HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018/08/20 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
AUGUST 20, 2018
(Council member Mavity out)
7:20 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Council chambers
1.Call to order
2.Roll call
3.Approval of minutes
3a. EDA meeting minutes July 16, 2018
4.Approval of agenda and items on EDA consent calendar
EDA consent calendar
4a. Adopt EDA Resolution approving the assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract
between Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC and Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC
relative to the Central Park West Phase II Apartment Project.
4b. Adopt EDA Resolution finding the building at 4601 Highway 7 and 3130 Monterey Avenue S.,
structurally substandard to a degree requiring removal.
5.Reports -- None
7.New business – None
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council chambers
1.Call to order
1a. Pledge of allegiance
1b. Roll call
2. Presentations
2a. Westwood Hills Nature Center Junior Naturalist Recognition
2b. Minnesota Recreation and Park Association Awards of Excellence Presentation
2c. Recognition of donations
3.Approval of minutes -- None
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.)
Meeting of August 20, 2018
City council agenda
5. Boards and commissions
5a. Appointment of youth representatives to boards and commissions
Recommended action: Motion to appoint Katherine Christiansen to the Environment and
Sustainability Commission (ESC) and Rachel Salzer to the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Commission (PRAC) as youth members for one year terms beginning August 31, 2018.
6.Public hearings
6a. Public hearing on body worn camera policy
Recommended action: The mayor is asked to open the public hearing, take testimony, and
then close the public hearing. No other action is recommended. Another discussion on the
policy and the input received will be scheduled for a future council study session.
7.Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – None
8.Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items
8a. Conditional use permit - Park Spanish Immersion School
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving a conditional use permit for an
elementary school at 9400 Cedar Lake Road with conditions recommended by staff.
8b. First reading of interim ordinance establishing moratorium on use and development of 3745
Louisiana Ave. S.
Recommended action:
•Motion to approve first reading of an interim ordinance temporarily restricting development
at 3745 Louisiana Avenue South, St. Louis Park (“Subject Property”).
•Motion to adopt Resolution directing city planning division staff to conduct a study and to
prepare amendments to official land use and zoning controls for the subject property based
upon the study for city council consideration.
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 August 20, 2018
City council agenda
Consent calendar
4a. Adopt Resolution authorizing the removal of restrictions on various street segments and
adopt Resolution authorizing the installation of traffic controls on Yosemite Avenue.
4b. Approve the amended Inclusionary Housing Policy to: increase the affordable unit
requirement for 60% AMI affordability from 18% to 20%, add an affordability category for
30% AMI, require a payment in lieu for eligible homeownership developments, and
increase the continued occupancy eligibility income for program participants to 140% of
the applicable AMI.
4c. Adopt a Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,200 donation from Carol Haff in the
amount of $2,150 and Jim Brimeyer in the amount of $50 for the purchase and
installation of a memorial bench in Aquila Park honoring Gene Gustafson.
4d. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,200 donation from Lillian Wefald for the
purchase and installation of a memorial bench in Westwood Hills Nature Center honoring
Lillian and Knut Wefald.
4e. Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,000 donation from Most Holy Trinity
School, class of 1958 for the purchase and installation of a memorial bench in Wolfe Park
honoring Most Holy Trinity School’s class of 1958.
4f. Adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final payment in the amount of
$19,041.46 for project 4017-1500 Alley Reconstruction with G.L. Contracting Inc., City
Contract No. 74-17.
4g. Adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the sewer service
line at 3858 Wooddale Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN. P.I.D. 21-117-21-21-0038.
4h. Approve, and authorize the City Manager to execute, SWLRT Subordinate Funding
Agreement Amendments to SFAs #9, #10 and #11.
4i. Approve, and authorize the mayor and city manager to execute, Subordinate Funding
Agreement 12 (SFA#12) with the Met Council regarding the SWLRT Project.
4j. Adopt Resolution approving the assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract
between Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC and Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC
relative to the Central Park West Phase II Apartment Project.
4k Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a monetary donation from the National
Association of Government Web Professionals in an amount not to exceed $2,500 for all
related expenses for Jason Huber, Information Technology Manager, to attend the 2018
National Association of Government Web Professionals National Conference in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
4l. Approve for filing planning commission meeting minutes of June 20, 2018.
4m. Approve for filing planning commission meeting minutes of July 11, 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: Economic development authority
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Minutes: 3a
Unofficial minutes
Economic development authority
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
July 16, 2018
1. Call to order
President Hallfin called the meeting to order at 7:20 p.m.
Commissioners present: President Steve Hallfin, Tim Brausen, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, and
Thom Miller.
Commissioners absent: Margaret Rog and Jake Spano
Staff present: Executive Director (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Senior Planner
(Mr. Walther), Assistant Planner (Ms. Kramer), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt),
Community Development Director (Ms. Barton), Fire Chief Koering, Communications and
Marketing Manager (Ms. Larson), CIO Information Resources (Mr. Pires), Assistant Zoning
Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Management Assistant (Ms. Carrillo Perez), and Recording
Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
2. Roll call
3. Approval of minutes
3a. Economic development authority meeting minutes of May 7, 2018
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to approve
the EDA minutes as presented.
The motion passed 5-0.
3b. Economic development authority meeting minutes June 4, 2018
It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to approve
the EDA minutes as presented.
The motion passed 5-0.
4. Approval of agenda
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Mavity, to approve
the EDA agenda as presented.
The motion passed 5-0.
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Economic development authority meeting minutes of July 16, 2018
5. Reports
5a. Approval of EDA disbursements
It was moved by Commissioner Brausen, seconded by Commissioner Miller, to approve
the EDA disbursements.
The motion passed 5-0.
6. Old business - none
7. New business
7a. Public hearing – purchase and redevelopment contract with Bridgewater Bank
President Hallfin opened the public hearing. No speakers were present.
It was moved by Commissioner Miller, seconded by Commissioner Brausen, to continue
the public hearing and table consideration of the purchase and redevelopment contract
with Bridgewater Bank to August 6, 2018.
The motion passed 4-0-1. (Councilmember Mavity abstained).
8. Communications - none
9. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, Secretary Steve Hallfin, President
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4a
Executive summary
Title: Consent to assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract – CPW Phase II
Apartments
Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution approving the assignment and
assumption of redevelopment contract between Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC and Elan
West End Apartments Owner, LLC relative to the Central Park West Phase II Apartment Project.
Policy consideration: Does the EDA find the proposed assignment and assumption of redevelopment
contract agreement between the Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC and Elan West End
Apartments Owner, LLC acceptable and is it willing to provide its consent to the agreement?
Summary: The amended and restated contract for private redevelopment of May 17, 2010
between the EDA, the city, and Duke Realty LP, a portion of which was subsequently assigned
to Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC (“Redeveloper”), provides that whenever the
Redeveloper wishes to convey any portion of its property and assign its obligations under the
Contract to a third party, the EDA and city must review and formally approve the proposed
assignment. Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC is selling its property located 1325 Utica
Avenue South to Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC (an affiliate of Greystar; a national
multifamily housing development company) who desires to assume the Redeveloper’s
obligations to construct and manage the 164-unit Central Park West Phase II Apartment Project
per the Central Park West PUD and redevelopment contract.
As required under the Contract, the Redeveloper has provided the necessary information and
proposed assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract and has requested that the
EDA and city provide written approval of the assignment by executing the consent, estoppel
and agreement attached to the assignment. The EDA’s legal counsel has reviewed the proposed
assignment and the attached consent, and recommends the EDA and city approve and consent
to this document, which is substantially similar to previous assignment documents approved by
the EDA and city in the past.
Financial or budget considerations: Under the proposed assignment and assumption
agreement, Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC assumes the financial obligations to be
incurred by Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC under the redevelopment contract as it
pertains to the CPW Phase II property. All administrative costs associated with the agreement
are to be paid by Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: - EDA Resolution
-Letter from Faegre Baker Daniels
- Assignment and subordination of redevelopment contract (Available
from the community development department.)
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Consent to assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract – CPW Phase II Apartments
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
EDA Resolution No. 18-____
Resolution approving an assignment and assumption of
redevelopment contract between Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC
and Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC
Be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority ("Authority") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The Authority is currently administering its Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Project")
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 ("HRA Act"), and within the Project
has established The West End Tax Increment Financing District (“TIF District”).
1.02. The Authority, the City of St. Louis Park (“City”) and Duke Realty Limited
Partnership (the “Redeveloper”) entered into an Amended and Restated Contract for Private
Redevelopment Dated as of May 17, 2010, as amended (the “Contract”), regarding redevelopment
of a portion of the property within the TIF District, which Contract has been assigned in part to
Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC (“CPW”) as to the Redeveloper’s obligation to construct a
164-unit multifamily housing facility (“Central Park West Phase II”) on a portion of the property
(the “Subject Property”).
1.03. CPW has now determined that it is in the best interest of the Project and TIF District
to convey the Subject Property to Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC (the “Assignee”). The
Assignee intends to construct Central Park West Phase II on the Subject Property. In connection with
such conveyance, CPW seeks to assign certain of its obligations related to the Subject Property to
the Assignee, and the Assignee agrees to accept such obligations, all pursuant to an Assignment and
Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between CPW and Assignee (the “Assignment”).
1.04. The Board has reviewed the Assignment and finds that the approval and execution of
the Authority’s consent thereto are in the best interest of the Authority, the City, and its residents.
Section 2. Authority approval; other proceedings.
2.01. The Assignment, including the attached Consent of the Authority related thereto,
as presented to the Board is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not
alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by the President and Executive
Director, provided that execution of the consent to the Assignment by such officials shall be
conclusive evidence of approval.
2.02. The President and Executive Director are hereby authorized to execute on behalf of
the Authority the Consent attached to the Assignment and any other documents requiring execution
by the Authority in order to carry out the transaction described in the Assignment.
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Consent to assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract – CPW Phase II Apartments
2.03. Authority staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to carry
out the intent of this resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority
August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Steve Hallfin, President
Attest
Secretary
533947v1 MNI SA285-84
FaegreBD .com
Carol Lansing
Counsel
carol.lansing@FaegreBO.com
Direct +1 612 766 7005
August l 0, 2018
Greg Hunt
Economic Development Director
City of St. I ,ouis Park
5005 Minnetonka Blvd.
St. Louis Park, MN 554 I 6
FAEGRE�R D'lNIELS USA • UK • CHINA
Faegre Baker Daniels LLP
2200 Wells Fargo Center • 90 South Seventh Street
Minneapolis • Minnesota 55402-3901
Main +l 612 766 7000
Fax +l 612 766 1600
Re: Request for Consent to Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
Central Park West Phase II
Dear Mr. Hunt:
On behalf of Greystar, I am submitting this request to the Economic Development Authority of the City
of St. Louis Park (the "EDA") for its consent to the attached Assigru11ent and Assumption of
Redevelopment Contract (the "Assignment") between Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC, as
Assignor, and Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC, as Assignee. The Assignee will be a newly
formed entity which will be comprised of Greystar and an as-yet unidentified equity partner.
It is Greystar's intent to construct Phase II of the Central Park West Planned Unit Development as it has
been previously approved by the City as a multifamily housing project (the "Project"). Greystar is
exceptionally well-qualified to assume, complete and manage Project. Greystar is a global real estate
development, investment and property management firm with 50 offices in the United States. Europe.
Mexico. China and Australia. Greystar has sponsored nearly 130 multifamily projects comprising over
35,000 units, with a market capitalization of more than$ I 0.8 billion in the United States. Greystar has
extraordinary financial strength and experience. Combining international oversight with local real estate
execution, Greystar oversees a $26 billion global portfolio and over $13.4 billion of equity on behalf of
a worldwide network of institutional investors across a variety of rental housing investment strategies.
Greystar has built a notable local presence in the Twin Cities, beginning with the 597-unit Elan Uptown
apartment complex along the Midtown Greenway in Minneapolis, which it developed and manages.
Greystar also developed and manages The Lakes Residences, a signature, 90-unit luxury apartment
building on the shores of Lake Bde Maka Ska (formerly Lake Calhoun). Greystar owns and manages
Junction Flats, a 182-unit building in the North Loop of Minneapolis. Links to websites for these
properties are below.
US.119284942.0 I
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Consent to assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract – CPW Phase II Apartments Page 4
Greg Hunt -2-
The Lakes: https://thelakesresidences.com/ 90 units; 2017
Elan Uptown: https://www.clanuptown.com/ 597 units; 2015
Junction Flats: https://www.junctionflats.com/; 182 units; 2016
August I 0, 2018
A brochure that more fully describes the scope of Greystar's development, property management and
investment management business is attached, including information about its regional presence and
leadership team is attached.
The proposed Assignment, along with Consent, Estoppel and Agreement (the "Consent'") to be signed
by the City and the City's EDA, are attached. These documents are substantially the same as those used
for previous assignment of the Redevelopment Contract and have been prepared in consultation with the
EDA ·s legal counsel.
Greystar's development team is very excited about this opportunity to expand their Twin Cities presence
into St. Louis Park and contribute to fulfillment of the City's vision for the West End. Please let me
know if you have any questions or if there is any additional information you would like me to provide in
support of Greystar's request that the EDA approve the Assignment and execute the Consent. Thank
you.
Very truly yours,
17�.-f ;L,�---�
Carol Lansing
Attachments:
Greystar Brochure
Form of Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract
Form of Consent, F,stoppcl and Agreement
cc: Gary Wallace, Greystar, Managing Director, Development (Midwest)
Earl Latchley, Jackson Walker LLP
Carrie Bazella, Messerli & Kramer PA
US. I 19284942.0 I
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Consent to assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract – CPW Phase II Apartments Page 5
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4b
Executive summary
Title: Structurally substandard building designation – 4601 Highway 7
Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution finding the building at 4601 Highway 7
and 3130 Monterey Avenue S., structurally substandard to a degree requiring removal.
Policy consideration: Does the EDA find that the vacant industrial building located at 4601
Highway 7 and 3130 Monterey Ave. S as structurally substandard to a degree requiring removal
and does it authorize demolition of the building to protect the public’s health and safety?
Summary: On December 20, 2013, the EDA acquired the former Professional Instruments
property located at 4601 Highway 7 and 3130 Monterey Avenue S. per EDA direction. Since that
time the industrial building on the property has fallen into disrepair due to vandalism. Recently,
staff had the building inspected by LHB who concluded in their August 10, 2018 Letter of
Finding that the building on the property “qualifies as structurally substandard”. Given this
conclusion, staff recommends the building be removed.
In order to preserve the EDA’s ability to create a future TIF district at this location to facilitate
the larger Beltline Station redevelopment, the EDA must do two things: 1) adopt a resolution
establishing that the subject property is occupied by a structurally substandard building prior to
its removal and stating that it may create a future TIF district encompassing the property; and 2)
commence the demolition work. These actions protect the EDA’s ability to create a future TIF
district on the subject property for up to three years following demolition of the building.
Upon approval of the proposed resolution, staff will arrange to have the building abated of
hazardous material, decommissioned, and demolished.
Financial or budget considerations: The city will hire a contractor to abate and demolish the
building. The cost of all such work is expected to cost less than $150,000. Payment will initially
derive from the Development Fund with the intent that all costs be reimbursed through the
future Beltline Station TIF District.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in
environmental stewardship.
Supporting documents: - EDA Resolution
- Site map
- LHB TIF Analysis Letter of Finding (Available for viewing in the
community development department.)
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director/City Manager
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Structurally substandard building designation – 4601 Highway 7
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority
EDA Resolution No. 18 - ____
Resolution designating a building within Redevelopment Project No. 1
as structurally substandard
Be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority ("Authority") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. Under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 10(d), the Authority is
authorized to deem parcels as occupied by structurally substandard buildings despite prior
demolition or removal of the buildings, subject to certain terms and conditions as described in
this resolution.
1.02. The Authority intends to cause demolition of the building located on the
property described in Exhibit A hereto (the “Designated Property”), and may in the future
include the Designated Property in a redevelopment or renewal and renovation tax increment
financing district as defined in Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174, Subd. 10.
Section 2. Building designated substandard; other proceedings.
2.01. The Authority finds that the building on the Designated Property as described in
Exhibit A is structurally substandard to a degree requiring substantial renovation or clearance,
based upon the analysis of such building by LHB summarized in the TIF ANALYSIS FINDINGS FOR
4601 HIGHWAY 7 and 3130 MONTEREY AVE>S., ST. LOUIS PARK, MN, dated August 10, 2018, on
file in City Hall.
2.02. After the date of approval of this resolution, the building on the Designated
Property may be demolished or removed by the Authority, or such demolition or removal may
be financed by the Authority, or may be undertaken by a developer under a development
agreement with the Authority.
2.03. The Authority intends to include the Designated Property in a redevelopment or
renewal and renovation tax increment financing district, and to file the request for certification
of such district with the Hennepin County auditor within three years after the date of building
demolition on the Designated Property.
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Title: Structurally substandard building designation – 4601 Highway 7
2.04. Upon filing the request for certification of the new tax increment financing
district, the Authority will notify the Hennepin County auditor that the original tax capacity of
the Designated Property must be adjusted to reflect the greater of (a) the current net tax
capacity of the parcel, or (b) the estimated market value of the parcel for the year in which the
building was demolished or removed, but applying class rates for the current year, all in
accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.174, subd. 10(d).
2.05. Authority staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to
carry out the intent of this resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development Authority
August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Steve Hallfin, President
Attest:
Secretary
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 4
Title: Structurally substandard building designation – 4601 Highway 7
Exhibit A
Description of Designated Property
Property addresses: 4601 Highway 7 and 3130 Monterey Ave. S., St. Louis Park, MN
PIDs: 06-028-24-12-0091 and 06-028-24-13-0003
Subject Site
4601 Hwy 7
31ST
HIGHWAY 7BELTLINELYNNPARK GLE
N
SERVICE
D
R
HI
G
H
W
A
Y 7OTTAWANATCHEZMONTEREYSERVICE DR
HI
G
H
W
AY 7
HIGHW
A
Y
7
HIGHWAY 7
August 2018
Ü0.05
Miles
Legend
Parcels
4601 Hwy 7
Economic development authority meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Structurally substandard building designation – 4601 Highway 7 Page 5
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Presentation: 2a
Executive summary
Title: Westwood Hills Nature Center Junior Naturalist Recognition
Recommended action: The mayor is asked to recognize and thank the junior naturalists for
their service this summer. Westwood Hills Nature Center activity specialist Will Huyck, along
with naturalist Becky McConnell, will be in attendance to assist with the presentation.
Policy consideration: Not applicable.
Summary: There are 60 youth volunteers involved in the junior naturalist program. This
summer, they have volunteered over 1,600 hours. Several of these volunteers have been
involved for seven years and the program has been part of Westwood Hills Nature Center for 27
years. Junior naturalists are students entering 7th grade through those just completing their
senior year of high school. They are interested in serving their community while gaining
knowledge and experience in the outdoors.
