff to begin the design development phase. Staff has worked with HGA architecture and RJM Construction to further the design of the WHNC and refine cost estimates. During the design development phase, soil testing was done to determine the quality of soils and appropriate foundation design. American Engineering Testing (AET) performed 13 soil borings which were drilled to 35 feet and tested for building footing suitability. The findings from these borings determined the soils were much more mucky and unsuitable than originally anticipated (NOTE – the soil issues are not related to contamination). While the estimated project budget did anticipate the need for soil correction, the condition of the soils will require a foundation system more expensive than currently included in the budget by approximately $500,000. Based on Council direction, the design team is continuing to develop a “Zero Energy” certified building. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: The Westwood Hills Nature Center (WHNC) project has been included in the City’s CIP and long range financial plan since 2015. In December the estimated total project budget was $12 million, assuming inflationary costs for a 2019 start. A design contingency of $400,000 and construction contingency of $600,000 are currently included in the project budget. There is the possibility that the full amount of the contingency funds will not be needed and thereby offset all or part of the additional soils correction expense. Actual bids for the project may come in lower than anticipated and help offset the extra soils expense. However, as the Council considers moving into the next phase of project development, including preparation of construction plans and specs, staff would advise that at this time the project budget be assumed to be $12.5 million. 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 Life Cycle and Energy Cost Analysis Building Carbon Emissions Comparison Westwood Hills Nature Center Building Floor Plan Prepared by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Operations and Recreation Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8c) Page 2 Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Project DISCUSSION DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PHASE: On December 18, 2017 the city council authorized staff to move into the design development phase of the project. Through the design development phase the building footprint was decreased by approximately 2,000 square feet to contain the project cost to the established budget of $12 million. To reduce costs, the roof has been lowered over the mechanical rooms and raptor mews. The interior roof structure of the mechanical rooms and mew area are not typically visible for the public. The design development includes spaces to divide the area into four mews for raptors, three multi-purpose rooms that will accommodate 25 people in room A and 50 people each in room B and C, all which open into one larger space that can be used for programs or rentals with room for 125. In addition, the building design includes a catering kitchen for use by people renting the classrooms, separate exhibit and gathering space, a small lounge area for people to sit and observe nature, a conference room for use by staff or small neighborhood/resident gatherings, staff offices and all the back of house space for storage, mechanical, raptor and animal care etc. Through the design development phase color pallets, flooring, walls, textures, finishes, furniture, etc. were chosen, as well as, soil boring, bird glass, mechanical refinement, audio/visual details, life cycle cost analysis, and making sure the construction and building meets all state and city codes. Split Rock Studios is designing the exhibits with the intent to integrate the building into the exhibit design to support the nature center’s educational programming. Designing the exhibits appropriately is important as we consider working towards zero energy since they can be one of the largest energy users. Split Rock Studios has completed their Schematic Design Phase II where there are four separate exhibit zones: pollinators, wetland, woodland snag, and prairie mound. The following steps were completed during the Design Development Phase: • Wetland delineation • Site survey • Trees located within survey area • All utilities • The proposed new building site has been staked • Soil borings and geotechnical soil testing to determine that geo piers are necessary • Acoustic analysis • Exhibit lighting analysis • Audio/Visual analysis • Energy analysis • Exhibit coordination with Split Rock Studios • Exterior/Interior material concept design • Bird glass and window system research • Storm water management design • Reduced building footprint and lowered the ceiling in the mechanical area and mews • Geothermal test wells drilled and conductivity tests conducted SOIL CONDITIONS: Staff has worked with HGA architecture and RJM Construction to further the design of the WHNC and