There are five areas that they can be involved in:
Animal Care: Junior naturalists feed, care for, handle, and educate the public about
Westwood’s display and programming animals.
Program Aide: Junior naturalists assist staff members with supervising and running
Westwood’s various summer camps and children’s programs.
Wild Hikes: Junior naturalists hike Westwood’s trails, identify various organisms and
learn alongside a staff naturalist. They then apply their knowledge to other project
areas.
Behind the Scenes: Junior naturalists maintain Westwood’s birdfeeders, participate in a
citizen science project and complete various small projects around the center.
Water Garden: Junior naturalists maintain and monitor Westwood’s water garden for
public use.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Stacy Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Becky McConnell, Westwood Hills Nature Center Naturalist
Reviewed by: Mark Oestreich, Westwood Hills Nature Center Manager
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Presentation: 2b
Executive summary
Title: Minnesota Recreation and Park Association Awards of Excellence Presentation
Recommended action: Minnesota Recreation and Park Association representative, Sonya
Rippe, will be in attendance to present the City of St. Louis Park with three awards of
excellence.
Policy consideration: Not applicable.
Summary: The Minnesota Recreation and Park Association annually provides recognition to
communities that set a standard of excellence in the field of recreation, parks and leisure
services. The City of St. Louis Park received three awards of excellence in 2017 for the following
projects/programs:
• Westwood Hills Nature Center woodland and shoreland habitat restoration partnership
• The Recreation Outdoor Center Project (ROC)
• Recycling Champions
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in
environmental stewardship.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Jason Eisold, Rec Center Manager
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Presentation: 2c
Executive summary
Title: Recognition of donations
Recommended action: Mayor to announce and express thanks and appreciation for the
following donations being accepted at the meeting and listed on the consent agenda:
From Donation For
Carol Haff
Jim Brimeyer
$2,150
$50
Memorial bench in Aquila Park honoring
Gene Gustafson
Lillian Wefald
$2,200 Memorial bench in Westwood Hills Nature
Center honoring Lillian and Knut Wefald
Most Holy Trinity class
of 1958
$2,000 Memorial bench in Wolfe Park honoring
Most Holy Trinity School’s class of 1958
National Association of
Government Web
Professionals (NAGW)
Up to $2,500 Travel expenses for Information Technology
Manager Jason Huber to attend the 2018
NAGW Conference in Pittsburgh, PA
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Debbie Fischer, Administrative Services Office Assistant
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4a
Executive summary
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the removal of restrictions on
various street segments and adopt Resolution authorizing the installation of traffic controls on
Yosemite Avenue.
Policy consideration: Does the council support updating the road network to reflect current
road conditions? Does the council wish to rescind street restrictions that are not consistent
with the actual strength and current needs of the property owners on the street?
Summary: On February 5, 2018, the city council approved the 2018 Pavement Management
Project (PMP) (4018-1000). A part of that approval included the removal of the weight
restrictions in the Elmwood and Brooklawns neighborhoods; however, for record keeping
purposes it is recommended that the council rescind the resolutions approving the restrictions.
This has not always been done in the past.
Included in these resolutions are also a number of other street segments outside of these
neighborhoods. These streets are also capable of supporting at least six tons per axle. As a
result, instead of partially rescinding the resolutions, the Traffic Committee recommends that
the council rescind the resolutions in their entirety.
To inform the property owners on the posted streets that live outside of the Brookside,
Brooklawns, and Elmwood Neighborhoods of this recommendation, staff sent out a letter to
420 property owners in May.
Financial or budget considerations: The cost to implement these actions are minimal and will
come out of the general operating budget.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Resolution – Removing restrictions on various streets in the city
Resolution – Authorizing traffic controls on Yosemite Avenue
Weight restrictions map
Weight restriction street segment matrix
Truck classifications exhibit
Resolutions 1542, 2768, 3682, 4313, 5181, 6155, 85-202, and 00-151 –
to be rescinded
Prepared by: Ben Manibog, Transportation Engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets
Discussion
Background: The majority of the streets in the Brookside, Brooklawns, and Elmwood
Neighborhoods were posted to prohibit vehicles with a weight of more than two-ton per axle
from driving on them. These restrictions were installed in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. At
that time, the pavement was not designed to support vehicles over that weight.
The neighborhood-wide restriction is the only one of its kind within the city. Additionally, such a
restriction technically prevents vehicles such as UPS trucks, FedEx trucks, garbage trucks,
landscaping vehicles, and school buses from using the streets.
As a part of the public process for the 2018 Pavement Management Project staff completed a
review of the physical condition and weight bearing capacity of the roads in these
neighborhoods and it was determined that they can withstand at least six tons per axle which
does not require posted weight restrictions. The removal of the restrictions was approved as a
part of the project authorization; however, for record keeping purposes, it is recommended
that the council rescind the resolutions approving the restrictions.
Included in the resolutions recommended to be rescinded are also a number of other street
segments outside of these neighborhoods that are posted with restrictions. The attached table
provides each street segment, the restriction called out, and structural capacity. These
restrictions are broken out into two types.
Weight Restrictions
There are streets that are posted with 2-ton or 4-ton per axle weight restrictions. These
resolutions were approved in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s. At that time, the pavement was
not designed to support vehicles that exceed these weights. Staff has done a comprehensive
review of all of these street segments. All of these roads have been reconstructed, and are
designed for vehicles with a per axle weight of at least six tons.
Removing the axle weight restrictions allows vehicles – such as delivery vans or landscape
contractors – to legally drive on the street. To give you a better idea on what the posted
restrictions mean for road users: UPS delivery trucks and moving vans are not permitted to
travel on streets posted with a 2 or 4-ton axle weight. Heavy duty pick- up trucks, RVs, trailers
with boats, may be restricted as well.
No Truck Restrictions
From State Statute, the definition of a "truck" means every motor vehicle designed, used or
maintained primarily for the transportation of property. (169.011 Subd. 88.) Attached is a
figure that shows all of the different truck classes.
There are many vehicles that are not tractor trailer trucks that are also prohibited from
travelling on roads posted “no trucks”. Trucks provide our residents deliveries and services.
Such a restriction technically prevents all trucks from using these streets. Signs such as these
prohibit vehicles such as delivery trucks, moving trucks, and landscaping trucks from using the
streets.
In addition, these signs are difficult to enforce. We have discussed this with our police
department and they would need to patrol specifically for truck traffic to cite violators. The city
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets
attorney indicated that if we were to actively enforce these restrictions, we would have to cite
all vehicles in violation.
Finally, in reviewing the street segments that are posted in comparison to other residential
streets in the city, there is not a unique characteristic to these roads or to the surrounding land
uses that would be a reason to prohibit all truck traffic on the street. The streets are
structurally able to support at least six ton per axle weight.
Public Engagement
Residents and property owners in the Brookside, Brooklawns, and Elmwood Neighborhoods
were informed of the restrictions and asked for comment during the 2018 PMP public meeting
process.
To inform the property owners on the posted streets that live outside of the 2018 PMP
neighborhoods of this recommendation, staff sent out a letter to 420 property owners in May.
Of these 420 property owners, staff has heard from one resident who is opposed to the
recommendation.
Recommendation
For the reasons noted earlier, instead of partially rescinding the resolutions, staff is
recommending that the council rescind the resolutions in their entirety and remove the
restrictions posted on these streets. Un-posted streets are designed with a strength of at least
six ton per axle.
There are street segments on the attached table that are no longer posted, these restrictions
were removed when these individual street projects were approved and the streets were
reconstructed with a higher structural strength. However, the official records were not
updated. Rescinding the resolution entirely will clear up the records.
In addition to the resolution removing the restrictions, there is a second resolution being
recommended for approval. The rescinded resolutions included two items not related to the
weight restrictions that we do not recommend removing. The two items are traffic controls on
Yosemite Avenue. They are:
1. Install stop signs at the intersection of West 39th Street at Yosemite Avenue for
the north, south, east, and west approaches.
2. Install “two hour parking between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday-Friday” signs on both
sides of Yosemite Avenue from Excelsior Boulevard to a point 550 feet north of
Excelsior Boulevard.
Next Steps
As shown on the road restriction map, there are other street segments in the city that have
restrictions. Staff will be reviewing them as time allows to determine if they are no longer
necessary. If they are structurally capable of supporting at least six tons per axle, we will bring
these forward to the council in the future.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets
Resolution No. 18-___
Authorizing the removal of restrictions on
various street segments throughout the city
Traffic Study No. 697
Whereas, the weight restrictions in resolutions 1542, 2768, 3682, 4313, 5181, 6155, 85-
202, and 00-151 were installed to restrict truck traffic as well as protect streets that did not
have the design strength to support vehicles at such weights; and
Whereas, since then, the roads have been reconstructed and are designed for vehicles
with an axle weight of at least six tons; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has informed the affected adjacent
properties to gather comments and concerns; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota is committed to providing a variety of
options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably.
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
that Resolution No. 1542, 2768, 3682, 4313, 5181, 6155, 85-202, and 00-151 be rescinded.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 5
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets
Resolution No. 18-___
Authorizing traffic controls on Yosemite Avenue
Traffic Study No. 697
Whereas, Resolution 6155 was rescinded to update the road network to reflect current
road conditions as a part of Traffic Study No. 697; and
Whereas, city staff did not recommend rescinding or removing some of the traffic
controls in Resolution 6155; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota is committed to providing a variety of
options for people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely, and reliably.
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
that the Engineering Director is hereby authorized to:
1. Install stop signs at the intersection of West 39th Street at Yosemite Avenue for
the north, south, east, and west approaches.
2. Install “two hour parking between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday-Friday” signs on both
sides of Yosemite Avenue from Excelsior Boulevard to a point 550 feet north of
Excelsior Boulevard.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
")20
")17
")5
")25
")3
¬«100
¬«7
LYNNAVESPENNSYLVANIAAVESMINNETONKA BLVD
LOUI
SI
ANAAVESMINNETONKA BLVD
29TH ST W
TEXAS AVE S
MORNINGSIDE RD
MINNETONKA BLVD
36TH ST W
LAKE
S
T
W
M
O
N
T
E
R
E
Y
D
R
16TH ST W
W
O
O
D
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
PARK CENTERBLVDQUENTINAVESPARK CENTER BLVD42ND ST W RALEIGHAVESGENERALMILLSBLVDVERNONAVESKIPLINGAVES25TH ST WHAMPSHIREAVES
BELTLINEBLVDUTICAAVESC E D A R L AK E R D
JOPPAAVESMINNETONKA BLVD
OAK LEAF
D
R
32ND ST W
WAYZATA BLVD
WOODDA
L
E
A
V
E
FRANKLIN AVEW
ALABAMAAVESCEDAR LAKE AVE
V I C T O R I A C
U
R
V
16TH S T W
SERVICE DR H I G H W A Y 7
GAMBLE DR
WAYZATA
BLVD
FRANCEAVESBLACKSTONEAVESXENWOODAVESLOUISIANAAVES28TH ST W
33RD ST W
YOSEMITEAVESW O L F E P K W Y
CAMBRIDGE ST QUENTINAVESMONTEREYAVESTEXASAVES34TH ST W QUEBECAVESM
EA
D
O
W
BR
O
O
K
BL
VDZARTHANAVES4 1 S T S T WZARTHANAVES CEDAR LAKE RD
WEBSTERAVES394 HOV LN
C E D A R L A K E R D
COOLIDGEAVESPARKPLACEBLVDBROWNDALEAVESBROOKAVESMACKEYAVES29TH ST W
FOREST RD
UTICAAVESWALKER STVIRGINIAAVES
JOPPA AVE SGLENHURSTAVESLAKE ST W
31ST ST W INGLEWOODAVESMINNEHAHA C I R SWALKER STGEORGIAAVES TOLEDOAVESPARKDALE
D
R
P A R K C O M M O N S D R
22N D ST W
26TH ST W
ID
A
H
O
A
V
E
S
XENWOODAVESCLUB RD
GOODRICH AVE
14TH ST W
XENWOODAVESDAKOTAAVESMINNEHAHA CIR
NLOUISIANAAVESW ALKERST14TH ST W
PENNSYLVANIAAVES25TH ST W PENNSYLVANIAAVES2ND ST NWGLENHURSTAVESOREGONAVES42ND ST W MONTEREYAVES1 6T H S T W
VIRGINIA CIR N
XENWOODAVESLOUISIANA
CT16TH ST W
COLORADOAVESOXFOR
D
S
TAQUILAAVES PARKLANDSR D
26TH ST W
RHODEISLANDAVES34TH ST W
YOSEMITEAVES33RD ST WCOLORADOAVESUTAHAVES
BROWNDALEAVES28TH ST W
27TH ST W
RANDAL
L
A
V
E
GORHAM AVEIDAHOAVES36TH ST W
BRUNSWICKAVES31ST ST WFLAGAVES JOPPAAVESWOODDALE
AVE
36TH ST W
35TH ST W
CEDARWOODR
D
MEADOWBROOK RDBRUNSWICKAVESEDGEWOODAVESOTTAWAAVES41ST ST WHILLSBOROAVESLI
B
R
A
R
Y
L
N
25 T H S T W
ZINRANAVESFRANKLINAVE W
BROOKSIDEAVES41ST ST W
VICTORI
A
W
A
Y
QUEBECAVESOTTAWAAVESUTAHDR36TH ST W
INDEPENDENCEAVESVIRGINIAAV ES35TH ST WBOONEAVES KENTUCKYAVES29TH ST W
34TH ST WWESTWOODHILLSDR14TH ST W
KENTUCKY
LN28TH ST W
27TH ST W
UTICAAVESBURD PLWYOMINGAVESSUNSET BLVD
FLAGAVES33RD ST W
36TH ST W
39TH ST W HILLLN S
QU
EB
E
C
AVES26TH ST W
S E R V IC E D R H IG H W A Y 7
WYOMINGAVES31ST ST WSUMTERAVES
32ND ST W
TAFTAVESVALLAC
H
E
R
A
V
E
27TH ST W
32ND ST W
1ST ST NW33RD ST W
40TH ST W
16TH ST W
FRANKLIN AVE W
NATCHEZAVESBARRY ST
37TH ST W
18TH ST W
39TH ST W
32ND ST WFRONTAGE RD22ND ST W
HAMILTON ST
DIVISION ST
38TH ST W
24TH ST
W
34TH ST W
32 1/2 ST W
25 1/2 ST W
XENWOOD AVE S
S E R V I C E
D
R
H
I G H W AY
7
37TH ST W 36 1/2 ST W
33RD ST W
18TH ST W
EDGEWOODAVESTOLEDOAVESS E R V IC E D R H IG H W A Y 7
R
E
P
U
B
L
I
C
A
V
E
BASSWOOD RD
16TH ST W13THLNW
EDGEB
R
O
O
K
D
R BRUNSWICKAVES31ST ST W
3 9 T H S T W394 HOV LN
2 9 T H S T W
DAKOTAAVES394 HOV LN
GLENHURSTRDR
H
O
D
E
ISLANDAVES30 1/2 ST W
26TH ST
W
YUKONAVESW AY Z ATA BLVD
394 HOV LN
18THSTWHILLSBOROAVES31ST
ST W
E L IO T V IE W R D
ALABAMAAVESOXFORD STCOLORADOAVESPARKERRD
ZARTHANAVES37TH ST WUTAHAVES
VERMONT ST
34 1/2 ST WXYLONAVESVIRGINIAAVES
INGLEWOODAVESDAKOTAAVESF R A N K L I N AVE W
KIPLINGAVESWESTSIDE DR
BOONEAVE S
JORDANAVESSUMTERAVES18THSTW
BROOKLNAQUILALNSJOPPAAVESFORD RD
394H O V L N
BRUNSWICKAVESWOOD LNCOLORADOAVESJERSEYAVES22NDSTW HUNTINGTONAVESCOLORADOAVES23 RD S T WFLAGAVES
3 3 R D S T W LYNN AVE SGETTYSBURGAVESMEADOWBROOKLNINDEPENDENCEAVESKENTUCKYAVES25TH ST W
B
R
O
W
N
L
O
W
A
V
E ALLEYFORD LN
WESTMORELAND
LN13TH LN W
UTICAAVES13 1/2 ST W
2 3 RD ST W
WEBSTERAVESYOSEMITEAVESVIRGINIAAVES
31ST ST W QUEBECDR
AQUILAAVESSALEM AVE SQUEBECAVESQUEBECAVES16TH ST W
ZINRANAVESDARTAVESXYLONAVESOREGONAVESMARYLANDAVESYUKONAVESOREGONAVESUTAHAVESVERNONAVESIDAHOAVESNEVADAAVESVIRGINIA C IR S
EDGEWOODAVESHAMPSHIREAVESJERSEYAVESCAVELLAVESBLACKSTONEAVESFLORIDAAVESPENNSYLVANIAAVESIDAHOAVESCAVELLLN MARYLANDAVESDAKOTAAVESQUEBECAVESALABAMAAVESSALEMAVESYOSEMITEAVESPRINCETONAVESRALEIGHAVESQUENTINAVESQUEBECAVESOREGONAVESHUNTINGTONAVESALABAMAAVESXYLONAVESVIRGINIAAVESWOODLAND
DRUTAHAVESTOLEDOAVESSALEMAVESPRIVATE RD
28TH S
T
W
WEBSTER AVE SNEVADAAVES22ND LN W
NORTH
S
T ZARTHANAVESYUKONAVESFLAGAVES23RD ST W ALABAMAAVESDECATURLNPHILLIPS PKWYMELROSEAVES
VIRGINIAAVES
M
O
NIT
O
R
S
T
CAMBRIDGE ST
3 7 T H S T WCAVELLAVESKILMERAVE NATCHEZAVESBRUNSWICKAVESOTTAWAAVES14TH ST W
VERNONAVESBLACKSTONEAVESWEBSTERAVESUTAH AVESZARTHANAVES35TH ST
W PRINCETONAVESHILLSBOROAVESC
A
V
E
L
L
AVESHAMPSHIREAVESDUKE DR40TH L
N
WSUMTERAVES22NDSTWPARKWOODSRDJORDANAVESSTANLEN RD EDGEWOODAVESKILMER AVEXYLONAVESPARK GL
E
N
R
D
MEADOWBROOK
BLVDCEDARWOOD RD
RALEIGHAVESPOWELL RD 394HOVLN2 8 T H S T W 23RDS T W
HOSPI
TALSERVICEDRPRIVATER D RIDGE DRRIDGEDRP R I VAT E
RDP
RI
VA
T
E R D
PRIVATERD
£¤169
§¨¦394
0 1 20.5
Miles ´
Weight Restrictions
Legend
Weight Restriction
2 Tons
4 Tons
6 Tons
9 Tons
9 Tons MSA
No Trucks
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 6
Street Segments
Page 1 of 2
Resolution
Number
Street From To Restriction Weight
Capacity
00-151 Cambridge St Texas Ave W. Lake St No Trucks 9 Tons
00-151 Cambridge St Alabama Ave Wooddale Ave 2 Tons 9-14 Tons
00-151 Goodrich Ave Colorado Ave Wooddale Ave 2 Tons 6-13 Tons
00-151 Lynn Ave Minnetonka Blvd Co. Rd. 25 4 Tons 15 Tons
00-151 Monterey Ave Minnetonka Blvd Co. Rd. 25 4 Tons 15-17 Tons
00-151 Natchez Ave Minnetonka Blvd Co. Rd. 25 4 Tons 12-13 Tons
00-151 Natchez Ave Excelsior Blvd Vallacher Ave No Trucks 11 Tons
00-151 Oxford St Colorado Ave Wooddale Ave 2 Tons 6-8 Tons
00-151 Taft Ave W. Lake St Edgebrook Dr 2 Tons 10-11 Tons
00-151 W. 16th St Colorado Ave Dakota Ave 2 Tons 10 Tons
85-202 Wooddale Ave Cambridge St Goodrich Ave No Trucks 11 Tons
6155 Wooddale Ave Cambridge St Goodrich Ave 2 Tons 11 Tons
5181 Wooddale Ave Oxford St Cambridge St 2 Tons 9-13 Tons
5181 Xenwood Ave W. 39th St Excelsior Blvd 2 Tons 8 Tons