refine cost estimates. During the current design development phase, soil testing was done to determine the quality of soils and appropriate foundation design. American Engineering Testing (AET) performed 13 soil borings which were drilled to 35 feet and tested for building footing suitability. The findings from these borings determined the soils were much more mucky and unsuitable than originally anticipated (NOTE – the soil issues are not related to City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8c) Page 3 Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Project contamination). While the estimated project budget did anticipate the need for soil correction, the condition of the soils will require a foundation system more expensive than currently included in the budget by approximately $500,000. Staff and consultants studied four possible foundation solutions for this site: 1. Relocating the building: This option was closely studied and additional borings revealed soil conditions worsened in other parts of the site. As a result, this option was eliminated. 2. Soil corrections: Excavating all fill material and replacing with new suitable soils. Due to the significant depths of poor soils and high water table, this option is not recommended. 3. Pilings: Multiple deep piles around the perimeter and through the interior would support concrete grade beams and a structural concrete slab between 8” to 10” thick. This option is not recommended because it is the most expensive. 4. Geopier system: Aggregate piers are driven in a tight grid pattern to support the foundation and floor slabs. This system is recommended as the most cost effective solution and has been successfully utilized on a recently constructed apartment complex in the city. 2018 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC PROCESS PRESENTATIONS: Feb. 8: Present to Discover St. Louis Park Staff Feb. 12: Present to Health in the Park – City Hall Feb. 13: Present to Dept. Head Team Feb. 13: Present to CEAC – Lenox Community Center Feb. 22: Present at a WHNC Public Meeting Feb. 26: Present at DRC Feb. 27: Present at Root and Shoots – High School Feb. 27: Present at Senior Men’s Group – Lenox Community Center Feb. 28: Present at a WHNC Public Meeting (HGA presents) March 2: Present at Sunrise Rotary March 12: Present at School Board Meeting – High School March 15: Present at DSLP – Marriott March 28: Present at Multicultural Advisory Committee April 3: Present at WHNC Volunteer Breakfast April 4: Present at Joint Commission Meeting (PRAC, Planning Com., Sustainability Commission) April 11: Present at Realtor Forum – City Hall April 16: Present to Noontime Rotary – Double Tree West End May 15: Present at DPAC – District Office One of the suggestions that came out of the public process was the possibility of providing a means by which people could donate to the project. Staff will be exploring ideas of how we may incorporate donation opportunities into the project. SUSTAINABILITY GOAL: Sustainability strategies and energy analysis have been developed and sustainability rating systems have been reviewed. Based on Council direction, the design team is working towards a “Zero Energy” certified building, which means one hundred percent of the building’s energy needs on a net annual basis are supplied by on-site renewable energy https://www.living-future.org/net-zero/certification/. Generally, zero energy is accomplished through maximizing passive climatic opportunities, choosing efficient mechanical systems, and continuing to fine tune the building’s operation to reduce energy loads dramatically. Offsite energy may need to be used during some years as elements that are beyond our control (weather) play a huge role in meeting our sustainability goals. If Council continues to direct staff towards a certified City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8c) Page 4 Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Project Zero Energy building, all components in the Life Cycle Analysis need to be integrated (please see attached “Life Cycle and Energy Cost Analysis” for this data) Zero energy buildings are among the most progressive sustainable design projects in the world today. Due to the new and innovative nature of this goal, St. Louis Park has the opportunity to create a project which is among the first (or perhaps be the first) non-residential Zero Energy Project in Minnesota--leading the way for future sustainable design work in our cold-climate region. CARBON EMISSIONS: The attachment provided with this report shows that the current design for the Westwood Hills Nature Center will result in a reduction of 98,000 pounds per year of carbon emissions due to the energy efficiency strategies. LIFE CYCLE AND ENERGY COST ANALYSIS: The attached analysis was developed in response to council’s question of how the energy saving strategies proposed compare to the cost to implement the energy saving strategies. This first required HGA to develop building and mechanical plans to sufficient detail to perform energy modeling and a cost analysis. There are four major components providing most of the reduced energy consumption and production for the proposed building. While the design incorporates other strategies like building orientation for ventilation and passive solar, the analysis was only for items which could be individually evaluated. Pursuing a Zero Energy goal requires all the components work collectively. For example, without an enhanced thermal envelope, the mechanical systems would need to be increased in capacity. Lifetime operation savings was chosen rather than simple energy cost savings to reflect the total cost of equipment, maintenance, and replacement costs, in addition to energy costs over the lifetime of the building. OPERATING COSTS ANALYSIS: Staff has looked at how this building will impact future staffing and other operational needs. At this time, we would look at restructuring the staff who work at the nature center which would result in an increase of one fulltime naturalist and a decrease in a non-benefited year-round seasonal staff person. There is also an additional Public Service Worker to assist the Facilities Maintenance group with maintenance of this building and support weekend operating hours of the facility. This position would also provide services to other city buildings outside normal business hours. The estimated increase in staffing costs is approximately $140,000. There would also be additional revenue of approximately $50,000 - $60,000 for rentals of the facility and programming that would offset this cost. We have not included estimates in staffing needs or revenue if the school district expands their programming. These figures also do not account for the energy savings from a zero energy facility. NEXT STEPS: Assuming the City Council approves moving to the next phase of project development, outlined below is the anticipated schedule: • September or October 2018: Request Council to approve construction documents including plans and specs and authorize bids. • Late November or December 2018: Approve bids and authorize the project. • Spring 2019: Construction begins as soon as weather permits. • Fall 2020: Construction is complete including deconstruction of current building Page 1 of 3 Life Cycle and Energy Cost Analysis Summary Tables and Notes– DRAFT 4/02/2018 Whole Building Comparison1 Baseline WHNC Building Zero Energy WHNC Building Construction Cost difference -- +$1.36M Annual Energy Savings -- $12,000 Lifetime Operational Savings (maintenance/operations, replacement, and energy costs) -- $808,000 Lifetime Cost (NPV) Savings -- $32,000 Zero Energy Component Comparison Cost impacts for individual components of zero energy building design Building Envelope Comparison2 (walls, roof, floor, and glazing) Baseline Envelope High Performance Envelope Construction Cost difference -- +$524,000 Annual Energy Savings -- $1,800 Lifetime Operational Savings -- $190,000 Mechanical Systems Comparison3 Air Cooled Chiller, Boilers, Fan Coil System Geothermal Heat Pump System Construction Cost difference -- +$405,000 Annual Energy Savings -- $3,700 Lifetime Operational Savings -- $310,000 Lighting Systems Comparison4 Conventional System High Performance System Construction Cost difference -- +$85,000 Annual Energy Savings -- $500 Lifetime Operational Savings -- $45,000 Photovoltaic Comparison5 No PV 40 EUI Energy Offset PV System Construction Cost difference -- +$350,000 Annual Energy Savings -- $6,000 Lifetime Operational Savings (includes 25-yr PV replacement) -- $262,500 City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8c) Title: Westwood Westwood Hills Nature Center Hills Nature Center Project Page 5 Page 2 of 3 1Whole Building Comparison Baseline WHNC Building ·Meets the current program. ·Has conventional envelope and mechanical systems. ·50 year life span quality level. ·Meets the WHNC site conditions. ·Meets SLP generator requirements. ·Meets minimum SLP green rating system requirements. ·No on-site energy generation. ·Estimated building and site cost of approximately $8.1M. ·Net Present Value (cost of the building over its life span, in today’s dollars) is approximately $10.91M. Zero Energy WHNC Building ·Meets the current program ·Has high performance envelope and ground source heat pump with radiant floor systems ·50 year life span quality level ·Meets the WHNC site conditions ·Meets SLP generator requirements ·Meets Zero Energy Certification Requirements ·On-site energy generation with photovoltaic arrays ·Estimated Building and Site Cost of approximately $9.5M ·The Discounted payback for the proposed building is approximately 50 years. ·Net Present Value (cost of the building over its life span, in today’s dollars) is approximately $10.88M, a savings of $32,000 over the baseline building. 