5181 Yosemite Ave Goodrich Ave Wooddale Ave 2 Tons 6-8 Tons
5181 Zarthan Ave Oxford St Excelsior Blvd 2 Tons 7 Tons
5181 Brunswick Ave W. 36th St Excelsior Blvd 2 Tons 5-10 Tons
5181 Oxford St Wooddale Ave Dakota Ave 2 Tons 6-8 Tons
5181 Goodrich Ave Wooddale Ave Colorado Ave 2 Tons 6-13 Tons
5181 Cambridge St Wooddale Ave Alabama Ave 2 Tons 9-14 Tons
5181 W. 39th St Webster Ave Brunswick
Ave
2 Tons 7-9 Tons
5181 Brookview Ln Alabama Ave Brunswick
Ave
2 Tons 7 Tons
4313 Yosemite Ave Excelsior Blvd Goodrich Ave 2 Tons 6-8 Tons
3682 Westmoreland
Ln / Franklin
Ave
Westwood Hills
Dr
Flag Ave 4 Tons 7-12 Tons
3682 Westwood Hills
Dr
Texas Ave Franklin Ave 4 Tons 7-8 Tons
3682 W. 16th St Co. Rd. 18 (Now
Hwy 169)
Hillsboro Ave 4 Tons 8-9 Tons
3682 Hillsboro Ave W. 16th St W. 18th St 4 Tons 10 Tons
3682 W. 18th St Hillsboro Ave Flag Ave 4 Tons 10-13 Tons
3682 Quebec Ave Texas Ave Cedar Lake
Rd
4 Tons 10-14 Tons
3682 Georgia Ave Minnetonka Blvd W. 27th St 4 Tons 7-9 Tons
3682 Virginia Ave Cedar Lake Rd G. N. Ry
(Now BN
Railwy)
4 Tons 10-12 Tons
3682 Virginia Ave W. 28th St Texas Ave 4 Tons 7-14 Tons
3682 W. 32nd St Texas Ave Xylon Ave 4 Tons 8-9 Tons
3682 Dakota Ave Cedar Lake Rd W. 16th St 4 Tons 9-10 Tons
3682 W. 16th St Dakota Ave Colorado Ave 4 Tons 10 Tons
3682 W. 42nd St Wooddale Ave TH 100 4 Tons 7-10 Tons
3682 W. 40th St Wooddale Ave Lynn Ave 4 Tons 8-12 Tons
3682 Zarthan Ave Cambridge St Excelsior Blvd 4 Tons 7 Tons
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 7
Street Segments
Page 2 of 2
Resolution
Number
Street From To Restriction Weight
Capacity
3682 Yosemite Ave Cambridge St Excelsior
Blvd
4 Tons 6-8 Tons
3682 Xenwood Ave W. 39th St Excelsior Blvd 4 Tons 8 Tons
3682 Toledo Ave W. 39th St Excelsior Blvd 4 Tons Does not exist
today
3682 W. 27th St Quentin Ave Ottawa Ave 4 Tons 6-9 Tons
3682 Ottawa Ave W. 27th St W. 28th St 4 Tons 10 Tons
3682 Kipling Ave W. 40th St Excelsior Blvd 4 Tons 7-8 Tons
2768 W. 34th St Texas Ave Aquila Ln 4 Tons 7-14 Tons
2768 Aquila Ln W. 34th St Boone Ave 4 Tons 9-10 Tons
2768 Aquila Ave Minnetonka Blvd Boone Ave 4 Tons 8 Tons
2768 Aquila Ave W. 34th St W. 36th St 4 Tons 9 Tons
2768 W. 36th St
(Walker St)
Texas Ave Quebec Ave 4 Tons 13-16 Tons
2768 Louisiana Ave Gorham Ave W. Lake St 4 Tons 13-14 Tons
2768 Webster Ave W. Lake St TH 7 4 Tons 9 Tons
2768 Cambridge Ave Alabama Ave Wooddale Ave 4 Tons 9-14 Tons
2768 Goodrich Ave Wooddale Ave Colorado Ave 4 Tons 6-13 Tons
2768 W. 37th St Joppa Ave France Ave 4 Tons 8-12 Tons
2768 W. 38th St Excelsior Blvd France Ave 4 Tons 9-12 Tons
2768 W. 39th St Lynn Ave France Ave 4 Tons 10-16 Tons
2768 Lynn Ave Excelsior Blvd W. 40th St 4 Tons 9-11 Tons
2768 Joppa Ave Excelsior Blvd W. 40th St 4 Tons 9-12 Tons
2768 Quentin Ave Excelsior Blvd W. 42nd St 4 Tons 9-10 Tons
2768 Princeton Ave Wooddale Ave W. 42nd St 4 Tons 8 Tons
2768 Wooddale Ave W. 44th St W. 40th St 4 Tons 8-13 Tons
2768 W. 41st St Brookside Ave Wooddale Ave 4 Tons 8-10 Tons
2768 Morningside Rd TH 100 Wooddale Ave 4 Tons 6-9 Tons
2768 Brookside Rd Excelsior Blvd Yosemite Ave 4 Tons 11-14 Tons
2768 Yosemite Ave Excelsior Blvd S City Limits 4 Tons 8-11 Tons
2768 Sunset Blvd Joppa Ave France Ave 4 Tons 12-14 Tons
2768 Joppa Ave Minnetonka Blvd Sunset Blvd 4 Tons 8 Tons
2768 Inglewood Ave W. 26th St Sunset Blvd 4 Tons 9-10 Tons
2768 Parkwoods Rd /
Cedarwood Rd /
Parklands Rd /
Ford Rd
TH 100 France Ave 4 Tons 10-12 Tons
2768 Texas Ave TH 12 (Now I-
394)
Cedar Lake
Rd
4 Tons 13-19 Tons
2768 Flag Ave Cedar Lake Rd W. 18th St 4 Tons 7-12 Tons
2768 Flag Ave W. 14th St Westmoreland
Ln
4 Tons 6 Tons
2768 W. 14th St Co. Rd. 18 (Now
Hwy 169)
Flag Ave 4 Tons 9-12 Tons
1542 Brunswick Ave Cambridge St Excelsior Blvd 2 Tons 8-9 Tons
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 8
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streetsPage 9
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 10
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 11
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 12
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 13
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 14
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 15
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streetsPage 16
OCTOBER 23, 1978
10d
RESOLUTION NO. 1- -
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT OF
SIGNS FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL AT INTERSECTION
OF W. 39TH STREET AND YOSEMITE AVENUE
AND AT GOODRICH AVENUE AND WOODDALE AVENUE
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park
that a traffic analysis having indicated that traffic control signs
are warranted, the Director of Public Works is authorized and directed
to install the following signs:
Two-way stop signs on the east and west approaches
on West 39th Street at Yosemite Avenue
Two -ton weight limit sign southbound at Goodrich
Avenue and Wooddale Avenue
Two-hour parking between signs 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Monday -Friday signs on both sides of Yosemite Avenue
from Excelsior Boulevard to a point 550 feet north of
Excelsior Boulevard
Adopted by the City Council Oct 23, 1971..
May
Approved as to form and legality:
City torney
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 17
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 18
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4a)
Title: Traffic Study No. 697: Authorize removal of restrictions on various streets Page 19
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4b
Executive summary
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
Recommended action: Motion to approve the amended Inclusionary Housing Policy to:
increase the affordable unit requirement for 60% AMI affordability from 18% to 20%, add an
affordability category for 30% AMI, require a payment in lieu for eligible homeownership
developments, and increase the continued occupancy eligibility income for program
participants to 140% of the applicable AMI.
Policy consideration: Do the proposed amendments assist in furthering the council’s affordable
housing goals?
Summary: In June 2015, the council adopted an Inclusionary Housing Policy requiring the
inclusion of affordable housing units for lower income households in new market-rate multi-
unit residential developments receiving financial assistance from the city. This policy was
subsequently amended in 2017 increasing the percentage of affordable units required. Since
the policy has been in place, 54 affordable units have been developed and 228 more approved.
An additional 27 affordable units are in the planning process.
At the August 13, 2018 study session, the council discussed four proposed amendments to the
policy: (i) increase the affordable unit requirement for 60% AMI affordability from 18% to 20%,
(ii) add an affordability category for 30% AMI, (iii) require a payment in lieu for eligible
homeownership developments, and (iv) increase the continued occupancy eligibility income for
program participants to 140% of the initial income eligibility requirement.
The council supported the proposed amendments and directed staff to amend the policy and
return to council for approval.
Financial or budget considerations: Increasing the required percentage of affordable units per
the Inclusionary Housing Policy will have an economic impact for the developers which could
result in a greater financial gap for the development.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Inclusionary Housing Policy with proposed amendments
Prepared by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
Discussion
Background:
Inclusionary Policy: The current Inclusionary Housing Policy was adopted by the council on
June 1, 2015 and amended May 9, 2017. The goal of the policy is to create affordable units in
market-rate developments where it would not otherwise occur. The intent is to do so while not
creating a burden so onerous that it becomes a deterrent or unreasonable constraint on
residential development in SLP, and to fulfill the city’s affordable housing objectives without
eliminating the developer’s economic benefit, especially for developers of market-rate
residential housing with little or no experience in the development of affordable housing. Since
its inception, the policy has been applied to 6 development projects.
Inclusionary Housing Policy Developments
Development Total Units Affordable Units Affordability Level
Required per policy
Shoreham - complete 148 30 50% AMI
4800 Excelsior - complete 164 18 60% AMI
Elmwood (PUD approved) 70 17 60% AMI
PLACE (PUD approved) 299 200* 60% AMI
Voluntary
Central Park West- Phase I
complete
363 11 (6 complete) 60% AMI
Livable Comm. required
Arlington Row
(PUD approved – on hold)
61 6* 80% AMI
Planning process
Platia Place 149 27 60% AMI
Beltline Station Area TBD TBD TBD
Total units 1254 309
*Number subject to change
Proposed policy amendments: Affordability requirements
Staff is recommending that the percentage of affordable housing required for the 60%
affordability level be increased from 18% to 20% of units. Staff is also recommending the
inclusion of an option to provide units affordable at 30% AMI.
Adding a 30% affordability alternative will provide an additional option for developers to fulfill
the affordability requirement under the policy and provide the city with the possibility of
creating units affordable for the lowest income households.
Staff recommends that the council amend the Inclusionary Housing Policy as follows:
Affordability Level: Rental: 18% 20% of units at 60%* area median income (AMI), or
10% of units at 50%* AMI, or
5% of units affordable at 30% AMI
Ownership: A payment in lieu equal to the difference between the
average market rate sale price and the for-sale home amount affordable
to households with incomes at or below eighty percent (80%) AMI
multiplied by fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of units in the
development. fifteen percent (15%) at eighty percent (18%).
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
Payment-in-lieu for homeownership units only:
The current policy does not allow for a payment-in-lieu of including affordable units in an
eligible development. Staff is recommending that the policy be amended to require a payment-
in-lieu for homeownership developments. It is likely that any eligible homeownership
developments will be high-density condominium or townhome developments. Ensuring long
term homeownership affordability beyond the initial sale and preventing a wind-fall financial
enrichment would be administratively impractical; however, a payment-in-lieu could provide a
funding resource that designated for homeownership assistance programs such as: down-
payment assistance, closing cost assistance, or a second mortgage. The funds would assist low-
and moderate income households with purchasing single-family homes, townhomes and
condominiums. Assistance could be provided in the form of no-interest, no-monthly-payment
loans, repayable at sale, allowing for reuse of the funds to assistance future households. The
payment-in-lieu would be established as a fee per unit, based on the inclusionary policy, that
would reflect the difference in cost to create an affordable unit versus a market-rate unit and
multiplied by 15% of the total number of market rate units in the development. Current cost of
a homeownership unit affordable at 80% AMI is $234,500.
Amend income eligibility for existing residents:
The current policy allows tenants residing in the affordable units to continue to live in the unit
until their income exceeds 120% of applicable AMI. Staff is recommending that this be changed
to 140% of the applicable AMI for the units, to be consistent with tax credit regulations. Since
some of the developments complying with the Inclusionary Housing Policy have chosen to
include tax credit units, it would be beneficial to developers to have the Inclusionary Policy
requirements mirror the tax credit regulations.
NEXT STEPS:
Upon approval of the amended Inclusionary Housing Policy, the new requirements will become
effective immediately for any future residential housing developments seeking financial
assistance from the city.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 4
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
Inclusionary Housing Policy
This policy promotes high quality housing located in the community for households with a variety
of income levels, ages and sizes in order to meet the city's goal of preserving and promoting
economically diverse housing options in our community.
The city recognizes the need to provide affordable housing to households of a broad range of
income levels in order to maintain a diverse population and to provide housing for those who
live or work in the city. Without intervention, the trend toward rising housing prices in new
developments will continue to increase. As a result, this policy is being adopted to ensure that a
reasonable proportion of each new development receiving city financial assistance include units
affordable to low and moderate income households and working families or in the case of for-
sale units, make a payment in lieu of including affordable units.
The requirements set forth in this policy furthers the city’s housing goals and the city’s
Comprehensive Plan to create and preserve affordable housing opportunities. These
requirements are intended to provide a structure for participation by both the public and private
sectors in the production of affordable housing.
I. Applicability and minimum project size
Market rate multi-unit development receiving city financial assistance
This policy applies to market rate multi-unit residential developments that receive financial
assistance from the city and includes:
(1) new developments that create at least 10 multi-family dwelling units; or
(2) any mixed use building that creates at least 10 multi-family dwelling units; or
(3) renovation or reconstruction of an existing building that contains multi-family
dwelling units that includes at least 10 dwelling units; or
(4) any change in use of all or part of an existing building from a non- residential use
to a residential use that includes at least 10 dwelling units.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 5
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
II. Affordable dwelling units
General requirement
A development that is subject to this policy shall provide a number of affordable dwelling units
equal to at least five percent ten (5 10%) to twenty eighteen percent (20 18%) of the total
number of dwelling units in the development or for for-sale developments, make a payment in
lieu. The units designated as affordable and the payment-in-lieu will be subject to the
requirements listed below.
Calculation of units and payment in lieu required.
For development of multi-family dwelling units:
A. The required number of affordable dwelling units or corresponding
payment in lieu is based on the total number of dwelling units that are
approved by the city.
B. To calculate the number of affordable dwelling units or payment in lieu
required in a development the total number of approved dwelling units
shall be multiplied by five percent (5%), ten percent (10%), fifteen percent
(15%) or twenty eighteen percent (20 18%), depending on the affordability
standard. If the final calculation includes a fraction, the fraction of a unit
shall be rounded to the nearest whole number.
C. If an occupied rental property with existing dwelling units is remodeled
and/or expanded, the number of affordable dwelling units shall be based
on the total number of units following completion of
renovation/expansion. At least five percent (5%), ten percent (10%) or
twenty eighteen percent (20 18%) shall be affordable, depending on the
affordability standard.
D. For-sale home ownership developments will be required to pay a payment
in lieu instead of including affordable units in the development. The
payment in lieu will be an amount equal to the difference between the
average market rate sale price of a for-sale unit and the for-sale home
amount affordable to a household with an income at or below eighty
percent (80%) AMI.
Affordability level
The required affordable dwelling units within a residential project subject to this policy shall meet
an income eligibility and rent affordability standard for the term of the restriction as follows:
(1) Rental Projects:
A. At least twenty eighteen percent (20 18%) of the units shall be affordable
for households at sixty percent (60%) Area Median Income (AMI), or
B. At least ten percent (10%) of the units shall be at affordable for households
at fifty percent (50%) AMI, or
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 6
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
C. At least five percent (5%) of the units shall be affordable for households at
thirty percent (30%) AMI.
(2) For-Sale Projects:
For-sale home ownership developments will pay a payment in lieu. The
payment in lieu will be an amount equal to the difference between the
average market rate sale price of a for-sale unit and the for sale home
amount affordable to a household with an income at or below eighty
percent (80%) AMI. The payment will be multiplied by a number equal to
fifteen percent (15%) of the total number of for-sale units in the
development.
At least fifteen percent (15%) of the units shall be affordable for
households at eighty percent (80%) Area Median Income (AMI).
Rent and sale price level
Rental Unit: The monthly rental cost for an affordable dwelling unit shall include rent and utility
costs and shall be based on thirty percent (30%), fifty percent (50%) or sixty percent (60%) AMI
for the metropolitan area that includes St. Louis Park adjusted for bedroom size and calculated
annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and posted by Minnesota
Housing for establishing rent limits for the Housing Tax Credit Program.
For-Sale Projects: The qualifying affordable sale price for an owner-occupied affordable dwelling
unit shall be based on a homeownership unit affordable to a household with income at or below
eighty percent (80%) AMI for the metropolitan area that includes St. Louis Park calculated
annually by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and posted by the Metropolitan
Council.
Period of affordability
In rental developments subject to this policy, the period of affordability for the affordable
dwelling units shall be at least twenty-five (25) years.
Location of affordable rental dwelling units
Except as otherwise specifically authorized by this policy, the affordable dwelling units
shall be located within the development.