2Building Envelope Comparison Baseline Building Envelope built for 50 year life span ·R-15 wall, 2” of continuous insulation ·R-25 roof, 4” of continuous insulation ·Doubled-paned, glazing system with standard window assembly (support and framing system) High Performance Building Envelope built for 50 year life span ·R-30 wall, 3” of continuous insulation, with cavity insulation ·R-60 roof, 10” average of continuous insulation ·Doubled-paned, high-performance, low-leakage, improved thermal break window system with operable windows. ·Enhanced, below-slab insulation system of R-10 (2” of continuous insulation) Detailed Impacts ·First Cost Difference of $524,000 ·The high performance envelope provides a 15% energy savings (reduction in Energy Use Intensity – EUI) when compared to the baseline building. ·If the high performance envelope is removed from the project, there would be $1,800 per year added energy cost when compared to the “Basic” chiller and boiler system that meets project requirements. ·The high performance envelope allows for mechanical systems to be reduced – in terms of both peak capacity of heating and cooling systems as well as some local terminal equipment. If the high performance envelope were to be reduced, there would be a cost increase to mechanical systems of approximately 5% or roughly $40k to $50k. ·The high performance envelope allows for an improved user comfort. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8c) Title: Westwood Westwood Hills Nature Center Hills Nature Center Project Page 6 Page 3 of 3 3Mechanical System Comparison Conventional System ·To meet the basic needs of a new Westwood Hills Nature Center for the City of St Louis Park, the mechanical system could be a more conventional air cooled chiller system with gas fired boilers serving distributed fan coil units. High Performance System ·The proposed high performance mechanical systems for the new Westwood Hills Nature Center are distributed geothermal heat pump units, with radiant heating systems, and connected to a geothermal well field. Detailed Impacts ·The geothermal heat pump system adds approximately $405,000 in mechanical system first costs when compared to the “Basic” chiller and boiler system. ·The geothermal heat pump system reduces energy consumption (Energy Use Intensity – EUI) by approximately 50%. Due to energy rate structures, the energy cost savings for the geothermal heat pumps is approximately $3,700 per year in energy cost savings or approximately a 22% energy cost savings. ·When using life-cycle analysis, the “Basic” WHNC chiller and boiler system has a Net Present Value (NPV) of $2,380,000 while the geothermal heat pump system has a NPV of $2,430,000. The resultant Discounted Payback for the geothermal heat pump systems is approximately 50 years. ·Utility rebates are anticipated to be nominal and would improve the results slightly. ·For the “Basic” chiller and boiler system, additional project costs including screenwalls for the chiller and additional mechanical room space are not included in the first cost impact but should be considered. 4Lighting Systems Comparison Conventional Lighting System ·Base energy code compliant lighting system to include LED lighting, dimming, daylight harvesting control, vacancy sensor control. High Performance Lighting System ·The proposed high performance lighting system to include the base energy code compliant features listed above plus an advanced lighting and control system, daylight balancing/automatic dimming, 10% lower lighting power density (LPD) than code, and shade control. 5Photovoltaic Comparison Baseline – No Photovoltaic System Impacts: ·Annual Energy Cost Increase of approx. $6,000 (consumption kWh). PV Option – Photovoltaic System to meet 40 EUI Building Energy Offset, with 25 year replacement Impacts: ·First Cost Difference of $350,000. ·Since PV is being used as part of a zero-energy building certification, and not just to generate renewable power or save money from purchasing electricity, then panel replacement must occur at about 25 years to maintain full energy production, as panel production currently decreases at about ½ % per year. ·At 25 year replacement, it is anticipated that cost will be reduced due to PV infrastructure already in place being reused, and the efficiency output of PV will be higher due to presumed technology developments. ·Energy Cost difference of ~$6,000 per year savings for complete 50 year life cycle. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8c) Title: Westwood Westwood Hills Nature Center Hills Nature Center Project Page 7 Building Carbon Emissions -Comparison 264,000 179,000 81,000 0 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 Baseline Building (Code Envelope and Four-Pipe Fan-Coil w/ electric boiler) Baseline Building (Code Envelope and Four-Pipe Fan-Coil w/ Gas Boiler) Current Design (High performance envelope with GSHP system) - HP DHWAnnual Carbon Emissions (lbs/yr)Westwood Hills Carbon Emissions Electric Emissions Gas Emissions Assumptions •Electricity: 805 lbs/MWh •Natural Gas:11.7 lbs/Therm Calculation assumes 100%of energy is sourced from Xcel Energy Analysis does not include energy from Photovoltaic generation Natural Gas emissions factor is not estimated to change in future Xcel has reduced electricity emissions 34% since 2005 and forecasts a 45% reduction from 2005 in 2021 Source: https://www.xcelenergy.com/staticfiles/xe-responsive/Environment/Carbon/Carbon-Reduction-2016-Energy-and-Carbon-Summary.pdf 98,000 lbs/yr carbon emissions reduction from energy efficiency strategies City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8c) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Project Page 8 LEGENDADMINBUILDINGSUPPORTCIRCULATIONEDUCATIONEXTERIORPROGRAMSUPPORTPUBLICGATHERINGSUPPORTCLASSROOM ENTRY0 102030 505CAGE CAGERAPTORCAREWARMMEWMEWGATHERING/EXHIBITLOUNGERENTALSSTAFFOFFICEENTRANCEUTILITY/RECEIVINGWORKROOMDISPLAYWORK RMCAGEWARMMEWCATERINGSTAGINGGROUPENTRYPROGRAMSTORAGEMECHCONF /READINGMECHMGROFFICETELECOMVESTIBULEQUIETFAMILYPUPPET STAGECLASSROOMDECKEXHIBITTERRACEENTRYTERRACEMAIN PUBLIC ENTRYMENWOMENSTOR CSTOR BWELCOMESTOR ACOATSTRASH/RECYCLEUTILITYELECCity Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8c) Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center ProjectPage 9 Meeting: City Council Meeting Date: May 21, 2018 Action Agenda Item: 8d EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TITLE: First Reading of Ordinance Related to Membership Terms of Environment & Sustainability Commission RECOMMENDED ACTION: Motion to approve the first reading of an ordinance amending Sec. 2-332 of the St. Louis Park City Code related to the membership terms of the Environment and Sustainability Commission and to schedule the second reading of the ordinance for June 4, 2018. POLICY CONSIDERATION: Does the City Council support the proposed changes to the membership terms for the Environment & Sustainability Commission? SUMMARY: Over the past several years the city has had difficulty recruiting and filling the business and residential tenant member positions on the Environment & Sustainability Commission. During the most recent annual appointment process, the city received no applications for either the business or residential tenant member positions on the Environment & Sustainability Commission. On April 30, 2018 the council discussed possible changes to the membership terms that would allow for the currently vacant positions to be filled and for the commission to have a full membership. A 13-member Environment & Sustainability Commission was created in 2013 via Ordinance No. 2438-13. The membership terms for each of the positions are set forth in City Code Sec. 2-332. The bylaws of the Environment & Sustainability Commission do not address membership requirements. The Rules & Procedures for Boards and Commissions also contain general membership requirements for all boards and commissions, including the Environment & Sustainability Commission. Following their discussion, council directed staff to move forward with an ordinance amendment that would achieve the following: •Remove the definitions for business and residential tenant members •Change the business and residential tenant member positions to “regular members” •Add language that communicates the council’s continued desire to have representation on the commission from both the business and rental communities, noting that preference will be given to such applicants. •Make it clear that owners or representatives from businesses in St. Louis Park need not be residents of the city to serve on the commission. FINANCIAL OR BUDGET CONSIDERATION: Not applicable. VISION CONSIDERATION: St. Louis Park is committed to being a connected and engaged community. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: Discussion Draft Ordinance Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8d) Page 2 Title: First Reading of Ordinance Related to Membership Terms of Environment & Sustainability Commission DISCUSSION What are the current membership requirements for the Environment & Sustainability Commission? Membership Type Number of Positions Qualifications Regular Members 8 -Qualified voters and residents of the city. -Council should ensure representation from each ward. Business Members 2 -Must reside in the city. -Must own or operate a business in the city. Residential Tenant 1 -Must reside in the city. -Must have been a resident of the city for at least 365 calendar days prior to appointment. -Must meet the definition of a tenant as contained in Chapter 1 of the St. Louis Park City Code. Youth Members 2 -Must reside in the city. -Must be a high school student. What is the current definition of a tenant? •The definition of a tenant is contained in Sec. 1-2 of the City Code. •The term tenant, when applied to a building or land, shall include any person holding a written or oral lease of or who occupies the whole or part of such building or land, either alone or with others. •Additionally, Sec. 2-332 of the City Code requires that the residential tenant member must have been a resident of the city for at least 365 calendar days prior to appointment. If changes are made to the membership terms, how would vacant positions be filled? •The process by which vacancies are filled is at the sole discretion of the council. When will these terms expire? •Term will expire on May 31 of each year, consistent with all board and commission membership terms (exception are terms for youth). Have the Environment and Sustainability Commission been informed? Yes, the commission was informed of the proposed changes at their meeting on May 2. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8d) Page 3 Title: First Reading of Ordinance Related to Membership Terms of Environment & Sustainability Commission ORDINANCE NO. ____- 18 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ST. LOUIS PARK CITY CODE CHAPTER 2, SEC. 2-332 RELATED TO THE MEMBERSHIP TERMS OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. That Section 2-332 of the Code of Ordinances, City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underlined language to read as follows: Sec. 2-332. Membership; terms. (a)The Environment and Sustainability Commission shall be an advisory commission to the city council. It shall consist of eight eleven regular members, two business members, one residential tenant member, and two youth members, all appointed as set forth in this section. (b)Regular members. The city council shall appoint three regular members of the commission for terms to expire on December May 31, 2013 2019, three regular members for terms to expire on December May 31, 2014 2020, and two five regular members for terms to expire on December May 31, 2015 2021. All subsequent appointments shall be for three-year terms that shall expire on December May 31 of the third year of such term and until a successor is duly appointed and qualified. The city council should ensure representation from each city ward, as outlined in Chapter 10 of this code. The city council will also give preference to applicants representing the business and rental communities in order to ensure fair representation on the commission. In the event of a vacancy, the city council shall appoint a person to complete the unexpired term. A member of the commission may be removed with or without cause by the city council. (c)Business members. Two voting business members who shall reside in the city and own or operate a business in the city may be appointed by the city council and serve a term of three years. (d)Residential tenant member. One voting residential tenant member who shall, and for at least 365 calendar days prior to appointment, reside in the city and meet the definition of a tenant as contained in Chapter 1 of this code as it applies to the member’s residence may be appointed by the city council and serve a term of three years. (e) (c) Youth members. Two voting youth members who shall reside in the city and be a high school student may be appointed by the city council and serve a term of one year. (f) (d) Qualifications. Regular, business, and residential tenant members of the Environment and Sustainability Commission shall be qualified voters and residents of the city, except in the case of a business owner or representative. A business owner or representative need not be a resident of the city. A vacancy shall deem to exist if a member ceases to meet the residency requirements. All members of the commission shall be appointed from persons who have demonstrated an interest in the commission by submission of appropriate city forms and exhibit high energy, leadership, and a commitment to the environment and sustainability. City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8d) Page 4 Title: First Reading of Ordinance Related to Membership Terms of Environment & Sustainability Commission SECTION 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. First Reading May 21, 2018 Second Reading June 4, 2018 Date of Publication June 14, 2018 Date Ordinance takes effect June 29, 2018 Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council June 4, 2018 Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney City Council Meeting of May 21, 2018 (Item No. 8d) Page 5 Title: First Reading of Ordinance Related to Membership Terms of Environment & Sustainability Commission SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION ORDINANCE NO. ____- 18 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK CODE OF ORDINANCES CHAPTER 2 ESTABLISHING THE ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION This ordinance amends the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances to change the membership terms for the Environment and Sustainability Commission. The 13-member commission will now consist of eleven (11) regular members and two (2) youth members. The council will, however, give preference to applicants representing the St. Louis Park business and rental communities to ensure fair representation on the commission. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Adopted by the City Council June 4, 2018 Jake Spano /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: June 14, 2018