III. Standards for inclusionary rental units
Size and design of affordable units
The size and design of the affordable dwelling units should be consistent and comparable with
the market rate units in the rest of the project and is subject to the approval of the city. The
interior of affordable dwelling units do not need to be identical to the market rate units but if
units are smaller than the other units with the same number of bedrooms in the development,
city approval must be obtained.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 7
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
Exterior/interior appearance.
The exterior materials and design of the affordable dwelling units in any development subject
to these regulations shall be indistinguishable in style and quality with the market rate units in
the development. The interior finish and quality of construction of the affordable dwelling units
shall at a minimum be comparable to entry level rental or ownership housing in the City.
Construction of the affordable dwelling units shall be concurrent with construction of market
rate dwelling units
IV. Integration of affordable dwelling units
Distribution of affordable rental housing units.
The affordable dwelling units shall be incorporated into the overall project unless expressly
allowed to be located in a separate building or a different location approved by the city council.
Affordable dwelling units shall be distributed throughout the building.
Number of bedrooms in the affordable units.
The affordable dwelling units shall have a number of bedrooms in the approximate proportion
as the market rate units. The mix of unit types, both bedroom and accessible units, of the
affordable dwelling units shall be approved by the city.
Tenants
Rental affordable dwelling units shall be rented only to income eligible families during the period
of affordability. An income eligible family may remain in the affordable dwelling unit for
additional rental periods as long as the income of the family does not exceed one-hundred forty
twenty percent (140 120%) of the applicable AMI.
V. Alternatives to on-site development of affordable dwelling units
This section provides alternatives to the construction of affordable dwelling units onsite as
a way to comply with this Policy. The alternatives are listed in subsection (3), below.
(1) The alternatives must be:
A. Approved by the city council, and
B. Agreed to by the applicant in an Affordable Housing Performance
Agreement.
C. Applicant must show evidence acceptable to the city that a formal
commitment to the proposed alternative is in place.
(2) This Section does not apply unless the applicant demonstrates:
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 8
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
A. The alternative provides an equivalent or greater amount of affordable
dwelling units in a way that the city determines better achieves the goals,
objectives and policies of the city’s housing goals and Comprehensive Plan
than providing them onsite; and
B. Will not cause the city to incur any net cost as a result of the alternative
compliance mechanism.
(3) If the conditions in (2) are met, the city may approve one or more of the following
options to providing affordable dwelling units that are required by this policy.
A. Dedication of existing units: Restricting existing dwelling units which are
approved by the city as suitable affordable housing dwelling units through
covenants or contractual arrangements, or resale restrictions. The city
shall determine whether the form and content of the restrictions comply
with this policy. Off-site units shall be located within the City of St. Louis
Park. The restriction of such existing units must result in the creation of
units that are of equivalent quality, and size of the permanently affordable
dwelling units which would have been constructed on-site if this
alternative had not been utilized.
B. Offsite construction of affordable dwelling units within the city. Offsite
construction of units should be located in proximity to public transit service
at a site approved by the city.
C. Participation in the construction of affordable dwelling units by another
developer on a different site within the city.
D. An alternative proposed by the applicant that directly provides or enables
the provision of affordable housing units within the city. The alternative
must be approved by the city and made a condition of approval of the
Affordable Housing Performance Agreement.
VI. Non-discrimination based on rent subsidies:
Developments covered by the policy must not discriminate against tenants who would
pay their rent with federal, state or local public assistance, including tenant based federal,
state or local subsidies, including, but not limited to rental assistance, rent supplements,
and Housing Choice Vouchers.
VII. Affordable housing plan
(1) Applicability
Developments that are subject to this policy shall include an Affordable Housing Plan
as described below. An Affordable Housing Plan describes how the developer complies
with each of the applicable requirements of this Policy.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 9
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
(2) Approval
A. The Affordable Housing Plan shall be approved by the city.
B. Minor modifications to the plan are subject to approval by the city
Manager. Major modifications are subject to approval by the city council.
Items that are considered major and minor will be designated in the
Affordable Housing Plan.
(3) Contents.
The Affordable Housing Plan shall include at least the following:
A. General information about the nature and scope of the development
subject to these regulations.
B. For requests of an alternative to on-site provision of affordable housing,
evidence that the proposed alternative will further affordable housing
opportunities in the city to an equivalent or greater extent than
compliance with the otherwise applicable on-site requirements of this
policy.
C. The total number of market rate units and for rental developments, the
number of affordable dwelling units in the rental development.
D. The floor plans for the affordable dwelling units showing the number of
bedrooms and bathrooms in each unit.
E. The approximate square footage of each affordable dwelling unit and
average square foot of market rate unit by types.
F. Building floor plans and site plans showing the location of each affordable
dwelling unit.
G. The pricing of each ownership dwelling unit shall be determined at time of
issuance of the occupancy permit approval. At time of sale this price may
be adjusted if there has been a change in the median income or a change
in the formulas used in this ordinance.
H. The order of completion of market rate and affordable dwelling units.
I. Documentation and specifications regarding the exterior appearance,
materials and finishes of the development for each of the affordable
dwelling units illustrating that the appearance of affordable units are
comparable to the appearance of the market-rate units.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 10
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
J. An Affordable Dwelling Unit Management Plan documenting policies and
procedures for administering the affordable dwelling units in accordance
with the Affordable Housing Performance Agreement.
K. Any and all other information that the city manager may require that is
needed to achieve the council’s affordable housing goals.
VIII. Recorded agreements, conditions and restrictions
(1) An Affordable Housing Performance Agreement shall be executed between the
city and a developer, in a form approved by the city attorney, based on the
Affordable Housing Plan described in Section VII, which formally sets forth
development approval and requirements to achieve affordable housing in
accordance with this policy and location criteria. The Agreement shall identify:
a. the location, number, type, and size of affordable housing units to be
constructed;
b. sales and/or rental terms; occupancy requirements;
c. a timetable for completion of the units; and
d. restrictions to be placed on the units to ensure their affordability and any
terms contained in the approval resolution by the city as applicable.
(2) The applicant or owner shall execute any and all documents deemed necessary by
the city manager, including, without limitation, restrictive covenants and other
related instruments, to ensure the affordability of the affordable housing units in
accordance with this policy.
(3) The applicant or owner must prepare and record all documents, restrictions,
easements, covenants, and/or agreements that are specified by the city as
conditions of approval of the application prior to issuance of a zoning compliance
permit for any development subject to this policy.
(4) Documents described above shall be recorded in the Hennepin County
Registry of Deeds as appropriate.
IX. Definitions
1. Affordable Dwelling Unit: The required affordable dwelling units within a residential
project subject to this policy shall meet an income eligibility and rent affordability
standard for the term of the restriction as follows:
(1) Rental Projects:
A. At least twenty eighteen percent (20 18%) of the units shall be affordable
for households at sixty percent (60%) Area Median Income (AMI), or
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 11
Title: Approval of the amended inclusionary housing policy
B. At least ten percent (10%) of the units shall be at affordable for
households at fifty percent (50%) Area Median Income.
C. At least five percent (5%) of the units shall be affordable for households
at thirty percent (30%) Area Medium Income.
(2) For-Sale Projects:
A. The qualifying affordable sale price for an owner-occupied affordable
dwelling unit shall be based on a household income of eighty percent
(80%) AMI for the metropolitan area that includes St. Louis Park
calculated annually by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. At least fifteen percent (15%) of the units shall be
affordable for households at eighty percent (80%) Area Median Income
(AMI).
2. Financial Assistance: The Inclusionary Affordable Housing Policy applies to all new and
renovated multifamily residential buildings receiving city financial assistance.
Financial Assistance is defined as funds derived from the city and includes but is not
limited to the following:
A. City of St. Louis Park Funds
B. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
C. Housing Rehabilitation Funds
D. Revenue Bonds (private activity bonds are negotiable)
E. Tax Increment Financing (TIF) & Tax Abatement
F. Housing Authority (HA) Funds
G. Land Writedowns
3. Affordable Housing Plan: A plan that documents policies and procedures for
administering the affordable dwelling units in accordance with the Affordable Housing
Performance Agreement.
4. Affordable Housing Performance Agreement: Agreement between the city and the
developer which formally sets forth development approval and requirements to achieve
Affordable Housing in accordance with this policy.
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4c
Executive summary
Title: Accept donation from Carol Haff and Jim Brimeyer for memorial bench honoring Gene
Gustafson
Recommended action: Motion to adopt a Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,200
donation from Carol Haff in the amount of $2,150 and Jim Brimeyer in the amount of $50 for
the purchase and installation of a memorial bench in Aquila Park honoring Gene Gustafson.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept this gift with restrictions on its use?
Summary: State statute requires city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Carol Haff and Jim Brimeyer graciously donated $2,150 and $50 respectfully for the purchase
and installation of a memorial bench. The donation is given with the restriction that the
memorial bench be placed in Aquila Park honoring Gene Gustafson who is a former Parks
Superintendent for the City.
Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used to purchase and install a
memorial bench in Aquila Park.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Rick Beane, Parks Superintendent
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4c) Page 2
Title: Accept donation from Carol Haff and Jim Brimeyer for memorial bench honoring Gene Gustafson
Resolution No. 18-___
Resolution approving acceptance of a donation in the amount of $2,200 for a
memorial bench to be placed in Aquila Park
honoring Gene Gustafson
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the
donor; and
Whereas, Carol Haff donated $2,150 and Jim Brimeyer donated $50.
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the gift
is hereby accepted with thanks to Carol Haff and Jim Brimeyer with the understanding that it
must be used to purchase a memorial bench in Aquila Pak honoring Gene Gustafson.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council August 6, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4d
Executive summary
Title: Accept donation from Lillian Wefald for memorial bench honoring Lillian and Knut Wefald
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,200 donation
from Lillian Wefald for the purchase and installation of a memorial bench in Westwood Hills
Nature Center honoring Lillian and Knut Wefald.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept this gift with restrictions on its use?
Summary: State statute requires city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Lillian Wefald graciously donated $2,200 for the purchase and installation of a memorial bench.
The donation is given with the restriction that the memorial bench be placed in Westwood Hills
Nature Center honoring Lillian and Knut Wefald.
Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used to purchase and install a
memorial bench in Westwood Hills Nature Center.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Mark Oestreich, Westwood Hills Nature Center Manager
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Accept donation from Lillian Wefald for memorial bench honoring Lillian and Knut Wefald
Resolution No. 18-___
Resolution approving acceptance of a donation in the amount of $2,200 for a
memorial bench to be placed at Westwood Hills Nature Center
honoring Lillian and Knut Wefald
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the
donor; and
Whereas, Lillian Wefald donated $2,200.
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the gift
is hereby accepted with thanks to Lillian Wefald with the understanding that it must be used to
purchase a memorial bench in Westwood Hills Nature Center honoring Lillian and Knut Wefald.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council August 6, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4e
Executive summary
Title: Accept donation from Most Holy Trinity School for memorial bench
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a $2,000 donation
from Most Holy Trinity School, class of 1958 for the purchase and installation of a memorial
bench in Wolfe Park honoring Most Holy Trinity School’s class of 1958.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to accept this gift with restrictions on its use?
Summary: State statute requires city council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the city council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on the
use of each donation prior to it being expended.
Most Holy Trinity School, class of 1958 graciously donated $2,000 for the purchase and
installation of a memorial bench. The donation is given with the restriction that the memorial
bench be placed in Wolfe Park honoring Most Holy Trinity School’s class of 1958.
Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used to purchase and install a
memorial bench in Wolfe Park.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Stacy M. Voelker, Senior Office Assistant
Reviewed by: Rick Beane, Parks Superintendent
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4e) Page 2
Title: Accept donation from Most Holy Trinity School for memorial bench
Resolution No. 18-___
Resolution approving acceptance of a donation in the amount of $2,000 for a
memorial bench to be placed in Wolfe Park
honoring Most Holy Trinity School’s class of 1958
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park is required by state statute to authorize acceptance
of any donations; and
Whereas, the city council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the
donor; and
Whereas, Most Holy Trinity School’s class of 1958 donated $2,000.
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the gift
is hereby accepted with thanks to Most Holy Trinity School’s class of 1958 with the
understanding that it must be used to purchase a memorial bench in Wolfe Park honoring Most
Holy Trinity School’s class of 1958.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council August 6, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4f
Executive summary
Title: Final payment resolution - alley reconstruction project - project 4017-1500
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution accepting work and authorizing final
payment in the amount of $19,041.46 for project 4017-1500 Alley Reconstruction with G.L.
Contracting Inc., City Contract No. 74-17.
Policy consideration: Not applicable.
Summary: On May 15, 2017, the city council awarded the bid for the alley reconstruction
project. The project was advertised, bid and awarded to G.L. Contracting Inc. in the amount of
$389,882.00. The project consisted of replacing four gravel alleys with concrete pavement in
the Lenox neighborhood. This was the first year of a 10 year plan to replace all the gravel and
bituminous alleys in the city with concrete pavement.
The contractor completed the work within the contract time allowed. The final contract cost of
$379,754.94 is an underrun of $10,127.06 (-2.6%) from the original contract price. There were
no change orders associated with this contract.
Financial or budget considerations: The final contract cost of the work performed by the
contractor under contract no. 74-17 has been calculated as follows:
Original Contract Price $ 389,882.00
Underruns $ 10,127.06
Contract Amount $ 379,754.94
Previous Payments $ 360,713.48
Balance Due $ 19,041.46
This project was included in the city’s capital improvement program (CIP). The work was paid for
using pavement management and stormwater utility funds.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Final payment resolution - alley reconstruction project - project 4017-1500
Resolution No. 18-____
Resolution authorizing final payment and
accepting work for the alley reconstruction project
City project no. 4017-1500
Contract no. 74-17
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
as follows:
1.Pursuant to a written contract with the city dated May 15, 2017, G.L. Construction Inc.
has satisfactorily completed the annual alley reconstruction project, as per contract no.
74-17.
2.The Engineering Director has filed her recommendations for final acceptance of the
work.
3.The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The final contract
cost is $379,754.94.
4.The City Manager is directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the
contractor's receipt in full.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4g
Executive summary
Title: Special assessment – sewer service line repair at 3858 Wooddale Avenue South
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the
repair of the sewer service line at 3858 Wooddale Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN.
P.I.D. 21-117-21-21-0038.
Policy consideration: The proposed action is consistent with policy previously established by
the city council.
Summary: Emily Dalager, owner of the single family residence at 3858 Wooddale Avenue
South, has requested the city to authorize the repair of the sewer service line for her home and
assess the cost against the property in accordance with the city’s special assessment policy.
The city requires the repair of service lines to promote the general public health, safety and welfare
within the community. The special assessment policy for the repair or replacement of water or
sewer service lines for existing homes was adopted by the city council in 1996. This program was put
into place because sometimes property owners face financial hardships when emergency repairs like
this are unexpectedly required. Plans and permits for this service line repair work were completed,
submitted and approved by city staff. The property owners hired a contractor and repaired the
sewer service line in compliance with current codes and regulations. Based on the completed work,
this repair qualifies for the city’s special assessment program. The property owners have petitioned
the city to authorize the sewer service line repair and special assess the cost of the repair. The total
eligible cost of the repair has been determined to be $ 5,500.00.
Financial or budget considerations: The city has funds in place to finance the cost of this special
assessment.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Jay Hall, Utility Superintendent
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Beth Simonsen, Accountant
Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Special assessment – sewer service line repair at 3858 Wooddale Avenue South
Resolution No. 18-____
Resolution authorizing the special assessment
for the repair of the sewer service line at
3858 Wooddale Avenue South, St. Louis Park, MN
P.I.D. 21-117-21-21-0038
Whereas, the property owner at 3858 Wooddale Avenue South, has petitioned the City
of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the sewer service line for the
single family residence located at 3858 Wooddale Avenue South; and
Whereas, the property owner has agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, right of
notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
Whereas, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
utility superintendent related to the repair of the sewer service line.
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that:
1. The petition from the property owner requesting the approval and special assessment for
the sewer service line repair is hereby accepted.
2. The sewer service line repair that was done in conformance with the plans and
specifications approved by the Operations and recreation department and Department of
inspections is hereby accepted.
3. The total cost for the repair of the sewer service line is accepted at $5,500.00.
4. The property owner has agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, notice and appeal
from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by
other statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law.
5. The property owner has agreed to pay the city for the total cost of the above improvements
through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at the interest rate of 4.00%.
6. The property owner has executed an agreement with the city and all other documents
necessary to implement the repair of the water service line and the special assessment of
all costs associated therewith.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4h
Executive summary
Title: SWLRT Subordinate Funding Agreement Amendments to Agreements #9, #10 and #11
Recommended action: Motion to approve, and authorize the City Manager to execute, SWLRT
Subordinate Funding Agreement Amendments to SFAs #9, #10 and #11.
Policy consideration: Are the proposed SWLRT SFA Amendments consistent with the City’s
existing commitments to the SWLRT project and are City’s funding sources in place to meet
those commitments?
Summary: The city council approved and entered into three Southwest Light Rail Transit
(SWLRT) Subordinate Funding Agreements (SFAs) with the Met Council in early 2017 (1/26/17
and 3/10/17). These agreements committed the City to a) funding our locally requested
additions to the SWLRT project in the amount of $1,548,536; b) funding certain elements of the
base SWLRT project in the amount of $2,062,928; and c) a $2,000,000 general contribution to
the SWLRT project.
The SFAs included a payment schedule for each of our obligations with specific payment dates
based on SWLRT beginning construction in 2017. With the delays in the start of construction,
the payment dates in the SFAs are no longer valid. The three attached SFA amendments serve
to correct this situation by providing a new schedule for payments tied to the actual start of
SWLRT construction. Specifically, they are referenced to the Met Council’s issuance of the
SWLRT Project Civil Construction Contract Limited Notice to Proceed #1. The amount of the
City’s financial commitment is unchanged; only the schedule of payments is altered. By tying
the schedule for payments to a number of days following the Limited Notice to Proceed (LNTP)
this should eliminate the need for any further amendments to the SFAs due to changes in the
construction schedule. Currently the Met Council anticipates awarding a contract for civil
construction and the LNTP yet this fall 2018.
Financial or budget considerations: The sources for funding the city’s commitments to the
SWLRT project continue to be in place and the future payments are incorporated into the city’s
long range financial plans and budgets. If the Met Council is able to issue the LNTP this fall as
they anticipate, the first payments from the city would be due 30 days later. The second
payments would be due roughly five to six months later, in the spring of 2019; and the last
payment, the final payment on our general contribution would be due in the spring of 2020.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: - Summary of Local Improvements
- SWLRT Project Subordinate Funding Agreements Amendments
Number One (3 documents)
Prepared by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Specialist
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4h) Page 2
Title: SWLRT Subordinate Funding Agreement Amendments to Agreements #9, #10 and #11
Summary of St. Louis Park’s SFA Improvements
Local Work – SFA #9
1. Beltline/CSAH 25 Intersection Improvements
2. Upgraded railing on Trail Bridge at Beltline
3. Lighting on Trail Bridge at Beltline
4. Upgraded railing on Trail Bridge at Louisiana Avenue
5. Construction related Fees for Local Work
Base Project Elements – SFA #10
1. Louisiana Station trail underpass
2. Lynn Avenue Extension and “Backage Road” at Beltline Station
3. Stairs to Trail Underpass at Wooddale Station
4. Stairs to Trail Bridge at Beltline
5. Construction related Fees for Base Project Elements
General Contribution to SWLRT Project – SFA #11
1. Contribution for Project Advancement
Sources of Funding for SFA Improvements
1. Three Rivers Park District Reimbursement
2. EDA transfer from General Fund
3. Bonding (2017)
4. TIF Pooling
5. EDA Fund
6. Bonding (2019)
Contract 14I061I Page 1
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
390 North Robert Street, St. Paul, MN 55101-1805
(651) 602-1000
AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE
to
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
Metropolitan Council Contract No. 14I061I
City of St. Louis Park and the Metropolitan Council agree that the contract entered into on March 10,
2017, relating to “Subordinate Funding Agreemement City of St. Louis Park 09 Local Work -Construction,” is
amended in the following particulars.
1.EXHIBIT A TO CONTRACT, PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR LOCAL WORK is
DELETED and REPLACED with the following:
Payment # Payable upon notice by the Council on or
before
Amount
1 30 days following SWLRT Project Civil
Construction Contract Limited Notice to
Proceed #1
75%: $1,161,402
2 154 Days Following SWLRT Project Civil
Construction Contract Limited Notice to
Proceed #1
Remaining balance:
$387,134
Except as amended hereby, the provisions of the above-referenced contract shall remain in force and effect
without change.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this amendment to be executed by their duly authorized
officers on the dates set forth below.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By: ______________________________ By: ___________________________________
(Please print name legibly below)
______________________________
Signer
Its: ______________________________ Its: Regional Administrator
Date: ______________________________ Date: ___________________________________
By: ______________________________
(Please print name legibly below)
______________________________
Its: ______________________________
Date: ______________________________
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4h)
Title: SWLRT Subordinate Funding Agreement Amendments to Agreements #9, #10 and #11 Page 3
Contract 14I061K Page 1
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
390 North Robert Street, St. Paul, MN 55101-1805
(651) 602-1000
AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE
to
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
Metropolitan Council Contract No. 14I061J
City of St. Louis Park and the Metropolitan Council agree that the contract entered into on January 26,
2017, relating to “Subordinate Funding Agreemement City of St. Louis Park 10 Base Project Work-
Construction,” is amended in the following particulars.
1.EXHIBIT B TO CONTRACT, BASE PROJECT WORK is DELETED and REPLACED
with the following:
Payment # Payable upon notice by the Council on or
before
Amount
1 30 Days Following SWLRT Project Civil
Construction Contract Limited Notice to
Proceed #1
$1,031,464
2 154 Days Following SWLRT Project Civil
Construction Contract Limited Notice to
Proceed #1
$1,031,464
Except as amended hereby, the provisions of the above-referenced contract shall remain in force and effect
without change.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this amendment to be executed by their duly authorized
officers on the dates set forth below.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By: ______________________________ By: ___________________________________
(Please print name legibly below)
______________________________
Signer
Its: ______________________________ Its: Regional Administrator
Date: ______________________________ Date: ___________________________________
By: ______________________________
(Please print name legibly below)
______________________________
Its: ______________________________
Date: ______________________________
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4h)
Title: SWLRT Subordinate Funding Agreement Amendments to Agreements #9, #10 and #11 Page 4
Contract 14I061K Page 1
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
390 North Robert Street, St. Paul, MN 55101-1805
(651) 602-1000
AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE
to
CONTRACT FOR SERVICES
Metropolitan Council Contract No. 14I061K
City of St. Louis Park and the Metropolitan Council agree that the contract entered into on January 26,
2017, relating to “Subordinate Funding Agreemement City of St. Louis Park 11 Local Funding Contribution,”
is amended in the following particulars.
1.EXHIBIT B TO CONTRACT, PAYMENT SCHEDULE FOR FUNDING
CONTRIBUTION is DELETED and REPLACED with the following:
Payment # Payable upon notice by the Council on or
before
Amount
1 30 Days Following SWLRT Project Civil
Construction Contract Limited Notice to
Proceed #1
$666,666.67
2 182 Days Following SWLRT Project Civil
Construction Contract Limited Notice to
Proceed #1
$666,666.67
3 548 Days Following SWLRT Project Civil
Construction Contract Limited Notice to
Proceed #1
$666,666.66
Except as amended hereby, the provisions of the above-referenced contract shall remain in force and effect
without change.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this amendment to be executed by their duly authorized
officers on the dates set forth below.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By: ______________________________ By: ___________________________________
(Please print name legibly below)
______________________________
Signer
Its: ______________________________ Its: Regional Administrator
Date: ______________________________ Date: ___________________________________
By: ______________________________
(Please print name legibly below)
______________________________
Its: ______________________________
Date: ______________________________
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4h)
Title: SWLRT Subordinate Funding Agreement Amendments to Agreements #9, #10 and #11 Page 5
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4i
Executive summary
Title: SWLRT Agreement for Change Orders: Subordinate Funding Agreement #12
Recommended action: Motion to approve, and authorize the mayor and city manager to
execute, Subordinate Funding Agreement 12 (SFA#12) with the Met Council regarding the
SWLRT Project.
Policy consideration: Is SFA#12 consistent with the city’s existing commitments to the SWLRT
project and will it provide for efficient, timely, cost effective decision making during
construction.
Summary: As construction of the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT) project approaches, the
Met Council has proposed that we enter into a Subordinate Funding Agreement (SFA#12) with
them to facilitate efficient handling of any change orders that may be needed during the course
of construction of the project elements which are St. Louis Park’s responsibility. Those
elements consist of our locally requested capital improvements and certain elements of the
base SWLRT project we have agreed to fund. The City’s funding commitment for these items is
covered in the previously approved Subordinate Funding Agreements 9 and 10 (SFA#9 and
SFA#10).
The change order agreement (SFA#12) lays out the procedure by which change orders will be
handled, who can approve them and how big they can be without specific approval by the City
Council. The agreement allows the City Engineer to approve change orders of up to $175,000
per change order; and, up to a total cost of $500,000 for all change orders. This is consistent
with the City’s policies regarding the City’s own construction projects. It will allow for timely,
efficient and cost effective decision making during SWLRT construction.
Financial or budget considerations: SFA#12 gives the City Engineer authority to approve
change orders up to $175,000 each and up to a total cost of $500,000.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: SWLRT Project Subordinate Funding Agreement City of St. Louis Park –
12 (Change Orders)
Prepared by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Specialist
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: SWLRT Agreement for Change Orders: Subordinate Funding Agreement #12
Reference Numbers:
SWLRT Project: 61001
Metropolitan Council: 14I061L
City of St. Louis Park: ______________
PROJECT: SOUTHWEST LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT PROJECT
MASTER AGREEMENT: Master Funding Agreement – City of St. Louis Park
PARTIES TO AGREEMENT: • Metropolitan Council (“Council”)
• City of St. Louis Park (“City”)
SUBORDINATE FUNDING AGREEMENT
City of St. Louis Park – 12 (Change Orders)
This Subordinate Funding Agreement (“SFA”) with the City of St. Louis Park is entered into by
and between the above-named Parties.
WHEREAS:
1. The Parties entered into a Southwest Light Rail Transit Project (“Project”) Master Funding
Agreement (“MFA”) effective February 3, 2015. The parties subsequently amended the
MFA on November 17, 2015.
2. The Parties provided in the MFA that certain aspects of funding for the Project would be
determined in subsequent SFAs.
3. The Project scope includes Locally Requested Capital Improvements, hereby referred to
as “Local Work,” for which the City will fund.
4. The Parties contemplate from time to time that the City will authorize transfers to the
Council for changes to Project and Local Work components and agree that execution of a
single SFA that allows the Parties to process multiple small transfers would benefit both
parties.
5. The City has delegated authority to its City Engineer as set forth below to enter into change
order agreements under this SFA.
6. The Council has delegated authority to its officers and staff as set forth below to enter into
change order agreements under this SFA.
7. The Parties desire to enter into this SFA in order to facilitate transfers of City funds to the
Council as described below.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 3
Title: SWLRT Agreement for Change Orders: Subordinate Funding Agreement #12
NOW, THEREFORE, in reliance on the statements in these recitals, the Parties hereby agree as
follows:
1. Amount of Authorized Funding. The aggregate amount of funding authorized shall not
exceed $500,000, unless authorized in a subsequent agreement or an amendment to this
SFA.
2. Specific Funding Agreement The activities to be performed by the Council and
reimbursed by the City will be described in the Change Order Authorizations, substantially
in the form outlined in Attachment 1. Upon execution, the Change Order Authorization is
integrated into and made part of this SFA. The City will reimburse the Council within 30
days after the execution of the Change Order Authorization.
3. Project Activity Periods. The project activity period for the purposes of this SFA shall be
effective upon execution and shall terminate on the date all costs under this SFA have been
reimbursed, unless terminated earlier consistent with the terms of the MFA.
4. Authorized Signers. In order for a Change Order Authorization under this SFA to be
binding on the City, it must be signed by the City Engineer (up to $175,000). In order for
the Change Order Authorization to be binding on the Council, it must be signed by one of
the following authorized signers: Council Authorized Representative (up to $10,000),
Construction Manager (up to $20,000), Assistant Director of Construction (up to $50,000),
Director of Construction (up to $100,000), Deputy Project Director (up to $250,000),
Project Director (up to $350,000) or Program Director (up to $500,000).
5. Incorporation. The terms, conditions, and definitions of the MFA are expressly
incorporated into this SFA except as modified herein.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By: By:
Its: Mayor ____ Its:
Date: __________ Date: __________
By:
Its: City Manager
Date: __________
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 4
Title: SWLRT Agreement for Change Orders: Subordinate Funding Agreement #12
Attachment 1
SUBORDINATE FUNDING AGREEMENT
City of St. Louis Park – 12 (Change Orders)
Change Order Authorization #
1. Authorized work scope/description of the change funded by this Change Order
Authorization:
.
2. Construction Contract Number # .
3. Construction Change Order # .
4. Amount payable by the City to the Council for this Change Order shall not exceed $
without further authorization from the City.
5. The asset that is the subject of this Attachment will, upon completion of the Project, be
owned by the: [City] or [Council].
6. The terms, conditions, and definitions of the Southwest Light Rail Transit Project Master
Funding Agreement dated ## and SFA ##, entered by and between the Parties, are
expressly incorporated into this Change Order Authorization.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK METROPOLITAN COUNCIL
By: By:
Its: Its:
Date: Date:
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4j
Executive summary
Title: Consent to assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract – CPW Phase II
Apartments
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving the assignment and assumption
of redevelopment contract between Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC and Elan West End
Apartments Owner, LLC relative to the Central Park West Phase II Apartment Project.
Policy consideration: Does the city council find the proposed assignment and assumption of
redevelopment contract agreement between the Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC and Elan
West End Apartments Owner, LLC acceptable and is it willing to provide its consent to the
agreement?
Summary: The Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment of May 17, 2010
between the EDA, the city, and Duke Realty LP, a portion of which was subsequently assigned
to Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC (“Redeveloper”), provides that whenever the
Redeveloper wishes to convey any portion of its property and assign its obligations under the
Contract to a third party, the EDA and the city must review and formally approve the proposed
assignment. Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC is selling its property located 1325 Utica
Avenue South to Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC (an affiliate of Greystar; a national
multifamily housing development company) who desires to assume the redeveloper’s
obligations to construct and manage the 164-unit Central Park West Phase II apartment project
per the Central Park West PUD and redevelopment contract.
As required under the Contract, the Redeveloper has provided the necessary information and
proposed assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract and has requested that the
EDA and city provide written approval of the assignment by executing the consent, estoppel
and agreement attached to the assignment. The EDA’s legal counsel has reviewed the proposed
assignment and the attached consent, and recommends the EDA and city approve and consent
to this document, which is substantially similar to previous assignment documents approved by
the EDA and city in the past.
Financial or budget considerations: Under the proposed assignment and assumption
agreement, Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC assumes the financial obligations to be
incurred by Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC under the redevelopment contract as it
pertains to the CPW Phase II property. All administrative costs associated with the agreement
are to be paid by Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Resolution
See EDA staff report for other attachments.
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Title: Consent to assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract – CPW Phase II Apartments
City of St. Louis Park
Resolution No. 18-____
Resolution approving an assignment and assumption of
redevelopment contract between
Central Park West Phase II Land, LLC and Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC
Be it resolved by the City Council ("Council") of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota ("City")
as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“Authority”) is currently
administering its Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Project") pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.001 to 469.047, and within the Project has established The West End Tax Increment
Financing District (“TIF District”).
1.02. The Authority, the City of St. Louis Park (“City”) and Duke Realty Limited Partnership
(the “Redeveloper”) entered into an Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment
Dated as of May 17, 2010, as amended (the “Contract”), regarding redevelopment of a portion of
the property within the TIF District, which Contract has been assigned in part to Central Park West
Phase II Land, LLC (“CPW”) as to the Redeveloper’s obligation to construct a 164-unit multifamily
housing facility (“Central Park West Phase II”) on a portion of the property (the “Subject
Property”).
1.03. CPW has now determined that it is in the best interest of the Project and TIF
District to convey the Subject Property to Elan West End Apartments Owner, LLC (the “Assignee”).
The Assignee intends to construct Central Park West Phase II on the Subject Property. In
connection with such conveyance, CPW seeks to assign certain of its obligations related to the
Subject Property to the Assignee, and the Assignee agrees to accept such obligations, all pursuant
to an Assignment and Assumption of Redevelopment Contract between CPW and Assignee (the
“Assignment”).
1.04. The Council has reviewed the Assignment and finds that the approval and execution
of the City’s consent thereto are in the best interest of the City and its residents.
Section 2. City approval; other proceedings.
2.01. The Assignment, including the attached Consent thereto, as presented to the
Council is hereby in all respects approved, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance
of the transaction and that are approved by the Mayor and City Manager, provided that execution
of the Consent to the Assignment by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4j) Page 3
Title: Consent to assignment and assumption of redevelopment contract – CPW Phase II Apartments
2.02. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute on behalf of the City,
the Consent attached to the Assignment and any other documents requiring execution by the City
in order to carry out the transaction described in the Assignment.
2.03. City staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to carry out
the intent of this resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jacob Spano, Mayor
Attest
City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4k
Executive summary
Title: Accept Donation from National Association of Government Web Professionals (Jason
Huber)
Recommended action: Motion to Adopt Resolution approving acceptance of a monetary
donation from the National Association of Government Web Professionals in an amount not to
exceed $2,500 for all related expenses for Jason Huber, Information Technology Manager, to
attend the 2018 National Association of Government Web Professionals National Conference in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Policy consideration: Does the City Council wish to accept the gift with restrictions on its use?
Summary: State statute requires the City Council’s acceptance of donations. This requirement is
necessary in order to make sure the City Council has knowledge of any restrictions placed on
the use of each donation prior to it being expended.
The City of St. Louis Park’s Information Technology Manager, Jason Huber, represents the
National Association of Government Web Professionals (NAGW) as their Midwest Director.
As a result of Mr. Huber’s board member status, the National Association of Government Web
Professionals will compensate all related expenses to attend National Association of
Government Web Professionals Conference, September 10-14, 2018, in Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania in an amount not to exceed $2,500.
The City Attorney has reviewed this matter. His opinion is that state law permits the payment of
such expenses by this organization, regardless of whether the funds come from primary or
secondary sources. It is treated as a gift to the city and needs to be a resolution adopted by the
City Council determining that attendance at this event serves a public purpose and accepting
the gift. The resolution needs to be adopted before attendance at the conference.
Financial or budget considerations: This donation will be used toward the expenses incurred by
Jason Huber’s attendance to the National Association of Government Web Professionals
National Conference in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Jason Huber, Information Technology Manager
Reviewed by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: Accept Donation from National Association of Government Web Professionals (Jason Huber)
Resolution No. 18-___
Resolution accepting donation from
National Association of Government Web Professionals for expenses for Jason
Huber to attend the 2018 National Association of Government Web
Professionals National Conference
Whereas, The City of St. Louis Park is required by State statute to authorize acceptance of
any donations; and
Whereas, the City Council must also ratify any restrictions placed on the donation by the
donor; and
Whereas, the National Association of Government Web Professionals will compensate all
related costs, in an amount not to exceed $2,500, for the City’s Information Technology
Manager, Jason Huber, to attend the National Association of Government Web Professionals
Conference, September 10-14, 2018, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the gift
is hereby accepted with thanks to the National Association of Government Web Professionals
with the understanding that it must be used for expenses incurred by Jason Huber to attend the
2018 National Association of Government Web Professionals National Conference held in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Minutes: 4l
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JUNE 20, 2018 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Matt Eckholm, Jessica Kraft, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Lisa Peilen, Carl Robertson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Joe Tatalovich
STAFF PRESENT: Gary Morrison, Greg Hunt
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of May 16, 2018 and May 30, 2018
Commissioner Peilen made a motion to approve the May 16, 2018 minutes.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a
vote of 5-0-1 (Robertson abstained).
Commissioner Eckholm noted his name needed to be corrected in the May 30, 2018
minutes. Commissioner Peilen made a motion to approve the May 30, 2018 minutes as
corrected. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 5-0-1 (Carper abstained).
3. Public Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit – Light of the World Church
Location: 6713 and 6719 Cedar Lake Road
Applicant: Light of the World Church
Case No: 18-21-CUP
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He stated
the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to operate a religious institution at
6713 and 6719 Cedar Lake Road, and to expand the existing parking lot.
Mr. Morrison described the variances requested for fence height from eight feet to six
feet and number of required parking spaces from 76 to 60.
Commissioner Peilen asked if the current level of parking is adequate for the use.
Mr. Morrison deferred the question to the applicant.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 2
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 20, 2018
Commissioner Peilen asked why the fence needs to be reduced in height, asking if it was
cost.
Mr. Morrison responded that cost would be a factor, but conversations were held with
neighbors about a proposed 8 ft. fence. Neighbors indicated that they desired a 6 ft.
fence, especially the neighbor to the east. The 8 ft. fence would be outside that
neighbor’s windows and it would create shading and a kind of barrier.
Commissioner Kraft asked if the 8 ft. fence would block parking lot lights more than a 6
ft. fence would.
Mr. Morrison said the photometric plan shows that the light levels diminish well below
the property line and lights are all downcast as required by code.
Chair Robertson asked if there was any discussion about additional plantings along the
fence to create a taller buffer providing extra screening.
Mr. Morrison responded staff did have the applicant focus some of their tree plantings
in that area. Those plantings will start out small but the anticipation is that the canopy
will provide additional screening above the 6 foot fence.
The Chair asked if the parking requirement is based on square footage, occupants or
tables.
Mr. Morrison said the occupancy was based on the fixed seats in the sanctuary. In the
dining hall occupancy was based on square footage.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked why a conditional use permit for a church was
required at this time.
Mr. Morrison responded that a place of worship is allowed in a residential area by
conditional use permit, however that wasn’t always the case. Light of the World does
not have a conditional use permit, so it is operating legally non-conforming to code. A
church is allowed to continue without a conditional use permit until changes are made
to the property, such as the proposed parking lot expansion.
Igor Kondratyuk, associate pastor, representing the applicant, said the congregation is
growing and it has outgrown the parking lot.
In response to the Chair’s question about access, Mr. Morrison said a staff
recommendation is that the entrance/exit to Cedar Lake Rd. be converted to a two-way.
The Chair opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, he closed
the public hearing.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 3
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 20, 2018
The Chair said he liked what the applicant is doing, including improvements to
accessibility and stormwater management.
Commissioner Carper said he agreed with the city’s recommendation regarding the
entrance/exit on Cedar Lake Rd.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending approval of the conditional use
permit and variances as recommended by staff. Commissioner Johnston-Madison
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
4. Other Business
A. Consideration of Resolution No. 92 – Bridgewater Bank TIF District Plan
Conformance to City’s Redevelopment Plans
Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator, presented the staff report.
Commissioner Carper asked about assessment of $18-20 million upon project
completion and estimated construction costs of $36 million.
Mr. Hunt said in this case construction costs do not necessarily translate to assessed
value, particularly when there are high extraordinary costs and significant customized
requirements with minimal market value to the property.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison spoke about the mixed use definition and asked the
Chair whether he thought that definition is stretched with this development.
The Chair responded he has had issues with the city’s mixed use for many years. He said
he looks at the Bridgewater development as a mixed use development. He added that a
mixed use with residential requesting TIF is required to have an affordability
component. But, a mixed use with office and commercial requiring TIF does not have an
affordability component. He said the city should delve into the need for affordable
commercial space. Chair Robertson said this is critical in the city and we are losing it to
projects like this. He said he is bothered that we are looking at TIF for this project but
did not require affordable commercial space for it. He said he supports this project for
TIF but his concerns are for future discussion on an agenda as it does open up many
more questions.
Commissioner Peilen said she agrees and requests that these ideas be put on an agenda,
including at the council level.
Commissioners Johnston-Madison, Carper and Eckholm also agreed.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion to adopt Resolution No. 92 finding that the Tax
Increment Financing Plan for the Bridgewater Bank Tax Increment Financing District is in
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 4
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes June 20, 2018
conformance with the general plans for the development and redevelopment of the City
of St. Louis Park. Commissioner Eckholm seconded the motion, and the motion passed
on a vote of 5-1 (Johnston-Madison opposed).
B. Resolution No. 93 recognizing Commissioner Torrey Kanne
The Chair read Resolution No. 93 and Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion
recommending approval. Commissioner Peilen seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 6-0.
C. Resolution No. 94 recognizing Commissioner Richard Person
The Chair read Resolution No. 94 and Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion
recommending approval. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 6-0.
5. Communications
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Minutes: 4m
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
JULY 11, 2018 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Matt Eckholm, Jessica Kraft, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Carl Robertson, Alanna Franklin (youth member)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lisa Peilen, Joe Tatalovich
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Jacquelyn Kramer, Jennifer Monson
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of June 6, 2018
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion approving the minutes of June 6,
2018. Commissioner Carper seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of
5-0.
3. Public Hearings
A. Zoning code amendment: accessory uses in industrial districts
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 18-27-ZA
Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She explained that
the request would allow greater amount of gross floor area in breweries to be used for
any combination of retail and taproom. It would also allow outdoor seating and service
of food and beverage as an accessory use.
The Chair asked about the reason for the request.
Ms. Kramer responded there was an inquiry from a business to add outdoor seating in
the IG General Industrial zoning district, and staff concluded the amendments would
add consistency to the zoning code.
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, added that a distillery in the I-G General
Industrial zoning district has inquired about adding an outdoor seating area which led to
a review of the zoning code.
Commissioner Carper asked for clarification on food service in the proposed language.
Ms. Kramer stated this doesn’t allow restaurants in breweries. It would allow an
outdoor patio next to the brewery; patrons could bring their own food, but it doesn’t
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 2
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes July 11, 2018
create a pathway for restaurant or food service in the brewery. She noted that
limitations have been included on the outdoor seating to minimize impacts on
residential area.
Commissioner Carper asked about food trucks at breweries.
Ms. Kramer responded that food trucks must have a permit to operate. The proposed
amendments do not change how the food trucks may operate on the site.
The Chair opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, he
closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion recommending approval of the zoning
code amendment to modify conditions applied to breweries and allow outdoor seating
and service of food and beverage as an accessory use in industrial zoning districts, as
recommended by staff. Commissioner Eckholm seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 5-0.
4. Other Business
5. Communications
Mr. Walther noted that updated rules and procedures for city boards and commissions
were distributed.
Mr. Walther said a study session will be held on July 18. The discussion topics will be
2040 Comp Plan preliminary survey results and retail and service size requirements.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 6:12 p.m.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 3
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes July 11, 2018
STUDY SESSION MINUTES
Alanna Franklin, newly appointed youth member, introduced herself to the Planning
Commission.
1. Electric Vehicle Charging Stations Ordinance
Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, introduced the topic. She reviewed revisions made to the
draft ordinance since the commission last discussed it. She asked the commission to consider
policy questions regarding incentives the city may offer to businesses and developers to aid in
compliance; as well as what criteria should apply to existing buildings and businesses.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if it could be a special assessment. She said it would be
a good idea to incorporate existing buildings and businesses.
The Chair said existing buildings need to be incentivized.
Ms. Kramer said the idea of special assessment has been considered by staff.
Mr. Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, spoke about using the existing fire sprinkler
special assessment as a model. It is a voluntary program that allows property owners to request
that the city reimburse expenses and essentially finance the project through a special
assessment against the property.
The Chair said retrofitting will be expensive and will require incentive.
Commissioner Carper said it’s appropriate to offer incentives. He suggested a limited time
period on those incentives being available based upon number of electric vehicles that exist in
the driving population. At some point it needs to be required without incentive.
The Chair said residential buildings don’t need incentives as tenants and the market will require
charging stations. He discussed capturing some kind of a fee from the user.
There was a discussion about existing options for user payment. The proposed code would not
address how the charging stations are managed or if payment is required.
Mr. Walther spoke about statewide strategies regarding incentivizing charging stations. One of
the focuses includes establishing a system of charging stations along the interstate network.
He said the city is also collaborating with multiple jurisdictions in looking at how to provide
infrastructure on city properties, r-o-w and possible conversion to electric vehicles.
Commissioner Eckholm asked about the feasibility of level 3 requirements for any future gas
station renovations.
The Chair asked if discussions have been held with Xcel about incentives and off-peak rates.
Commissioner Carper asked about safety requirements for EV charging stations.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 4
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes July 11, 2018
Ms. Kramer responded safety requirements would be part of the building code requirements
and/or fire inspection requirements.
2. Mixed Use District
Jennifer Monson, Planner, introduced the topic. She presented proposed amendments which
have developed from previous commission discussions.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison commented that she would like to see opportunities for
outdoor gathering spaces similar to “parklets” and gave examples of the outdoor seating in the
West End.
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Administrator, discussed ways to create those kinds of
spaces and making corners more active. He spoke about the Ellipse development. He
mentioned the staircase on the corner of the 4800.
The Chair commented that a visual like the staircase is good when it is also useful.
Comments were made about Fresh Thyme.
Commissioner Eckholm spoke about secondary frontage and transparency.
Ms. Monson said staff will work up some case studies on where these MX buildings will go,
based on land use guidance in the 2040 Comp Plan and requirements.
The Chair spoke about maximum building length. He suggested doing a tour of examples.
Commissioner Eckholm spoke about Bloomington’s rezoning of the Southtown development
and how it is becoming more of a mixed use urban area. He said some of St. Louis Park’s older
strip malls are still guided commercial under the 2040 plan. He asked if some of these areas
might be better served as mixed use if the large commercial uses leave.
3. Window Transparency Ordinance
Ms. Monson introduced the topic. She said the Council discussed window transparency at its
July 16 study session and wants to look further at regulations for transparency requirements;
particularly for high pedestrian areas and ground floor retail. She said staff is asking for the
commission’s guidance on how to craft and apply the proposed regulations.
The Chair commented that it’s hard to provide flexibility. What can you do to meet the intent
but still meet your needs.
Commissioner Kraft asked about levels of transparency, and reasons why it might not be 100%
transparent.
Ms. Monson spoke about the amount of depth between the pedestrian level and the use.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 5
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes July 11, 2018
The Chair spoke about the difficulty of providing transparency and privacy.
Ms. Monson provided transparency requirement examples at Excelsior & Grand, Shops at West
End, Elmwood, PLACE and Bridgewater.
The Chair stated that visual in/visual out is an important element.
Commissioner Kraft asked how violations are handled.
Staff responded that similar to signage, there is enforcement.
Commissioner Carper said he’d like to see something that shows what exists today to see all the
variation; for example on Excelsior Blvd. He spoke about businesses also needing to function
and losing important sales space to transparency requirements.
Commissioner Kraft spoke about Byerly’s downtown which is very active, very glassy and has
lots of display.
The Chair asked if we are looking at particular uses or particular streets.
Mr. Walther responded we are still considering applying the rules based upon both the uses on
the first floor and the adjacency to the streets.
Ms. Monson remarked that uses can change. If requirements are based on street location the
transparency might not be workable everywhere but there may be other alternative elements
that could be added to make it more pedestrian friendly.
Ms. Monson said staff will come up with examples for review.
The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Action agenda item: 5a
Executive summary
Title: Appointment of youth representatives to boards and commissions
Recommended action: Motion to appoint Katherine Christiansen to the Environment and
Sustainability Commission (ESC) and Rachel Salzer to the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Commission (PRAC) as youth members for one year terms beginning August 31, 2018.
Policy consideration: Having youth serving on boards and commissions is consistent with
council policy.
Summary: The city received applications for reappointment from Katherine Christiansen and
Rachel Salzer to serve as youth members on the Environment and Sustainability Commission
(ESC) and Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) respectively. Both applicants are
extremely impressive students who are interested in dedicating their time to service in the
community.
Youth members are appointed to one-year terms, beginning on August 31 of each year.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Maria Carrillo Perez, Management Assistant
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Public hearing: 6a
Executive summary
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy
Recommended action: The mayor is asked to open the public hearing, take testimony, and
then close the public hearing. No other action is recommended. Another discussion on the
policy and the input received will be scheduled for a future council study session.
Policy consideration: Will the draft body-worn camera policy help meet the intended goals of
assisting in the collection of evidence, writing accurate reports, and provide for greater
transparency and accountability?
Summary: Minnesota State Statute 626.8473 requires that a police department provide the
community an opportunity for public comment before it purchases or implements a portable
recording system. After undertaking a process of developing a policy with the help of police
staff, the PAC, the HRC and MAC, on July 30 a draft body worn camera policy was posted on the
city website to provide opportunity for public comments. Attached are the comments received
through August 14, 2018.
Financial or budget considerations: Based on the contents of the policy, the startup cost of the
body worn camera program is estimated to be $200,000 in 2018-2019 with an additional
$100,000 annually in software and maintenance fees. Funding for the body worn camera
program is included in the city’s capital plan.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to creating opportunities to build
social capital through community engagement.
Supporting documents: Body worn camera draft policy
Public comments 07-30-18 through 08-14-18
Prepared by: Mike Harcey, Police Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 1
City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Use of Body-Worn Camera’s Policy
Purpose
The primary purpose of using body-worn-cameras (BWCs) is to:
A.Capture evidence arising from a police-citizen contact.
B.Assist with accurate report writing.
C.Allow for transparency and accountability in policing.
This policy sets forth guidelines governing the use of BWCs and administering the data that
results. Compliance with these guidelines is mandatory, but it is recognized that officers must
also attend to other primary duties and the safety of all concerned, sometimes in circumstances
that are tense, uncertain, and rapidly evolving.
Objectives
The St. Louis Park Police Department has adopted the use of portable audio/video recorders to
accomplish the following objectives:
A.To enhance officer safety.
B.To document statements and events during the course of an incident.
C.To enhance the officers ability to document and review statements and actions for
both internal reporting requirements and for courtroom preparation/presentation.
D.To preserve audio and visual information for use in current and future investigations.
E.To enhance the public trust by preserving factual representations of officer-citizen
interactions in the form of audio-video recording.
F.To assist with the defense of civil actions against police officers and the City of St.
Louis Park.
G.To assist with training and evaluation of officers.
Policy
It is the policy of this department to authorize and require the use of department-issued BWCs as
set forth below, and to administer BWC data as provided by law.
Scope
This policy governs the use of BWCs in the course of official duties. It does not apply to the use
of squad-based (dash-cam) recording systems. The Chief of Police or the chief’s designee may
supersede this policy by providing specific instructions for BWC use to individual officers, or
providing specific instructions pertaining to particular events or classes of events, including but
not limited to political rallies and demonstrations where their use might be perceived as a form of
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 2
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 2
political or viewpoint-based surveillance. The chief or designee may also provide specific
instructions or standard operating procedures for BWC use to officers assigned to specialized
details, such as carrying out duties in courts or guarding prisoners or patients in hospitals and
mental health facilities. In the event the chief does supersede policy by providing specific
instructions for use, a written report will be submitted to the City Manager.
Definitions
The following phrases have special meanings as used in this policy:
A.MGDPA or Data Practices Act refers to the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act,
Minn. Stat. § 13.01, et seq.
B.Records Retention Schedule refers to the General Records Retention Schedule for
Minnesota Cities.
C.Law enforcement-related information means information captured or available for
capture by use of a BWC that has evidentiary value because it documents events with
respect to a stop, arrest, search, citation, or charging decision.
D.Evidentiary value means that the information may be useful as proof in a prosecution or
defense of a criminal action, related civil or administrative proceeding, further
investigation of an actual or suspected criminal act, or in considering an allegation
against a law enforcement agency or officer.
E.General citizen contact means an informal encounter with a citizen that is not and does
not become law enforcement-related or adversarial, and a recording of the event would
not yield information relevant to an ongoing investigation. Examples include, but are not
limited to, assisting a motorist with directions, summoning a wrecker, or receiving
generalized concerns from a citizen about crime trends in his or her neighborhood.
F.Adversarial means a law enforcement encounter with a person that becomes
confrontational, during which at least one person expresses anger, resentment, or hostility
toward the other, or at least one person directs toward the other verbal conduct consisting
of arguing, threatening, challenging, swearing, yelling, or shouting. Encounters in which
a citizen demands to be recorded or initiates recording on his or her own are deemed
adversarial.
G.Unintentionally recorded footage is a video recording that results from an officer’s
inadvertence or neglect in operating the officer’s BWC, provided that no portion of the
resulting recording has evidentiary value. Examples of unintentionally recorded footage
include, but are not limited to, recordings made in station house locker rooms, restrooms,
and recordings made while officers were engaged in conversations of a non-business,
personal nature with the expectation that the conversation was not being recorded.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 3
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 3
H.Official duties, for purposes of this policy, means that the officer is on duty and
performing authorized law enforcement services on behalf of this agency.
Training
All users of a BWC will be trained on the cameras operation and this policy prior to deploying
one.
Use and Documentation
A.Officers may use only department-issued BWCs in the performance of official duties for
this agency or when otherwise performing authorized law enforcement services as an
employee of this department.
B.All officers working uniform patrol, uniform special details, traffic duties, and uniform
school resource officer duties shall use a BWC unless permission has been granted by a
supervisor to deviate from this clause. Plain clothes investigators/officers and
administrators are allowed to use BWC when interacting with citizens, when appropriate.
C.Officers who have deployed a BWC shall operate and use them consistent with this
policy. Officers shall conduct a function test of their issued BWCs at the beginning of
each shift to make sure the devices are operating properly. Officers noting a malfunction
during testing or at any other time shall promptly report the malfunction to the officer’s
supervisor and shall document the report in writing. As soon as is practical, the
malfunctioning BWC shall be put down for service and the officer should deploy a
working BWC. If a BWC malfunctions while recording, is lost, or damaged the
circumstances shall be documented in a police report and a supervisor shall be notified.
Supervisors shall take prompt action to address malfunctions and document the steps
taken in writing.
D.Officers should wear their BWC in a conspicuous manner at the location on their body
and manner specified in training.
E.Officers must document BWC use and non-use as follows:
1. Whenever an officer makes a recording, the existence of the recording shall be
documented in the records management system, an incident report, or a citation if
completed.
2. Whenever an officer fails to record an activity that is required to be recorded under
this policy or captures only a part of the activity, the officer must document the
circumstances and reasons for not recording in the records management system or
incident report. Supervisors shall review these reports and initiate any corrective
action deemed necessary.
F.The department will maintain the following records and documents relating to BWC use,
which are classified as public data:
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 4
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 4
1. The total number of BWCs owned or maintained by the agency;
2. A daily record of the total number of BWCs actually deployed and used by officers
and, if applicable, the precincts in which they were used;
3. The total amount of recorded BWC data collected and maintained; and
4. This policy, together with the Records Retention Schedule.
General Guidelines for Recording
A.This policy is not intended to describe every possible situation in which the BWC should
be activated, although there are many situations where use of the BWC is appropriate.
Officers should activate the BWC any time the user believes it would be appropriate or
valuable to record an incident.
B.Officers shall activate their BWCs when anticipating that they will be involved in,
become involved in, or witness other officers of this agency involved in a pursuit, Terry
stop of a motorist or pedestrian, search, seizure, arrest, response to resistance, adversarial
contact, and during other activities likely to yield information having evidentiary value.
However, officers need not activate their cameras when it would be unsafe, impossible,
or impractical to do so, but such instances of not recording when otherwise required must
be documented as specified in the Use and Documentation guidelines, part (E)(2)
(above).
C.Officers have discretion to record or not record general citizen contacts.
D.Officers will wear their camera in a conspicuous manner as specified in training. Officers
have no affirmative duty to inform people that a BWC is being operated or that the
individuals are being recorded. Officers may make an announcement that BWCs are
being used.
E.Once activated, the BWC should continue recording until the conclusion of the incident
or encounter, or until it becomes apparent that additional recording is unlikely to capture
information having evidentiary value. The supervisor having charge of a scene shall
likewise direct the discontinuance of recording when further recording is unlikely to
capture additional information having evidentiary value. If the recording is discontinued
while an investigation, response, or incident is ongoing, officers shall state the reasons for
ceasing the recording on camera before deactivating their BWC. If circumstances change,
officers shall reactivate their cameras as required by this policy to capture information
having evidentiary value. Any decision to discontinue recording shall be made with
respect to the seven policy objectives.
F.Officers shall not intentionally block the BWC’s audio or visual recording functionality
to defeat the purposes of this policy. This does not prevent an officer from temporarily
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 5
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 5
blocking the visual recording while ensuring audio data is collected during an encounter
with persons who are nude or when sensitive human areas are exposed.
G.Notwithstanding any other provision in this policy, officers shall not use their BWCs or
any other device to record other agency personnel during non-enforcement related
activities, such as during pre- and post-shift time in locker rooms, during meal breaks, or
during other private conversations, unless recording is authorized as part of a criminal
investigation.
Special Guidelines for Recording
Officers may, in the exercise of sound discretion, determine:
A.To use their BWCs to record any police-citizen encounter if there is reason to believe the
recording would potentially yield information having evidentiary value, unless such
recording is otherwise expressly prohibited.
B.To use their BWCs to take recorded statements from persons believed to be victims of
and witnesses to crimes, and persons suspected of committing crimes, considering the
needs of the investigation and the circumstances pertaining to the victim, witness, or
suspect. The preferred method of recording a formal statement from a victim, witness or
suspect is using currently approved audio recording devices/software compatible with
records management dictation software.
In addition,
C.Officers need not record persons being provided medical care unless there is reason to
believe the recording would document information having evidentiary value. When
responding to an apparent mental health crisis or event, BWCs shall be activated as
necessary to document any response to resistance and the basis for it, and any other
information having evidentiary value, but need not be activated when doing so would
serve only to record symptoms or behaviors believed to be attributable to the mental
health issue.
D.Officers should use their BWC and/or squad-based audio/video systems to record their
transportation and the physical transfer of persons in their custody to hospitals, detox and
mental health care facilities, juvenile detention centers, and jails, but otherwise should
not record in these facilities unless the officer anticipates witnessing a criminal event or
being involved in or witnessing an adversarial encounter or response to resistance
incident.
School Resource Officers
The St. Louis Park Police Department recognizes that the duties and working environment for
School Resource Officers (SRO) are unique within policing. It recognizes the SROs are required
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 6
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 6
to maintain school safety while keeping the sanctity of the learning environment that the school
provides. SROs are expected to continuously build trusting relationships with students and staff.
SROs often have impromptu interventions with students to deescalate arguments and/or
conflicts. It is with this understanding that the St. Louis Park Police Department provide special
guidelines for SROs and their BWC.
The BWC should be activated in any of the following situations:
(a) When summoned by any individual to respond to an incident where it is likely that law
enforcement action will occur when you arrive.
(b) Any self-initiated activity where it is previously known that you will make a custodial
arrest.
(c) Any self-initiated activity where it is previously known that you’re questioning /
investigation will be used later in a criminal charge.
(d) When feasible an SRO shall activate the BWC when the contact becomes adversarial or
the subject exhibits unusual behaviors.
Nothing in the policy undermines the fact that in many instances SROs are suddenly forced to
take law enforcement action and have no opportunity to activate the BWC. It is also recognized
that SROs have private (confidential) conversations with juveniles. It is not always appropriate to
record these conversations as it diminishes the trust between the individual and the SRO.
Downloading and Labeling Data
A.Each officer using a BWC is responsible for transferring or assuring the proper transfer of
the data from their camera to the BWC server by the end of that officer’s shift. However,
if the officer is involved in a shooting, in-custody death, or other law enforcement
activity resulting in death or great bodily harm, a supervisor or investigator shall take
custody of the officer’s BWC and consult with their supervisor.
B.Officers shall label the BWC data files at the conclusion of each video capture and should
consult with a supervisor if in doubt as to the appropriate labeling.
1.Evidence—criminal: The information has evidentiary value with respect to an actual
or suspected criminal incident or charging decision.
2.Evidence—response to resistance: Whether or not enforcement action was taken or
an arrest resulted, the event involved the application of force by a law enforcement
officer of this or another agency.
3.Evidence—property: Whether or not enforcement action was taken or an arrest
resulted, an officer seized property from an individual or directed an individual to
dispossess property.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 7
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 7
4.Evidence—administrative: The incident involved an adversarial encounter or
resulted in a complaint against the officer.
5.Evidence—other: The recording has potential evidentiary value for reasons
identified by the officer at the time of labeling.
6.Training: The event was such that it may have value for training.
7.Not evidence: The recording does not contain any of the foregoing categories of
information and has no apparent evidentiary value. Recordings of general citizen
contacts and unintentionally recorded footage are not evidence.
C.In addition, officers shall label each file appropriately, in the manner specified in training,
with the appropriate label to indicate the information it contains. Some data subjects may
have rights under the MGDPA limiting disclosure of information about them. These
individuals include:
1. Victims and alleged victims of criminal sexual conduct and sex trafficking.
2. Victims of child abuse or neglect.
3. Vulnerable adults who are victims of maltreatment.
4. Undercover officers.
5. Informants.
6. When the video is clearly offensive to common sensitivities.
7. Victims of and witnesses to crimes, if the victim or witness has requested not to be
identified publicly.
8. Individuals who called 911, and services subscribers whose lines were used to place a
call to the 911 system.
9. Mandated reporters.
10. Juvenile witnesses, if the nature of the event or activity justifies protecting the
identity of the witness.
11. Juveniles who are or may be delinquent or engaged in criminal acts.
12. Individuals who make complaints about violations with respect to the use of real
property.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 8
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 8
13. Officers and employees who are the subject of a complaint related to the events
captured on video.
14. Other individuals whose identities the officer believes may be legally protected from
public disclosure.
D.Labeling and flagging designations may be corrected or amended based on additional
information.
Administering Access to BWC Data
A.Data subjects. Under Minnesota law, the following are considered data subjects for
purposes of administering access to BWC data:
1. Any person or entity whose image or voice is documented in the data.
2. The officer who collected the data.
3. Any other officer whose voice or image is documented in the data, regardless of
whether that officer is or can be identified by the recording.
B.BWC data is presumptively private. BWC recordings are classified as private data
about the data subjects unless there is a specific law that provides differently. As a result:
1. BWC data pertaining to people is presumed private, as is BWC data pertaining to
businesses or other entities.
2. Some BWC data is classified as confidential (see C. below).
3. Some BWC data is classified as public (see D. below).
C.Confidential data. BWC data that is collected or created as part of an active criminal
investigation is confidential. This classification takes precedence over the “private”
classification listed above and the “public” classifications listed below.
D.Public data. The following BWC data is public:
1. Data documenting the discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty,
other than for training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured, or dangerous.
2. Data that documents the use of force by a peace officer that results in substantial
bodily harm.
3. Data that a data subject requests to be made accessible to the public, subject to
redaction. Data on any data subject (other than a peace officer) who has not consented
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 9
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 9
to the public release must be redacted [if practicable]. In addition, any data on
undercover officers must be redacted.
4. Data that documents the final disposition of a disciplinary action against a public
employee.
However, if another provision of the Data Practices Act classifies data as private or
otherwise not public, the data retains that other classification. For instance, data that
reveals protected identities under Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17 (e.g., certain victims,
witnesses, and others) should not be released even if it would otherwise fit into one of the
public categories listed above.
E.Access to BWC data by non-employees. Officers shall refer members of the media or
public seeking access to BWC data to the lieutenant in charge of investigations, who shall
process the request in accordance with the St. Louis Park Police Department’s applicable
processes and policies and other governing laws. In particular:
1. An individual shall be allowed to review recorded BWC data about themself and
other data subjects in the recording, but access shall not be granted:
a.If the data was collected or created as part of an active investigation.
b. To portions of the data that the agency would otherwise be prohibited by law
from disclosing to the person seeking access, such as portions that would
reveal identities protected by Minn. Stat. § 13.82, subd. 17.
2. Unless the data is part of an active investigation, an individual data subject shall be
provided with a copy of the recording upon request, but subject to the following
guidelines on redaction:
a.Data on other individuals in the recording who do not consent to the release
must be redacted.
b. Data that would identify undercover officers must be redacted.
c.Data on other officers who are not undercover, and who are on duty and
engaged in the performance of official duties, may not be redacted.
F.Access by peace officers and law enforcement employees. No employee may have
access to the department’s BWC data except for legitimate law enforcement or data
administration purposes:
1. Officers may access and view stored BWC video only when there is a business need
for doing so, including the need to defend against an allegation of misconduct or
substandard performance. Officers may review video footage of an incident in which
they were involved prior to preparing a report, giving a statement, or providing
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 10
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 10
testimony about the incident. Officers shall not use the fact that a recording was made
as a reason to write a less detailed report.
2. Supervisors may view recordings at any time they are making inquiry into an alleged
complaint, performance issue, or policy violation.
3. Agency personnel are prohibited from accessing BWC data for non-business reasons
and from sharing the data for non-law enforcement related purposes, including but
not limited to uploading BWC data recorded or maintained by this agency to public
and social media websites. All incidents of access to BWC data are digitally logged.
Allegations of inappropriate access to BWC data will be investigated and based on
the finding, discipline may result.
4. Employees seeking access to BWC data for non-business reasons may make a request
for it in the same manner as any member of the public.
G.Other authorized disclosures of data. Officers may display portions of BWC footage to
witnesses as necessary for purposes of investigation as allowed by Minn. Stat. § 13.82,
subd. 15, as may be amended from time to time. These displays will generally be limited
in order to protect against the incidental disclosure of individuals whose identities are not
public. Any displays will take place at the St. Louis Park Police Department with the
approval of a supervisor. Protecting against incidental disclosure could involve, for
instance, showing only a portion of the video, showing only screen shots, muting the
audio, or playing the audio but not displaying video. In addition,
1. An officer may request a supervisor respond to the scene and request approval for a
display to take place outside the St. Louis Park Police Department.
2. BWC data may be shared with other law enforcement agencies only for legitimate
law enforcement purposes that are documented in writing at the time of the
disclosure.
3. BWC data shall be made available to prosecutors, courts, and other criminal justice
entities as provided by law.
Data Security Safeguards
A.Personally owned devices, including but not limited to computers and mobile devices,
shall not be programmed or used to access or view agency BWC data.
B.Officers shall not intentionally edit, alter, or erase any BWC recording unless otherwise
expressly authorized by the Chief of Police or the Chief’s designee.
C.As required by Minn. Stat. § 13.825, subd. 9, as may be amended from time to time, this
agency shall obtain an independent biennial audit of its BWC program.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 11
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 11
Agency Use of Data
A.To ensure compliance with this policy and to identify any performance areas in which
additional training or guidance is required supervisors will review each officer’s BWC
recordings during each officer’s trimester evaluation or more frequently if there is
reason to do so.
B.In addition, supervisors and other assigned personnel may access BWC data for the
purposes of reviewing or investigating a specific incident that has given rise to a
complaint or concern about officer misconduct or performance.
C.Nothing in this policy limits or prohibits the use of BWC data as evidence of
misconduct or as a basis for discipline.
D.Officers should contact their supervisors to discuss retaining and using BWC footage
for training purposes. Officer objections to preserving or using certain footage for
training will be considered by the chief of Police on a case-by-case basis. Field training
officers may utilize BWC data with trainees for the purpose of providing coaching and
feedback on the trainees’ performance.
Data Retention
A.All BWC data shall be retained for a minimum period of 90 days. There are no
exceptions for erroneously recorded or non-evidentiary data.
B.Data documenting the discharge of a firearm by a peace officer in the course of duty,
other than for training or the killing of an animal that is sick, injured, or dangerous, must
be maintained for a minimum period of one year.
C.Certain kinds of BWC data must be retained for six years:
1. Data that documents the use of deadly force by a peace officer, or force of a sufficient
type or degree to require a response to resistance report or supervisory review.
2. Data documenting circumstances that have given rise to a formal complaint against an
officer.
D.Other data having evidentiary value shall be retained for the period specified in the
Records Retention Schedule. When a particular recording is subject to multiple retention
periods, it shall be maintained for the longest applicable period.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 12
DRAFT
07-17-18
7/17/2018
Body-Worn Cameras Draft Page 12
E.Subject to Part F (below), all other BWC footage that is classified as non-evidentiary,
becomes classified as non-evidentiary, or is not maintained for training shall be destroyed
after 90 days.
F.Upon written request by a BWC data subject, the agency shall retain a recording
pertaining to that subject for an additional time period requested by the subject of up to 1
year. The agency will notify the requestor at the time of the request that the data will then
be destroyed unless a new written request is received.
G.The department shall maintain an inventory of BWC recordings having evidentiary value.
H.The department will post this policy, together with a link to its Records Retention
Schedule, on its website.
I.In the event that a BWC data file is mislabeled by an officer, or additional information is
gained that suggests a data file label should be changed, a request to change a label and
reasoning for said change shall be forwarded to the lieutenant in charge of investigations
or their designee.
Compliance
Supervisors shall monitor for compliance with this policy. The unauthorized access to or
disclosure of BWC data may constitute misconduct and subject individuals to disciplinary action
and criminal penalties pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13.09.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 13
Comments from Online Sources (22)
I'm in favor of officers wearing body cameras that are turned on for any interaction with the public. We
have the technology to support transparency and I think we're fortunate this technology is available to
protect both our officers and the public.
I support the use of body-worn cameras for St. Louis Park police officers. Video provides excellent
evidence opportunities when there is a conflict between police and the community. It is a benefit for
both the officers and the public. It will help support an officer when he/she is following policy and will
help weed out officers who should not be on a police force.
I am pro body cameras worn by Police Department. SLP resident since 2011
It doesn't seem that occurrences happen to the level of needing them. Minneapolis needs them as they
have such a large amount of lawsuits per capita where the cameras can help bring down the $60 million
awarded in the past ten years. Some justified while others weren't. Saint Louis Park doesn't need police
body cameras.
Accountability must be maintained in all levels of enforcement. Body cams are a must for holding all
parties accountable
Objective number 1 should be:
A) To enhance Public safety
Adversarial definition - a citizen initiating a recording on his or her own is considered adversarial?
I completely support the use of BWCs for both public safety and peace officer protection. In the recent
officer involved shooting in Mpls, the footage clearly supports the use of force by the officers. If there
are bad actors on either side of the incident, it is better to have this recorded so the story is clear for
the public. We will only improve as a society if full disclosure and visibility is maintained. Nothing good
grows in the shadows.
I think the cameras are a good idea. Cameras should be able to protect both the civilians and the police
officers.
I think it’s a great idea and if it will help with the safety officers and provide extra protection to
everyone involved in an interaction I say do it!
I am completely in favor of body cameras for police. It will protect them from any lies told by supposed
witnesses. I’m in favor of anything that protects our police officers from harm. After all, they risk their
lives now every time they put on that uniform. We need to do everything possible to protect them from
harm.
My feelings are that if the use of cameras will allow the police to be more comfortable in doing their
jobs (i.e. not afraid to act due to public backlash) then use of cameras is a positive thing. If they are used
to have a second pair of eyes on the police themselves and to question their motives, then it’s a
negative thing. We need to trust the police and my thoughts are really based on the intent of the use.
Body-cams worn by police is a plus for all.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 14
Thank you for your consideration of the implementation of the use of body cameras for SLP police. I am
a strong supporter of the use of body cams for our officers. I do hope that with the new cameras,
comes ample training. It seems oftentimes we hear in the news that officers new to the use of body
cameras do not have them on at the time of an event in question. The footage not only protects the
public from inappropriate conduct, it protects the officers against unfounded accusations during
incidents that would be called into question. I hope too that we can have a robust police force in SLP
that has ample de-escalation and mental health training and resources to foster and promote the least
violent responses possible by our officers, whose goal is to serve and protect. If this means we pay
more in taxes, I'm all for it. We do not want to follow suit with Mpls., St. Paul, St. Anthony and other
communities who have had problems in the past few years. Thank you for your time and consideration.
I am not able to attend the meetings around this topic, but I read the draft policy. I think it is a good
policy and I am in favor of instituting this policy. Police body-worn cameras are the most direct way to
build trust and accountability through transparency. Body-worn cameras protect both citizens and
police officers.
Please institute this policy. It would make me proud of our city for being leaders of this policy, and it will
make me feel safer as a citizen.
Thank you for allowing our input.
OK with me. I think it will be good for the police.
BWC should be turned on for every interaction. The policy as currently written doesn't include routine
traffic stops such as the one where Philando Castille was killed. There is no way to predict when an
interaction will turn critical.
Officers should be required to submit their report before viewing the video. It is important to preserve
the officer's state of mind when making decisions (for example, use of force decisions) before seeing
the video. A supplemental report can be filed after viewing the video. Would we let the suspect view
the video before making their statement? Perhaps this requirement could be limited to Use of Force (all
levels) incidents to streamline reporting in routine cases?
No one, not even the Chief, should be authorized to edit, alter or erase original BWC recordings
The department's rate of compliance with the policy should be part of the public record and reported
regularly to the City Council or City Manager.
The policy should explicitly address whether we will use technology such as facial recognition to analyze
the footage.
To the extent that we know there will likely be exceptions needed for the policy, we should treat them
like the Resource Officers section and detail what the exceptions will be. The ones already mentioned
are political rallies and demonstrations, court detail, hospitals, and mental health facilities. Obviously
we can't cover all situations but we might as well cover the ones we already anticipate.
I understand that this draft policy was modeled on a template, but I don't think the template
adequately protects the rights of our citizens as it grants too many advantages to the police
department.
I will be unavailable for both the 13th and 20th meetings but would welcome a chance to discuss my
concerns in-depth with the city council or city manager.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 15
In the past year how many incidents happened where you thought it would have been helpful to have
an officer wearing a camera. We are not a violent community!!!
I am in favor of body cameras. The evidence it captures in encounters with a person from the public is
proof of what was really happening in any criminal investigation, and particularly in a police shooting. It
is unfortunate that there have been several police shootings of black people, but if the body camera is
capturing what was really being said, and actions that were taking place, then this is very important
evidence of whether the police officer acted appropriately as her/she should have in that particular
situation.
August 13, 2018#Overall I believe body-worn cameras can be an effective tool for law enforcement and
in Chief Harcey's words, "[enhance] evidence collection and report writing as well as providing for
greater transparency and accountability to the community." I also believe this technology is evolving,
very rapidly, and laying down policies reflective of our city's values is important for everyone.
To that end, as someone who has experience working in the video surveillance industry, I would like to
offer a few suggestions on the body-worn cameras policy.
1. Commitment to Reject Use with Facial Recognition and License Plate Recognition Systems
The potential is already available to use video from body-worn cameras with technologies that would
expand their use beyond the scope and spirit of the policy as written. These technologies could cause
grave harm to our citizenry's right-to-privacy and erode public trust in the police force.
I would recommend amending the policy with a section explicitly vowing to never use body-worn
camera video with facial recognition or license plate recognition systems, or at least not without the
issuance of a warrant.
2. Integration with video management systems
I would recommend, when evaluating both the body-worn solutions and the city's and school district's
video management system, consideration be given to technologies that integrate with each other.
Integrating body-worn cameras with a city's or school's video system can have tremendous benefits in
live emergency response, evidence-gathering and review, and system accountability. This technology
exists today at no greater cost than simply finding a solution that provides these benefits.
3. Pertaining to "Administering Access to BWC Data" - audit logging
I would recommend that the body-worn solution chosen have the capability for "deep audit logging" -
i.e., the ability the keep detailed records of video storage, video access, and video deletion. For
example, it is possible to have a body-worn video system that can retain reports for every single time
someone has reviewed that body-worn video after it has been recorded and who that person is. By
utilizing a technology that supports detailed audit logging, St Louis Park can be confident these excellent
access policies stated here are adhered to as written.
Thanks for your time and consideration,
,St Louis Park resident
I think it is a great idea. It protects the police and our community when there are investigations
I am a protections agent and I use a body camera when I can. I am all for LEO's wearing body cameras
I'm in favor of body cameras
Wear them and make sure they are turned on
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 16
Comments from 2017/-18 District 43/44 Neighborhood Surveys (16)
Texa-Tonka Residents Need to build trust with the community. Cameras should be
worn and enforced to be on at all times for any contact. Most
of the officers hide behind their badge and use that as a way
to do and say whatever they want without having to be
accountable
South Oak Hill Residents Body cameras are a good thing, however I don’t want my taxes
to increase to get them. They're high enough
South Oak Hill Residents If body cameras protected officers, I would be in favor.
South Oak Hill Residents I don't expressly believe there are problems for the need of
body cameras, but it would protect transparency if used
properly.
Cobblecrest Residents Certainly consider all of the options to provide public safety,
evidence collection and transparency, but my checking the box
for "yes" (to agree to body worn cameras) should not be
interpreted that you should implement body cameras. I
believe that decision should be made by those that perform
the job and know what helps or hinders to do that job
effectively.
Cobblecrest Residents I think body cameras would be a good idea. But, they should
have some kind of "automatic" way of turning on. Like if an
officer has to pull any weapon.
Cobblecrest Residents Since we are a 1st tier suburb of Minneapolis, I really don't see
the need myself. But, if its warranted (like in Minneapolis)
then maybe.
Oak Hill Residents I think body cameras could be a good idea but depends on
cost to residents. I think car cameras could be a better idea
(upgrading and more per car).
Oak Hill Residents Personally, I think you could limit body cameras to evenings
for the safety of both officers and civilians
Oak Hill Residents Body cams are lovely, but not as a substitute for systemic
acknowledgement of racism rooted in the system and reform.
Amhurst Residents Body cams are a MUST
Aquila Residents I do like the body cam idea for the safety of the officers.
Unfortunately I don’t think the public understands the need
for the maintenance and review needed for the cameras. Cost
would be a big factor to the residents.
Minnehaha Residents I believe body cams are just as much for the protection of the
officers as the public. Many times I think the public truly has
no idea what happens and jump to conclusions to the
detriment of others.
Elmwood Residents I’m in favor of body worn cameras fo0r safety of the officers.
What happen to respecting our men and women in uniform?
Never hurts to get knocked back into reality once in a while.
Wolfe park neighborhood residents I believe that body worn cameras should be used because they
are an emerging best practice for documenting and helping to
ensure that the police conduct is fair and appropriate, and as
an investigative tool, when questions may arise.
Wolfe park neighborhood residents Get cameras on all police vehicles immediately. Implement
body cameras as soon as possible.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 6a)
Title: Public hearing on body worn camera policy Page 17
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Action agenda item: 8a
Executive summary
Title: Conditional use permit - Park Spanish Immersion School
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving a conditional use permit for an
elementary school at 9400 Cedar Lake Road with conditions recommended by staff.
Policy consideration: Does the application meet the CUP requirements for an elementary
school?
Summary: The St. Louis Park School District requests a conditional use permit (CUP) to operate
an elementary school at Cedar Manor School, located at 9400 Cedar Lake Road. The site has
continuously been used as a school from its opening in 1957 until the present day.
The applicant applied for a conditional use permit to allow Park Spanish Immersion School to
relocate to the site. Enrollment is projected to be 505-520 elementary students, similar to
enrollment at Cedar Manor prior to 2000 and well under the 900 students that occupied the
building in the 1960s.
As part of the relocation of Park Spanish Immersion, a number of building and site
improvements are proposed: a new main entrance will be added to the east side of the
building; a new bus drop-off area north of the building; improvements to grading and
stormwater treatment on the site; and new play equipment east and west of the building.
The site is located in the R-1 zoning district, which requires conditional use permits (CUP) for
educational institutions. The property does not currently have a CUP. The facility can continue
to operate as a school without a CUP, however, the proposed site and building changes require
the property obtain the CUP. Staff finds that this application meets all zoning requirements for
an elementary school in the R-1 zoning district.
The planning commission held a public hearing on August 1, 2018 at which no one spoke. The
planning commission recommended approval of the application 5-0 with one abstention
(School Board Representative Joe Tatalovich).
An affirmative vote of four councilmembers is needed to approve the conditional use permit.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Site plan
Resolution
Excerpt of planning commission minutes (unofficial)
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 August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Conditional use permit - Park Spanish Immersion School
Site Plan
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Title: Conditional use permit - Park Spanish Immersion School
Resolution No. 18-___
Resolution approving a conditional use permit for operation of
an elementary school located at 9400 Cedar Lake Road
Whereas, Thomas Bravo, Facilities Manager representing St. Louis Park School District
283, applied for a conditional use permit (Case No. 18-30-CUP) to operate an elementary school
and make site improvements at 9400 Cedar Lake Road; the property is legal described as
follows, to-wit:
That part of Northwest 1/4 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 7, Township 117, North Range
21, West of the 5th Principal Meridian, lying West of Aretz 3rd Addition North of the
center line of Cedar Lake Road and South of a line drawn from the Northwest corner of
Lot 4, Block 2, of Aretz 3rd Addition to a point on the West line of said Southwest 1/4 of
said Section 7, 221 feet South of the Northwest corner of said Southwest 1/4.
Findings
Whereas, the property is located in the R-1 Single Family Residence Zoning District, and
educational facilities are allowed in this district by conditional use permit.
Whereas, the property is guided “Civic” in the comprehensive plan, which allows
educational facilities.
Whereas, the property has been used continuously as an educational facility since 1957,
and the school district would continue to use it as such.
Whereas, the use of this property as an educational institution is consistent with and
supportive of principles, goals, objectives, land use designations, redevelopment plans,
neighborhood objectives, and implementation strategies of the comprehensive plan.
Whereas, the use is not detrimental to the health, safety, morals and general welfare of
the community as a whole. It will not have undue adverse impacts on the use and enjoyment of
properties, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, parking facilities on adjacent streets, and
values of properties in close proximity to the conditional use.
Whereas, the use is consistent with the regulations, intent and purpose of city code and
the zoning district in which the conditional use is located. The proposed plan, with staff
recommended conditions of approval, will meet the conditions required for an educational
facility and the proposed building, parking lot and site improvements.
Whereas, the use will not have undue adverse impacts on governmental facilities, services
or improvements which are either existing or proposed.
Whereas, the site design for the school is consistent with the design and other
requirements of site and landscape plans prepared by or under the direction of a professional
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Title: Conditional use permit - Park Spanish Immersion School
landscape architect or civil engineer registered in the state and adopted as part of the
conditions imposed on the use by the city council.
Whereas, the use and site design are consistent with the city’s stormwater, sanitary
sewer, and water plans. On-site stormwater management improvements will be made as part
of the site improvements. The existing utilities have capacity for the use.
Whereas, the city council has determined that the CUP application meets the
requirements for an educational facility in the R-1 district, including:
1. All buildings shall be located at least 50 feet from any lot line of a lot in an R
district.
2. An off-street passenger loading area shall be provided in order to maintain
vehicular and pedestrian safety.
3. Outdoor recreational and play areas shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in
an R district.
4. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or
arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without
generating significant traffic on local residential streets.
Whereas, the contents of Case No. 18-30-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of
the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
Now therefore be it resolved that the conditional use permit is hereby approved and
accepted by the city council as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, city plans
and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park, 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 conformance with the official
exhibits. The official exhibits include:
a. Exhibit A: Survey Sheet R010
b. Exhibit B: Survey Sheet R011
c. Exhibit C: Floor Plans R100
d. Exhibit D: Elevations R101
e. Exhibit E: Site Layout Plan C1.21
f. Exhibit F: Grading and Drainage Plan C1.41
g. Exhibit G: Utility Plan C1.51
h. Exhibit H: Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan C1.61
i. Exhibit I: Site Details Sheet C2.11
j. Exhibit J: Site Details Sheet C2.12
k. Exhibit K: Landscape Plan L101
l. Exhibit L: Planting Plan L105
m. Exhibit M: Electrical Site Plan E100
n. Exhibit N: Photometric Plan E101
2. All required permits shall be obtained prior to starting construction, including but
not limited to:
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Title: Conditional use permit - Park Spanish Immersion School
a. NPDES grading/construction permit.
b. City of St. Louis Park building, erosion control, right-of-way, and sign
permits.
c. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District stormwater management permit.
3. Prior to issuance of city building or erosion control permits:
a. The city assent form and the official exhibits must be signed by property
owner prior to issuance of a building permit.
b. Wetland delineation shall be submitted for city review and approval.
4. A sign plan that conforms to all requirements in the zoning ordinance shall be
submitted for city review and approval.
5. In addition to other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative
fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval.
The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the
Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Register of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council August 20, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Title: Conditional use permit - Park Spanish Immersion School
Excerpt – Unofficial Minutes
Planning Commission
August 1, 2018
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Matt Eckholm, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Lisa Peilen, Carl
Robertson, Joe Tatalovich, Alanna Franklin (youth member)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Jessica Kraft
STAFF PRESENT: Jacquelyn Kramer, Sean Walther, Meg McMonigal
3. Public Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit Park Spanish Immersion School
Applicant: St. Louis Park School District No. 283
Location: 9400 Cedar Lake Road
Case No.: 18-30-CUP
Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. She discussed building
and site improvements proposed for the relocation of Park Spanish Immersion to 9400
Cedar Lake Road. She said the applicant will submit a sign permit that meets all city
requirements. Ms. Kramer stated that wetland delineation also needs to be completed
to determine if the grading and site improvements will impact that wetland.
Ms. Kramer reviewed the conditions of approval and staff findings. She noted that staff
has not received any comments from the public regarding the application. She said the
school district has held community meetings for this project as part of meetings
regarding improvements to be made in the district.
Chair Robertson asked why there wasn’t an existing conditional use permit for the property.
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said the school was established prior to
the conditional use permit requirement. The proposed changes require a conditional
use permit.
Commissioner Carper asked why the relocation was occurring.
Tom Bravo, applicant, St. Louis Park School District facilities manager, spoke about the
district’s study on growth. After determining how Central was going to be developed in
the future, it was decided that moving PSI from Central to the Cedar Manor site would
allow for PSI’s expansion and growth.
The Chair opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak he closed
the public hearing.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending approval of the conditional use
permit with conditions as recommended by staff. Commissioner Johnston-Madison
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0-1 (Tatalovich abstained).
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: August 20, 2018
Action agenda item: 8b
Executive summary
Title: First reading of interim ordinance establishing moratorium on use and development of
3745 Louisiana Ave. S.
Recommended action:
•Motion to approve first reading of an interim ordinance temporarily restricting
development at 3745 Louisiana Avenue South, St. Louis Park (“Subject Property”).
•Motion to adopt Resolution directing city planning division staff to conduct a study and to
prepare amendments to official land use and zoning controls for the subject property
based upon the study for city council consideration.
Policy consideration: Should the city temporarily restrict the use and development of the
building and lands located on the Subject Property in order to study the site conditions,
appropriate future land use, and the city’s official controls?
Summary: The Subject Property is a 13-acre site and contains an approximate 150,000-square-
foot building located adjacent to a future light rail transit station. The building has been vacant
since Sam’s Club closed on January 26, 2018. It is currently guided for commercial use and zoned
C2 General Commercial. The draft St. Louis Park 2040 comprehensive plan proposes a change to
the land use of the property. A study is needed of the site conditions, land use and the city’s
official controls for the Subject Property.
There are substantial concerns that the city’s official comprehensive plan future land use map and
zoning ordinance provisions relating to the Subject Property do not adequately address issues
relating to the present use, future land use, development or redevelopment of this vacant
property. The city’s concerns include, and are not limited to, compatibility with existing uses,
recent public improvements, planned future land uses, and the planned light rail transit station in
the area surrounding the Subject Property.
The proposed temporary restrictions on the use and development of the Subject Property are
needed to prevent use and development that might be inconsistent with potential changes the
city’s official controls resulting from the proposed study.
Financial or budget considerations: The study will be conducted by city planning division staff
and/or with the assistance of planning consultants. The study costs will be paid with existing
budgeted resources, and is not expected to require separate city council authorization.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Interim Ordinance
Resolution
Prepared by: Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
Title: First reading of interim ordinance establishing moratorium on use and development of 3745 Louisiana Ave. S.
Ordinance No. ____-18
An interim ordinance establishing a moratorium on
the use and development of the building and lands located at
3745 Louisiana Avenue South
The City of St. Louis Park does ordain:
Section 1. Background.
1.01. Authority. Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Section 462.355, Subd. 4., the City of St.
Louis Park is authorized to establish interim ordinances to regulate, restrict or prohibit any use or
development in all or a part of the city while the city or its planning consultant is conducting
studies, or has authorized a study to be conducted, or has scheduled a hearing to consider
adoption or amendment of the comprehensive plan or official zoning controls. The city declares
that this Interim Ordinance is established pursuant to the aforementioned statute.
1.02. Comprehensive Plan Update. The city has drafted an update to its
comprehensive plan that has been circulated to surrounding jurisdictions, and is available to
the public, for review and comments. The city will schedule a public hearing to occur after a six-
month review period. The draft comprehensive plan update includes a proposal to change the
future land use designation for the 13-acre property and vacant 150,637-square-foot building
located at 3745 Louisiana Avenue South, St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota (“Subject
Property”) from Commercial to Business Park.
Section 2. Findings and Purpose.
2.01. There are substantial concerns that the city’s official comprehensive plan future
land use map and zoning ordinance provisions relating to the Subject Property do not adequately
address issues relating to the present use, future land use, development or redevelopment of this
vacant property.
2.02. The city’s concerns include, and are not limited to, compatibility with existing uses,
recent public improvements, planned future land uses, and the planned light rail transit station in
the area surrounding the Subject Property.
2.03. As a result of the important land use and zoning issues cited above the city council
finds that it is necessary to conduct a study to address the types of developments and land uses
that are appropriate on the Subject Property. The study may also identify appropriate changes,
if any, that should be made to the city’s official land use controls, including but not limited to
the city’s zoning ordinance and comprehensive plan.
2.04 The city council directs the planning and zoning division staff to conduct a study for
the purpose of consideration of possible amendments to the city’s official controls to address the
issues concerning the subject property.
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 3
Title: First reading of interim ordinance establishing moratorium on use and development of 3745 Louisiana Ave. S.
2.05 The city finds that this interim ordinance must be adopted to protect the planning
process and the health, safety and welfare of the citizens.
Section 3. Prohibition
3.01. In accordance with the findings set forth in Section 2 and pursuant to the authority
of Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.355, subd. 4, there is hereby established a moratorium on the
Subject Property.
3.02. To ensure that use and development does not occur within the Subject Property
that might be inconsistent with any potential changes in the city’s updated comprehensive plan
and official controls resulting from the study referenced in Section 2.03 above, the city council
finds that the moratorium established by this ordinance should apply to all land use and zoning
applications for the Subject Property.
3.03 During the effective period of this interim ordinance, applications for a registration
of land use, subdivision, preliminary plat, planned unit development, zoning map amendment,
conditional use permit, variance, or comprehensive plan amendment for the Subject Property shall
not be accepted, considered or approved by the City. This Ordinance prohibits the further
consideration and approval of any pending application for the Subject Property.
SECTION 4. Exceptions to prohibition.
4.01. The city exempts from the prohibitions listed in Section 3 above any permits for basic
maintenance and repair of the existing building and grounds.
4.02. The city exempts from the prohibitions listed in Section 3 above the development of
the Subject Property for office, medical office, dental office, business/trade school/college,
medical and dental laboratories; provided the development of the site for these uses meet all city
code requirements and results in building(s) not less than four stories tall and floor area ratio(s)
not less than 1.0.
SECTION 5. Enforcement. The City may enforce this Ordinance by injunction or any other
appropriate civil remedy in any court of competent jurisdiction.
SECTION 6. Separability. Every section, provision or part of this Ordinance is declared
separable from every section, provision or part of this Ordinance. If any section, provision or part
of this Ordinance is adjudged to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such judgment
shall not invalidate any other section, provision or part of this Ordinance.
SECTION 7. Duration. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication and
shall remain in effect for up to twelve (12) months.
First Reading August 20, 2018
Second Reading August 27, 2018
Date of Publication August 30, 2018
Date Ordinance takes effect September 14, 2018
City council meeting of August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 4
Title: First reading of interim ordinance establishing moratorium on use and development of 3745 Louisiana Ave. S.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council (date)
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 August 20, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 5
Title: First reading of interim ordinance establishing moratorium on use and development of 3745 Louisiana Ave. S.
Resolution No. 18-____
Resolution directing completion of a study on the official land use and zoning
controls for the property located at 3745 Louisiana Avenue South
Whereas, the City has adopted an interim ordinance temporarily restricting the use and
development of the building and lands located at 3745 Louisiana Avenue South, St. Louis Park,
pending completion of a study and adoption of appropriate official controls.
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows:
1.The city planning division staff are directed to conduct a study to determine how
the use and development of the building and lands should be regulated within the
City of St. Louis Park.
2.Based on the study, the city staff and city attorney are directed to prepare a draft
of any appropriate amendments to the city’s official controls for consideration by
the city council.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council (date)
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk