HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/08/01 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
August 1, 2005 – 7:30 p.m.
6:30 p.m. – Study Session – Westwood Room
1. Call to Order
a. Pledge of Allegiance
b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
a. Presentation of Met Council TBRA Grant – Peggy Leppik
3. Approval of Minutes
a. City Council Minutes of July 18, 2005
Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented
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.
Action: Motion to approve the agenda as presented and to approve items listed on
the consent calendar
(Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, motion to
move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion and to
approve those items remaining on the consent calendar).
5. Boards and Commissions
6. Public Hearings
6a. Consideration of the establishment of Special Service District #4 (along
westerly Excelsior Boulevard between Highway 100 and Louisiana Avenue)
and the imposition of a service charge within the District.
Recommended
Action:
Close the Public Hearing
1. Motion to approve 2nd reading of the attached ordinance to
create Special Service District #4, adopt ordinance, approve
summary, and authorize summary publication.
2. Motion to approve attached resolution imposing a service
charge for Special Service District #4.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
8a Request by Park Tavern for a Major Amendment to a Special Permit to
construct a building addition at 3401 Louisiana Avenue South.
Case No. 05-15-CUP
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution amending and restating
Resolution No. 6805, authorizing a Major Amendment to a
Special Permit to allow the construction of a building
addition, subject to conditions as recommended in the
resolution.
8b. Traffic Study No. 597: Basketweave stop sign pattern in the Pennsylvania
Park neighborhood.
This report considers the installation of a basketweave stop sign pattern in the
Pennsylvania Park neighborhood.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolutions authorizing the
installation of stop signs in a basketweave pattern in the
Pennsylvania Park neighborhood.
8c Salary Cap Changes Effective August 1, 2005
This report explains how recent salary cap legislation affects St. Louis Park
employees
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution revising employee salaries affected
by the change in the salary cap, removing PTO and revising a
section of our personnel manual.
8d. Request of Mr. Parrish Hemmeke for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
from Commercial and Low Density Residential to High Density Residential;
and a Zoning Map Amendment from C2 – General Commercial and R2 –
Single Family Residential to RC – Multi-Family Residential.
Location: 1324 and 1332 Kentucky Avenue
Applicant: Mr. Parrish Hemmeke
Case No.: 05-28-CP and 05-29-Z
Recommended
Action:
• Motion to adopt Resolution No. 000, approving an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for 1324 and 1332
Kentucky Avenue South; and a motion to approve the
publication of a summary of Resolution No. 000.
• Motion to adopt the first reading of Ordinance No. 00, an
ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code
changing boundaries of zoning districts for 1324 and 1332
Kentucky Avenue South from C2 and R2 to RC, Multi-
Family Residential
8e. Request by AVIS Rent-A-Car for a Conditional Use Permit to allow an
automobile rental facility together with a variance to allow 7 rental cars to be
parked within 100 of a residentially zoned property.
Case Nos. 05-30-CUP and 05-31-VAR
4150 Excelsior Blvd.
Recommended
Action:
• Motion to adopt a resolution approving a Conditional Use
Permit to allow an automobile rental facility at 4150
Excelsior Blvd.
• Motion to adopt a resolution approving a variance to allow 7
rental cars to be parked within 100 feet of a residentially
zoned property.
9. Communications
10. Adjournment
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.
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL
MEETING OF August 1, 2005
SECTION 4: 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.
4a Bid Tabulation: Motion to designate Michels Corporation the lowest responsible bidder
and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $95,152.00 for
construction of a fiber optic link to connect Golden Valley City Hall to Hennepin County
Sheriff Radio Tower at Highway 169 for the 800 MHz radio project communications
network serving the cities of St. Louis Park and Golden Valley
4b Bid Tabulation: Motion to designate Ettel & Franz Roofing Company the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of
$204,450.00 for the 2005 Police Department Reroof Project - Project No. 2005-1700
4c Motion to approve a Resolution Adopting the National Incident Management System
4d Motion to approve Resolution to adopt the Military Leave Policy
4e Motion to approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License - Holy Family Fall
Festival, 5900 & 5925 West Lake Street, St. Louis Park to be held September 23 & 24,
2005
4f Motion to Accept City/School Volunteer Office Annual Report for Filing
4g Motion to Accept Planning Commission Minutes of July 6, 2005 for Filing
4h Motion to adopt a resolution authorizing submittal of a Declaration of Restrictions and
Covenants and Affidavit Concerning Real Property Contaminated with Hazardous
Substances in Wolfe Park
4i Motion to accept vendor claim report for filing (supplement)
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
August 1, 2005
Items contained in this section are those items
which are not yet available in electronic format
and which are identified in the individual
reports by inclusion of the word “Supplement”.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 1
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
July 18, 2005
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm.
Council members present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt, Susan
Sanger and Sue Santa
Staff present: Associate Planner (Mr. Fulton), City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney
(Mr. Scott), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), City Clerk (Ms. Reichert),
Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin),
Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Stegora-Peterson).
2. Presentations
Mayor Jacobs presented a resolution to John Mantz for 35 years of service to the City.
Mr. Mantz thanked the Mayor and residents of St. Louis Park.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. City Council Minutes of July 5, 2005
The minutes were approved as presented.
3b. Study Session Minutes of June 27, 2005
The minutes were approved as presented.
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.
4a Moved to item 8e
4b Approve second reading of Ordinance No. 2297-04 amending chapters 4 and 20
of the St. Louis Park municipal code, approve summary, and authorize publication
allowing off-leash dogs in designated off-leash area(s) with a permit.
4c Bid Tabulation: Designate Park Construction the lowest responsible bidder and
authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $147,663.36 for
the Cedar Lake Road Trail Connection – City Project No. 2004-0303
4d Adopt Resolution No. 05-094 authorizing Special Assessment of Dutch Elm
Diseased Trees
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 2
4e Adopt Resolution No. 05-095 approving a Conditional Use Permit to allow the
placement of approximately 5,800 cubic yards of fill material to construct a trail
link between Cedar Lake Road and the Cedar Lake Regional Trail subject to
conditions included in the resolution. Case No. 05-32-CUP
4f Planning Commission Minutes of June 1, 2005
4g Planning Commission Minutes of June 15, 2005
4h Approve Resolution No. 05-096 honoring John Mantz’s Service to the City
4i Accept report regarding Time Warner Cable Franchise Agreement for filing
4j Accept vendor claims for filing (supplement)
Mr. Harmening noted it had been requested to move consent item 4a to the regular agenda (8e).
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to approve
the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar.
The motion passed 6-0.
5. Boards and Commissions
It was moved by Councilmember Finkelstein, seconded by Councilmember Omodt to
appoint Molly Althoffer to the Police Advisory Commission.
The motion passed 6-0.
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing to consider an intoxicating on-sale and Sunday sale liquor
license for WYN Hotels, LP dba Doubletree Park Place Hotel
Ms. Reichert presented the staff report.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa to approve
an intoxicating on-sale and Sunday sale liquor license for WYN Hotels, LP dba
Doubletree Park Place Hotel.
Councilmember Omodt asked if the new owners would continue to provide Kosher
service at the hotel. John Kramick, General Manager, replied that Kosher service would
continue as before.
The motion passed 6-0.
6b. Consideration of the establishment of Special Service District #4 (along the
western portion of Excelsior Boulevard between Highway 100 and Louisiana
Avenue) and the imposition of a service charge within the district.
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 3
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed.
Councilmember Basill asked if the snow removal was an issue they wanted to handle
with current contracts? Mr. Hunt replied there were a variety of reasons including they
were already taking care of their parking lots and it wouldn’t be much more for the
contractors to take care of the sidewalks.
Councilmember Basill asked if it became an issue in the future, would they be able to
entertain it? Mr. Hunt replied the property owners could request a higher level of service.
Councilmember Basill stated this was a welcome change and thanked staff for their work.
It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Sanger to approve
1st reading of the attached ordinance to create Special Service District #4 and to
schedule the 2nd reading of the ordinance for August 1, 2005.
Mayor Jacobs indicated that the other special service districts East on Excelsior Blvd had
been successful and made it a welcoming and attractive boulevard.
The motion passed 6-0.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
8a. Resolution Accepting Resignation and Declaring Vacancy in the Office of
Ward Four Councilmember Resolution No. 05-091
Mr. Harmening stated a letter of resignation was received from Councilmember Sally
Velick, effective July 15th. A resolution needed to be adopted declaring a vacancy.
Councilmember Sanger stated Councilmember Velick contributed a lot to the Council
and did a nice job representing her constituents and would be missed.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt
Resolution No. 05-091 declaring a vacancy in the office of Ward Four Councilmember
effective July 15, 2005.
Councilmember Santa stated she would miss Sally’s counsel and advocacy for Ward 4.
Councilmember Omodt thanked Sally for all she had done such as work with Westwood
Hills Neighborhood Association and Charter Commission. She would be missed.
Mayor Jacobs stated she would be missed for her wisdom, counsel and positive attitude
about the Council and the community. She had also been involved with the Planning
Commission and the precursor to the community education advisory council.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 4
Councilmember Finkelstein stated that they had known what a class act Sally had been
for many years. Her contributions hadn’t stopped for the City of St. Louis Park, but
would continue for the State with her educational work for the legislature.
Councilmember Basill added he would miss Sally.
Mayor Jacobs stated that they needed to declare a vacancy and the Council would be
considering in days to come how to fill the vacancy.
The motion passed 6-0.
8b. Comprehensive Plan Amendment to Chapter P, Redevelopment and Chapter
U, Plan by Neighborhood to incorporate development guidelines for the
northwest corner of Excelsior Boulevard and France Avenue. Case No. 05-
26-CP . Resolution No. 05-092
Ms. McMonigal presented the background.
Barry Warner, SRF Consulting, Marie Cody, SRF Consulting and Mike Lamb,
Cunningham Group, presented the development guidelines.
Ms. McMonigal stated that they initially recommended adoption of the guidelines into the
Comprehensive plan. The Planning Commission recommended they not be adopted in full,
but be adopted by reference which would provide notice that guidelines were available.
Dave Payne, Al’s Liquors, stated the property owners who participated concurred with
the Planning Commission recommendation that the guidelines be called a study and as
such would have no legal bearing on the properties as they were presently zoned.
Nancy Rose, 3402 Huntington, asked if the language would be added to the
Comprehensive Plan? Ms. McMonigal replied yes, the language referred to the
development guidelines, but wouldn’t adopt them in full. It would be an amendment to
the Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Rose believed the neighbors should have been advised of the amendment. Mr. Scott
replied that the required legal notice was done, a published notice. Ms. McMonigal
stated they were not suggesting a map change, only a text change, which did not require
notifying surrounding property owners.
Mr. Scott indicated the legal procedure was followed.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked if this was incorporated by reference, could they
change the study guidelines without changing the Comp Plan? Mr. Scott replied the
language noted the study existed. The text of the study was not part of the Comp Plan.
They could change wording in the study without a Comp Plan amendment process.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked the difference between incorporating it by reference
and using it as a study? Mr. Scott replied the intent was to allow someone looking at the
Comp Plan to be aware of the study. Ms. McMonigal indicated this would be consistent
with the Planning Commission recommendation. The Comprehensive Plan is where
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 5
people go to find out about future development plans and was an opportunity for potential
developers, property owners and neighbors to know what was worked on.
Ms. Rose was concerned that there was little communication regarding the changes.
Councilmember Sanger asked if they were not incorporating the guidelines, what was the
legal significance? Mr. Scott replied it would depend on the type of application. They
are guidelines and do not have the legal status of the zoning ordinance or Comp Plan.
There may be circumstances, where there is discretion to look to the guidelines.
Councilmember Sanger asked if someone had a proposal that met the zoning standards,
didn’t require financial assistance and wasn’t a PUD, but was markedly different from the
guidelines, would they be able to reject the proposal? Mr. Scott replied when someone
requested a building permit to develop under existing zoning, the guidelines would not be
implemented because there would be no Council discretion.
Councilmember Basill noted that pointed out the risk of adopting just a reference, however he
felt that was the best thing. He was present at some of the meetings and it was a process. At
the end they were not to full consensus. Adopting it as a reference allowed flexibility. The
Elmwood study was also referenced in the Comp Plan. This was a tool for developers who
would be foolish not to look at criteria the neighborhood had worked on.
John Miller, 3550 France, stated he spoke in favor at the Planning Commission meeting.
He wanted the Council to have all of the authority they could have because he felt that
they would do the right thing.
It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to adopt
Resolution No. 05-092 for Comprehensive Plan Amendment to refer to the
“Development Guidelines for the Northwest corner of Excelsior Boulevard and France
Avenue” in the Redevelopment and Plan by Neighborhood Chapters of the
Comprehensive Plan and authorize publication.
Councilmember Finkelstein wanted to be sure they all had the same understanding
because this was just a study tool and would not take away any of their authority? Mayor
Jacobs replied that was correct.
The motion passed 6-0.
8c. Request by Park Tavern for a Major Amendment to a Special Permit to
construct a building addition for a smoking area at 3401 Louisiana Avenue S.
Case No. 05-15-CUP
Mr. Locke stated this was the first bar/restaurant expansion since the Hennepin County
smoking ban had gone into effect. There had been additional review since the staff report
was mailed, particularly in the context of the City’s liquor license requirements. Staff
recommended this item be continued to the August 1st meeting for staff to work through
issues related to liquor license requirements, smoking ban requirements and the zoning.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 6
Phil Webber, Park Tavern owner, asked if the Council had particular issues to be
addressed before the next meeting? This was all according to the County guidelines. He
was trying to appease everyone and stay in front of the trends.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked how they would keep smoke from filtering into the
restaurant? Mr. Webber responded it would be negative air pressure, more pressure
being exited from the room than going into the room.
Councilmember Finkelstein asked if there would be alcohol or food service in the room?
Mr. Webber replied there was no service, which was a Hennepin County requirement.
People could consume, just not be served. The County had no problem with what he was
doing. The issue was on a city level.
Councilmember Finkelstein stated there was a list of exemptions from the Hennepin
County smoking ordinance and it didn’t fall within those exemptions. Where did the
authority come from? Mr. Webber responded they met all of the requirements. He didn’t
know beverage was considered food under a food license, but was informed on a city
level that beverage was considered food.
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to continue
the item to the August 1, 2005 Council meeting.
Councilmember Omodt stated because of previous dealings with the County, he hoped
staff would provide firm deadlines. This establishment was doing everything legally
possible and he hated to see the County delay this.
Mayor Jacobs asked what they needed from the County in order to act? Mr. Locke
replied the main issue was City ordinances and how they applied. There also may be
issues to work out with the County regarding employees going into a smoking room.
Councilmember Sanger requested that the County Attorney’s office provide a legal
opinion regarding the legality of the proposed smoking room addition. She had also read
the exemptions and an indoor room was not a specified exemption.
Mayor Jacobs was concerned about how long that would take.
Councilmember Sanger believed they were being asked to take a vote on something that
was not clear as a specified exemption. She didn’t think they should be put in the
position voting on something that was not clear and could violate the County’s ordinance.
Councilmember Santa asked if that was their responsibility? They were being asked to look
at changing an area currently being used by putting walls and a roof on it. It was Hennepin
County’s smoking ordinance. If they made exceptions, she wanted them clearly defined.
Councilmember Sanger believed they had. One was the outdoor space, such as a patio.
There was nothing in the exemptions that discussed indoor spaces. They needed to have
clarification because of possible liabilities for the City.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 7
Mr. Harmening noted Councilmember Sanger was referring to Ordinance No. 24. A
policy document had been received from the County and staff needed to do more research
on enforcement. County staff had been pointing at the enforcement policy and criteria
under which certain areas of multi-use facilities could have smoking. They needed to
connect how this policy related to the ordinance and how their own liquor laws related to
the use of this room. County policy says no staff should go into the smoking room, but
there was a question of oversight and monitoring.
Mr. Webber clarified that the City of St. Louis Park would be in charge of enforcement,
not Hennepin County.
Mr. Harmening responded that was more reason to be sure of what they were enforcing.
Councilmember Basill stated some of the burden needed to be on the County to submit
information by August 1st. If they didn’t get information, they needed to make a decision
on the information they had. It was not fair to wait indefinitely.
Councilmember Finkelstein believed they needed to know what they could and could not
do and to find out in advance so the applicant didn’t expend money or before other bar
owners were interested in doing the same thing.
Councilmember Omodt reiterated that was why they had to put the onus on the County
and should be on record that the County needed to do better.
Mr. Scott added that it was not solely a County issue. There was also the issue with the
City’s liquor license.
The motion passed 6-0.
8d. Resolution authorizing an application for a grant from the Metropolitan
Council Livable Communities Demonstration Account.
Resolution No. 05-093
Mr. Fulton presented the staff report.
Councilmember Sanger asked when staff said application for these funds was tied to a
development project, did that imply they were agreeing to a specific proposal for the
Hoigaard’s site? Mr. Fulton replied no. The applications would be accepted or denied in
December 2005. They could be awarded these funds and still turn them down were they
to decide the development project was inappropriate.
Councilmember Basill noted this would enhance the storm water system. He had a lot of
questions from residents neighboring the development if they were paying attention to
that and they were.
It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to adopt
Resolution No. 05-093 authorizing an application for grant funds from the Metropolitan
Council.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 8
The motion passed 6-0.
8e. Ordinance amending chapter 36 of the city code to remove Cluster Housing
from the R-1, R-2, and R-3 zoning districts, while allowing existing cluster
housing developments to continue as a conforming use. Case Nos. 05-23-ZA
Ordinance No. 2296-05
Mayor Jacobs noted this was on the consent agenda, but a question came up why they
were doing this in the R3 district as opposed to just R1 and R2? Ms. McMonigal stated
that the R3 district encompassed a lot of single-family homes, which was primarily the
reason it was included. The ordinance proposed removing the cluster housing provision
from R1, R2 and R3, but allow existing cluster housing developments to remain
conforming. There was a fear that someone could buy a number of single-family homes
and put in town homes and completely change the character of a neighborhood.
Josh Aaron, 7600 W 14th St, was concerned they were eliminating transition housing. If
they take out cluster housing and town homes from these zones, how can somebody with
an acre parcel develop a site? He didn’t think the Planning Commission was clear about
the true intent of this blanket change. They should only change R1 and R2. They needed
to find a way to have transition to a higher density, which couldn’t be done with this.
Councilmember Sanger responded that the Housing Summit process led to this change
and an emphasis to maintain and encourage development of single-family detached
housing. They wanted to make sure people didn’t have economic incentives to tear down
houses and build cluster homes. They also talked about possibly developing a PUD
process or a process that would permit cluster homes to be developed in a more
controlled fashion. A large parcel could be subdivided if it met the requirements.
Mr. Aaron believed there were areas that a transition from single-family to multi-family
was appropriate and they were making everything single-family from R1 to R3. There
was no other mechanism to develop an R3 parcel that was over an acre.
Mayor Jacobs asked if there was a way to transition in an R3 district? Ms. McMonigal
replied it would be primarily single-family. They talked about changing the planned
development procedure to an overlay zoning district. If they allowed that to be applied to
residential, town homes could go into an R3 district with complete discretion. It would
be a zoning action by the City Council.
Councilmember Basill stated a lot of R3 districts were mostly single-family homes. If
they leave R3 out, they blanket it the other way, and someone could buy a group of
homes and put up cluster homes. They should pass this, but need to look at alternatives
for properties where it made sense for a PUD be considered in a public process.
Councilmember Finkelstein believed that made sense. They needed to get this on the
books and have some place to start.
Mr. Aaron felt that R3 districts were set up in a way to be close to transportation, etc. to
be logical for higher density uses. It was transitional and provided a buffer between
single-family and the “Rottlund” models.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 3a - Council Minutes July 18, 2005
Page 9
Councilmember Basill stated they had to deal with how the neighborhoods were set up
today. Several neighborhoods were zoned R3 and the majority were single-family homes.
They had to protect single-family homes and move up housing for the City. That didn’t
mean they couldn’t come up with something, but it needed to be done it in a calculated
basis and made sense for the neighborhood and the community.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to adopt
Ordinance No. 2296-05 amending chapter 36 of the city code to remove Cluster Housing
from the R-1, R-2, and R-3 zoning districts, while allowing existing cluster housing
developments to continue as a conforming use, approve summary, and authorize publication.
Councilmember Omodt stated that the Council’s thought on this was to put more controls
and eventually have a discussion on the PUD process. He wanted to be sure there was a
goal for the work to be done. Mr. Locke responded this was in the list of items they were
working on. They would be before the Council on August 8th and this would be included.
The motion passed 6-0.
9. Communications
Mayor Jacobs noted he attended the grand opening of the Marriott Hotel (formerly Holiday Inn).
The new post office will open August 1st.
Mr. Harmening indicated there will be a town meeting on June 26th, 7 PM at City Hall sharing
information regarding the City’s study into Wireless technology and to receive input and
feedback from the community.
Councilmember Omodt stated that St. Louis Park Little League was hosting the Little League All
Stars at Skippy Field during the next week.
Councilmember Santa noted on July 26th from 7-9 PM, Minnehaha Creek Visioning Partnership
would hold an open house at the City of Minnetonka Community Center.
Mayor Jacobs reminded viewers National Night Out is August 2nd. The new dog park was open.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:09 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
City Clerk Mayor
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4a - 800 MHz Radio Fiber Optic Contract
Page 1
4a. Bid Tabulation: Motion to designate Michels Corporation the lowest responsible
bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of
$95,152.00 for construction of a fiber optic link to connect Golden Valley City Hall
to Hennepin County Sheriff Radio Tower at Highway 169 for the 800 MHz radio
project communications network serving the cities of St. Louis Park and Golden
Valley.
Background: The 800 MHz radio project, previously approved by Council, is well on its way to
completion in the fall of this year. Related to this project is construction of a fiber optic network
to connect buildings at which City business is conducted, including LOGIS, located in Golden
Valley. This project includes replacement of current data communications services procured
from Qwest Communications and Time Warner Cable. The project, previously approved by
Council, will be completed in July and also incorporates the capability to carry radio
transmission.
Network Expansion for 800 MHz Radio System: One of the termination points of the St.
Louis Park fiber infrastructure is Golden Valley City Hall (which provides a link to LOGIS).
Staff anticipated the potential need for 800 MHz radio tower communications and thus
incorporated sufficient fiber strands to do so when needed. One component of the 800 MHz radio
system is connectivity to the main Hennepin County Sheriff’s tower on Highway 169 in Golden
Valley. (Besides data and radio, other fiber optic applications in the planning stages include
video and voice.)
This project contemplates linking a set of primary and backup fiber stands from Golden Valley
City Hall to the Highway 169 tower, which will complete the connection to the St. Louis Park
Dispatch Center (PSAP). This provides the most robust and cost-effective solution for such
connectivity, surpassing a microwave alternative. The City’s radio consultant supports this
assessment.
Financial Considerations: This fiber optic link has been contemplated as part of the overall
800 MHz project. Funding for this overall project is from the Police and Fire Pension Funds, per
previous Council actions. Golden Valley will also be contributing to paying the cost of this
improvement pursuant to the terms of our contract with them. The estimated cost, based upon
the proposed plans, was $90,000.
Project Timeline: Should the City Council approve this report, it is anticipated that the
following schedule could be met:
Plan approval & authorization to advertise for bids July 5, 2005
Advertise for bids July 2005
Bid Tab Report to City Council August 1, 2005
Construction August – October 2005
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4a - 800 MHz Radio Fiber Optic Contract
Page 2
A total of four (4) bids were received for this project. An advertisement for bids was published
in the Sun Sailor on July 7 and July 1 4, 2005 and in the Minneapolis Star Tribune on July 10,
2005. A summary of the bid results for the preferred underground option for major required sites
is as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Michels Corporation $95,152.00
MP Nexlevel, LLC $98,506.00
Parsons Technologies $129,965.00
MasTec North America, Inc. $153,262.24
Evaluation of Bids: Staff has reviewed all of the bids submitted and has tabulated the results.
From the review, staff recommends Michels Corporation as the lowest responsible bidder.
Michels Corporation is a reputable contractor who has performed satisfactory work on similar
projects.
Construction Timeline: Work is anticipated to begin in late August and be completed by the
November 1, 2005.
Prepared by: Clint Pires, Director of Technology and Support Services
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4b - Bid Tab PD Roof 2005-1700
Page 1
4b. Bid Tabulation: Motion to designate Ettel & Franz Roofing Company the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the
amount of $204,450.00 for the 2005 Police Department Reroof Project - Project No.
2005-1700.
Background: The Police facility was built in 1993 with a roofing system known as a single ply-
membrane with surface ballast. The system was installed to the specifications of the manufacturer;
this type of system has an estimated life of 10-12 years. The fact that the Police Department building
roof has multiple levels tends to further shorten the actual roof life.
Additional Information: The City hired Inspec, Inc., a consulting firm specializing in roofing
systems to conduct a survey of the Police Department roofing system in late 2004. They
recommended immediate replacement due to deterioration of the membrane along with extreme
difficulty to be able to monitor the membrane for failure. Staff then proceeded to hire Inspec to
develop plans and specifications to replace the existing roof with a three (3) ply built-up roofing
system that incorporates the latest in design features. This is a proven system that has a life
expectancy of approximately 20 years.
As part of the bidding requirements all contractors were required to attend a pre-bid meeting after
which time Inspec, Inc. prequalified the contractors. Of the eight (8) companies who were
represented at the pre-bid meeting, seven (7) submitted bids.
Bid Analysis: The project was advertised for bids in the Sun-Sailor on July 7, and 14, 2005 and in
the Construction Bulletin on July 8, and 15, 2005. Bids were received on July 27, 2005. Summary
of bid results are as follows:
CONTRACTOR BID AMOUNT
Ettel & Franz Roofing Company $204,450.00
McPhillips Brothers $215,000.00
John A. Dalsin $221,733.00
Palmer-West Construction Company $228,380.00
Dalbec Roofing $238,520.00
Central roofing $246,556.00
BA Roofing, Inc. $290,902.00
Engineer’s Estimate
$269,500.00
Funding: This project is included in the 2005 Capital Improvement Program funded by $200,000
from the 2006 G.O. Bonds and the remaining from the Municipal Building Fund.
Project Timing: Project scheduled for completion by October 1, 2005.
Prepared By: John Altepeter, Facilities Superintendent
Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator
Reviewed By: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4c - National Incident Management System (NIMS)
Page 1
4c Motion to approve a Resolution Adopting the National Incident Management System
Background:
One of the issues brought forward as a result of the September 11, 2001 attack on the World
Trade Center, was the inability of responding agencies to function under one command structure
that everyone understood. Because of this, the President issued Presidential Directive 5 to
establish a single, comprehensive national incident management system. This system, known as
the National Incident Management System (NIMS), is a consistent, nationwide system that
enables all levels of government, private sector, and non governmental organizations to work
together during emergencies.
Compliance requirement:
Formal recognition of NIMS principles and polices is one of the requirements of the new
directive. States and local entities can meet this requirement by approving a resolution that
adopts NIMS as their standard for incident management. On February 9, 2005, Governor
Pawlenty issued an executive order that established NIMS as the new state standard for incident
management.
As an added incentive to adopt NIMS, jurisdictions currently receiving homeland security grant
funding and any city that intends to apply for future federal preparedness, prevention or planning
grants must adopt and implement NIMS at the local government level.
As was discussed during a recent study session, St. Louis Park is already moving towards
integration of NIMS into our emergency management system. We have revised and incorporated
it into our Emergency Plan and previous training by Public Works, Police, and Fire will easily
bridge us operationally into the new system.
Prepared by: Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Resolution #05-097
DESIGNATION OF THE
NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
AS THE BASIS FOR ALL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT IN
ST. LOUIS PARK
WHEREAS, the President of the United States of America issues Homeland Security
Presidential Directive 5 to enhance the ability of the United States to manage domestic incidents
by establishing a single, comprehensive national incident management system; and
WHEREAS, the President, in Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5, tasked the secretary
of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to develop and administer a National Incident
Management System; and
WHEREAS, the secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security developed and
administered the National Incident Management System (NIMS) to provide for interoperability
and compatibility among federal, state, and local capabilities, the NIMS will include: a core set
of concepts, principles, terminology, and technologies covering the incident command system;
multi-agency coordination system; unified command; training; identification and management of
resources (including systems for classifying types of resources); qualifications and certification;
and the collection, tracking, and reporting of incident information and incident resources; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty issued Executive Order 05-02: DESIGNATION
OF THE NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (NIMS) AS THE BASIS FOR
ALL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT IN THE STATE OF MINNESOTA; and
WHEREAS, the collective input and guidance from all federal, state, local, and tribal homeland
security partners has been, and will continue to be, vital to the development, effective
implementation, and utilization of a comprehensive NIMS; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary and desirable that all St. Louis Park agencies and personnel
coordinate their efforts to effectively and efficiently provide the highest levels of incident
management; and
WHEREAS, the NIMS standardized procedures for managing personnel, communications,
facilities, and resources will improve the ability of St. Louis Park to utilize federal funding to
enhance local and state agency readiness, maintain first responder safety, and streamline incident
management processes; and
WHEREAS, the Incident Command System components of the NIMS are already an integral
part of various incident management activities throughout St. Louis Park, including current
emergency management training programs; and
WHEREAS, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks (9-11 Commission) recommended
adoption of a standardized Incident Command System; and
NOW< THEREFORE, we do hereby establish the National Incident Management System
(NIMS) as the St. Louis Park standard for incident management.
Adopted by the City Council August 1, 2005
(Insert signature block here)
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4d - Military Leave Policy
Page 1
4d. Motion to approve Resolution to adopt the Military Leave Policy.
Background: The purpose of this report is to inform the Council about recent legislation that
requires changes to our Military Leave Policy. We are recommending Council approve the new
Military Leave policy and authorize its addition to the Employee Personnel Manual.
Recent Legislation: Recent legislation has clarified Minnesota Statute 192.261 Subdivision 2 to
require employers to accrue flex leave or vacation and sick leave with pay for employees
reinstated after active military leave, effective September 11, 2001.
Additional St. Louis Park Benefits: In addition to benefits required under 192.261, the City
has the discretion to allow additional benefits to employees on military leave, per Minnesota
Statute 471.975. We recommend the approval of two additional discretionary benefits.
1. The first additional discretionary benefit would allow the City Manager to authorize
payment of accrued vacation and sick leave to employees who are not reinstated after
active military leave. For example, this benefit would allow the City Manager to
authorize payment of accrued flex leave to the estate of David Day, who died while
on active military duty.
2. The second additional discretionary benefit is our current practice. The City
continues to contribute to the cost of the employee’s health insurance at the same
level of city contribution as before the employee goes on leave.
Payout Options: The City’s flex leave policy contains provisions on maximum levels of hours
that can remain in the employee’s leave bank. The new legislation requires accrual of leave
without regard to any limits. To ensure compliance with the new law and current policy, we
recommend accrued leave be paid out to employees in cash or hours, depending on proximity to
the cap. On the advice of the City Attorney, the City Manager, Fire Chief, Police Chief, HR
Director, and HR Coordinator met with the members of the Police and Fire bargaining groups
who are affected by this policy to propose the payout options (we had a total of 5 employees
affected by this policy). All parties have agreed to the terms and conditions of the payout
options.
Funding: Funds for the increased leave payout will come from the department budgets.
Recommendation: The attached resolution will add this policy to the Employee Personnel
Manual and will apply to all employee groups.
Attachments: Resolution & Policy (Appendix A)
Prepared by: Ali Fosse, HR Coordinator
Reviewed by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4d - Military Leave Policy
Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 05-098
RESOLUTION ADDING THE MILITARY LEAVE POLICY
TO THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK PERSONNEL MANUAL
WHEREAS, The City Council wishes to adopt policies for City employees which ensure
adequate compensation, leave and benefits for City employees and which protect the ethical
standards of the City of St. Louis Park; and
WHEREAS, The City Council has conferred upon the City Manager the power to
establish and administer additional administrative policies and rules as may be appropriate to
administer the employment practices of the City;
NOW THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, The City Council of the City of St.
Louis Park hereby approves the resolution adopting the Military Leave Policy (attached as
Appendix A) to be added to the personnel manual:
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council
City Manager: Mayor:
Attest:
City Clerk:
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4d - Military Leave Policy
Page 3
APPENDIX A
RESOLUTION NO. 05-_________
CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK
MILITARY LEAVE POLICY
Military Leave
Employees are entitled to a leave of absence without loss of pay, seniority status, annual leave or
other benefits when engaged in training activities ordered or authorized by the proper authority
pursuant to law, whether for state or federal purposes. Military leave without loss of pay or
status will not exceed fifteen (15) workdays in any calendar year. Compensation is in addition to
military pay (MN Atty. Gen. opinion).
The City does not provide compensation to those employees on active duty in the Armed Forces
unless authorized by proper authority pursuant to law. For those employees on active duty, the
City will continue to contribute to the cost of the employee’s health insurance at the same level
of City contribution as before the employee goes on leave. If there are changes to the City’s
contribution levels and/or premium rates while the employee is on leave, those changes will take
place as if the employee were still on the job. The employee will be required to continue
payment of the employee portion of the health care and/or other insurance coverage they choose
to continue.
Effective September 11, 2001, the employee will accrue vacation, sick, or flex leave with pay as
provided in any applicable policy or collective bargaining agreement from the time he or she
enters active military service until the date of reinstatement (unless otherwise determined by the
City Manager). The City will distribute accrued vacation or flex leave in one of the following
options, whichever results in more hours paid to the employee in cash:
1. 50% of the hours accrued during the leave, or
2. any hours over the cap as specified in the personnel manual or labor agreement.
The accrued leave will be paid to the employee minus required payroll deductions. The
remaining accrued hours will be placed in the employee’s leave balance, subject to future caps
and to be used in accordance with policy or contract. Sick leave accrued will be placed in the
sick leave balance and must be used in accordance with policy.
Upon return from a military leave of absence, a regular employee shall be reinstated to the
employee’s former position or to a position of like status and pay, provided that the employee is
competent to perform all duties of the position to which assigned. If the position which the
employee formerly held no longer exists, the employee shall be reinstated to a position of like
status and pay, provided that it is practical to do so and the employee is competent to perform all
duties of the position to which assigned.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4e - Holy Family Temp Liquor License
Page 1
4e. Motion to approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License - Holy
Family Fall Festival, 5900 & 5925 West Lake Street, St. Louis Park to be held
September 23 & 24, 2005
Background:
The Holy Family Fall Festival is an annual event sponsored by the Holy Family Church, at 5900
& 5925 West Lake Street. Staff has administratively approved all required permits for the event,
with the exception of the Liquor License which must be approved by Council.
Police Investigation
The principals were investigated and no record or warrants were found.
Prepared by: Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4f - Volunteer Report 2004-2005
Page 1
4f. Motion to Accept City/School Volunteer Office Annual Report for Filing
Background:
The City of St. Louis Park partners with St. Louis Park School District’s Community
Education to provide volunteer program coordination. The volunteer office, located at
the High School, offers a centralized location where city residents of all ages may
connect to volunteer opportunities. The City shares the staffing and operation cost of the
volunteer office with Community Education by providing $32,600 in funding each year.
In addition to coordinating city & school volunteer programs, volunteer office staff also
refer residents with other community interests to opportunities available at local
nonprofits. All new residents moving into St. Louis Park houses and apartments receive a
listing of volunteer opportunities throughout the city. The following report highlights
community volunteerism. Also attached is the School District’s annual volunteer report.
Volunteers in the Park Annual Report 2004-2005
The Mission
The mission of the V.I.P. program is to promote quality volunteerism in the City of St.
Louis Park and in the St. Louis Park School District.
V.I.P. Program Summary
The program is responsible for the recruitment of hundreds of volunteers for the City and
the Schools of St. Louis Park. It also ensures that the volunteers are appropriately
screened, placed, and trained. Before a volunteer is placed in a position through the
volunteer office a risk management process is put into place. Volunteers are required to
complete an application and list two references. Both references are checked and city
volunteers also go through a Police Background check. The only volunteers who are not
required to complete an application are parents who are working in their child’s school
and people doing one time supervised activities.
The Volunteer Office staff is dedicated to making sure that the volunteers it recruits and
places are given all the information and training they need to be successful at their
volunteer positions. It conducts regular evaluations and makes adjustments to program
materials, training and operation based on feedback from volunteers. Recognition of
volunteers is also an important job of the V.I.P. office. It works with staff to insure that
volunteers are thanked and recognized in a variety of ways.
The dollar value for volunteer service was recently increased to $17.55 per hour by the
Independent Sector. This rate is based on the hourly earnings for private non-agricultural
workers as determined by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. That figure is then
increased by 12% to estimate fringe benefits. The estimated value of volunteer services
channeled through the V.I.P. Office is $213,583 (12,170 hours x $17.55). However, the
value of volunteerism in St. Louis Park goes far beyond any monetary assessment; the
benefits of volunteer time and commitment to our community and our schools is
immeasurable. Via the V.I.P. Program, volunteers gain first hand knowledge about the
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4f - Volunteer Report 2004-2005
Page 2
city and schools, giving them an appreciation for the dedicated staff and the excellent
work they do on behalf of the students and the community.
Volunteer Programs
Adopt a Hydrant
In December we sent a postcard to all the volunteers reminding them to keep their
hydrant clear all winter.
Adopt a Park/Garden 2004
Volunteers in this program are assigned to their neighborhood park and/or garden. Their
job duties include patrolling and cleaning their park, weeding and tending the garden as
well as reporting any damaged equipment, vandalism etc. to the park staff. (Included are
individuals, groups and families)
# of volunteers – 64
# of parks – 30
# of gardens –18
# of hours – 776
Adult ELL and GED programs
The goal of these dedicated volunteers is to provide one to one help and extra language
practice for students in Community Education’s adult classes.
# of volunteers - 5
# of hours – 203
Art Appreciation
Volunteers are trained to teach six lessons in art appreciation to children in grades K-6.
American Art was the theme of this year’s curriculum. Note: at PSI the lessons are
taught by the Amity staff. We train them as volunteers and provide materials.
# of volunteers - 54
# of classrooms - 96
# of students - 2304
# of presentations - 576
# of hours - 1250
Band Volunteers at Jr. High
Community members join the band class for regular practice.
# of volunteers -3
# of students - 170
# of hours -208
BRAVO!
Classical music is the focus of the BRAVO! Program for grades 1-3 at Peter Hobart and
Aquila. A music background is a requirement for BRAVO! volunteers. They are trained
to teach six lessons that focus on classical music and composers.
# of volunteers - 19
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4f - Volunteer Report 2004-2005
Page 3
# of classrooms - 26
# of students - 598
# of presentations - 156
# of hours – 396
Classroom VIPs
By working in the classroom these volunteers provide enrichment or reinforcement of the
classroom curriculum. Most volunteers are in the school once a week helping students in
the classroom.
# of volunteers - 66
# of students -1401
# of classes - 54
# of hours – 3011
Election Judges 2004
High School students were recruited and trained to be precinct judges for the November
2, 2004, general election.
# of volunteers – 32
# of hours - 343
ELL (English Language Learners) Volunteers
Volunteers help students practice their English verbal and written skills. They also assist
students in learning about American culture and customs.
# of volunteers - 18
# of students - 41
# of hours – 528
Event Judges
Volunteers play a key role in several programs by serving as judges or interviewers for
DECA and Business Professionals events and a science fair.
# of volunteers - 78
# of hours - 226
Family Fishing Day - June 19, 2004
Assisted the Park and Rec in recruiting volunteers for the Family Fishing Day held at
Wolfe Park.
# of volunteers – 4
# of hours – 9
Goblin March and Boogie Concert 2004
Volunteers work at this fun Halloween event held at the Rec Center.
# of volunteers – 30
# of hours – 60
Halloween Party 2004 – Westwood Hills Nature Center
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4f - Volunteer Report 2004-2005
Page 4
Volunteers work before, during and after the annual Halloween Party. They help with
set-up, work the nights of the party and help with clean-up. The V.I.P. office works to
recruit, place, schedule and thank the party volunteers.
# of volunteers –18 for pre party set up help
72 per night for the party and many stayed late for clean up
# of hours – 630 hours which included 54 hours for set up and 576 for the party
High School Media Center Inventory
In May, volunteers helped the High School Media Center staff by conducting an
inventory of over 26,000 items.
# of volunteers - 24
# of hours – 70
Kids Place Student Volunteers for Summer 2004
Students ages 14 and older volunteer in the SLP Community Ed Kids Place Program for
the summer.
# of volunteers – 6
# of hours – 608
Literacy 1st
Volunteers are trained by 1st grade teachers to help beginning readers and writers. Each
volunteer spent about 1½ hours one morning a week helping in a 1st or 2nd grade
classroom.
# of volunteers – 24
# of classrooms – 10
# of students - 250
# of hours – 597
Math Program
Volunteers help once a week in 5th grade
math class at Susan Lindgren and Cedar Manor schools.
# of volunteers – 14
# of students – 162
# of hours – 324
Media Center/ Clerical Volunteers
Volunteers assist in the schools media centers or offices
# of volunteers – 7
# of hours - 411
Mock Interviews
Volunteers conduct mock job interviews with high school business students.
# of volunteers – 16
# of hours – 18
Parktacular - 2004
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4f - Volunteer Report 2004-2005
Page 5
Volunteers helped with the Parktacular Booth, Kiddie parade and the picnic table
painting project.
# of volunteers – 29
# of hours - 54
Pick up the Park 2004
Volunteers are students, local service groups and individuals. The goal of Pick up the
Park is to get as much public space cleaned as possible before mid-May.
# of volunteers – 608
# of parks cleaned – 35 along with all the school playgrounds and surrounding areas
# of bags of trash – 87
# of hours – 329
Pre-school Screening
Volunteers assisted with registration and some parts of the screening.
# of volunteers – 5
# of hours – 93.5
Project Respect
Volunteers are trained to present four lessons designed to teach students to value
themselves and others. The program was at Peter Hobart School. (Aquila has the ACT
program.)
# of volunteers – 4
# of classrooms – 4
# of presentations – 16
# of students – 100
# of hours – 32
Resource Speakers
Volunteers enriched the classroom curriculum by sharing their hobby, career or special
interest with students.
# of volunteers – 20
# of presentations – 58
# of hours – 116
Water Testing Volunteers
Volunteers take water samples from area lakes every two weeks April through October.
# of volunteers – 3
# of hours – 63
Westwood Hills Nature Center
Regular Adult Volunteers 2004
Adult volunteers at Westwood Hills Nature Center assist the staff by helping with classes,
working on maintenance projects, studying wildlife, maintaining the computer web site,
and staffing the front desk between 11 and 1 almost every day so the staff can have lunch
and run errands for the Center.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4f - Volunteer Report 2004-2005
Page 6
# of volunteers – 20
# of hours – 1207
Young Women’s Mentorship Group
Volunteers meet with 7th & 8th grade girls in a group mentorship program eight times a
year serving as positive adult role models and listeners as they explore a variety of
interests and issues important to the students.
# of volunteers - 33
# of students - 64
# of hours – 680
Volunteers are business people, high school students, parents, retirees, community
members and university students. They are recruited through advertisements, direct mail
and word of mouth.
The volunteer office recognizes volunteers throughout the year. This year, volunteers
received “thank you” refrigerator magnets in the fall, candy for Valentines Day, notepads
during Volunteer Recognition week, and a thank you along with coupons from local
businesses and granola bars in May. A special workshop for volunteers was held in
April. The topic was “The State of St. Louis Park Schools” presented by Debra Bowers,
Superintendent of St. Louis Park Schools, and Dan Walker, Assistant Superintendent.
Sarah Krzesowiak was asked to join a group of local Volunteer Coordinators in
presenting volunteering options to interested staff at Michael Foods, a local corporation
based in Minnetonka. The company started a program giving employees paid release
time to volunteer 1 hour a week with children. Nine of the interested employees applied
to be volunteers in St. Louis Park. Four were placed in Literacy 1st, two in ELL, two in
5th grade math and one as a classroom VIP. We hope to have them in our program again
next year.
The 5th grade math program was expanded from Susan Lindgren to Cedar Manor. Seven
volunteers joined the program and helped in the math program at Cedar Manor. Seven
volunteers from last year continued at Susan Lindgren.
Per a special request from Bob Laney at the Senior High, we found a retired teacher to
work with a special needs student at the high school as she prepared for the state tests.
The volunteer worked with her several times a week in December and January before the
tests and then stayed on to help her for the rest of the year.
Because we receive many calls from students and parents looking for short- term
volunteer projects to fulfill a variety of requirements, we put together a brochure of local
agencies that can use teenage volunteers. We place students in city and school programs
when we can, but the timing is not always suitable to our scheduling needs; often we
refer them to other programs. The brochure has been well received by students, parents
and school counselors.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4f - Volunteer Report 2004-2005
Page 7
We worked on several one time projects to assist city and or school staff with volunteers
including: planting gardens at local parks, the Park and Run Event, Arbor Day tree
planting along the bike path, judging science and inventors fairs, and one time classroom
activities at various locations.
The V.I.P. Advisory Council meets regularly to share information and discuss issues
related to the volunteer programs. Members of the V.I.P. Advisory Council for 2004-
2005 were: Kirsten Albright, Susan Benus, Deb Danielson, Terri Johnson, Anita
Kramer, Yvonne Thomas, Anne Monique Vos Rapoport and Sarah Zubke.
Prepared by: Sarah Krzesowiak, Volunteer Coordinator
Reviewed by: Martha McDonell, Outreach Coordinator
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 1
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
July 6, 2005--6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-
Madison, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian
MEMBERS ABSENT: Robert Kramer
STAFF PRESENT: Meg McMonigal, Adam Fulton, Nancy Sells
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
Chair Carper called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes of June 1, 2005 and June 15, 2005
Chair Carper made a motion to approve the minutes of June 1, 2005 and June 15,
2005. The motion was approved on a vote of 5-0. Commissioner Bissonnette
arrived at 6:05 p.m.
3. Hearings
A. Amendment to Comprehensive Plan designation from Low Density and
Commercial to High Density Residential and Rezoning from R-1 Single Family
Residential and C-2 General Commercial to RC Multi-Family Residential to
allow a 12 unit condominium building
Location: 1324 and 1332 Kentucky Avenue South
Applicant: Parrish Hemmeke
Case Nos. 05-28-CP and 05-29-Z
Adam Fulton, Associate Planner, presented the staff report.
Mr. Fulton said a neighborhood meeting was held on June 28th with nine people in
attendance. Concerns raised by the neighborhood included impact to the neighborhood
during construction, traffic impacts at Wayzata and Louisiana, the buffer between the
condominium and the neighborhood, and future parking problems. Mr. Fulton added that
the applicant intends to apply for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) to accomplish the
development. He explained that setbacks, in particular, will be addressed in the PUD
process. The lots are quite small and the density proposed will require some setback
reductions through the PUD process.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 2
Commissioner Robertson asked how many units could be put on the site utilizing all
parking reductions.
Mr. Fulton said it would be extraordinarily difficult to do much more density than the 12
units proposed without putting another level of underground parking in. He explained
that the applicant is already extending a full level of underground parking under a portion
of the designed outdoor recreation area.
Chair Carper said it appears that Planning staff is advocating a buffer between zoning
districts. He referenced an application on Excelsior Boulevard a few months ago where
planning staff advocated against transitional zoning. He asked Mr. Fulton to explain the
inconsistency.
Mr. Fulton suggested that the two cases were different. He explained that traffic
volumes on I-394 were significantly higher and it is a different kind of commercial
district. He described the heavily used Park-and-Ride site directly across from the
Louisiana Ave. corridor. It would be a transition between the commercial uses and the
neighborhood to the south. Mr. Fulton added that the proposal isn’t for extraordinarily
high density but the recommendation was based on the fact that it is changing the zone
from commercial to a residential use and retaining that residential use into the future.
Parrish Hemmeke, applicant, described the proposal. He said the proposal would
eliminate access from the neighborhood development of Kentucky Ave. and the southerly
cul-de-sac and would push the access to Wayzata Blvd. and the northerly cul-de-sac. He
discussed the Eliot neighborhood meeting. Concerns were parking, construction staging,
construction noise and an appropriate buffer between the neighbors to the south and east.
Mr. Hemmeke said access from the building is proposed from the northern cul-de-sac of
Kentucky Ave. with underground parking. Twenty-six stalls are proposed underground
which includes guest parking. He said there is some parallel parking allowed on the
northern cul-de-sac. Regarding construction, he stated that the property borders some
MnDOT property to the west and that could provide some additional access for
construction equipment in addition to the Kentucky Ave. cul-de-sac.
Mr. Hemmeke commented that a crane will be used for first floor level construction
materials which will reduce construction time and construction noise. He said he
doesn’t believe parking will be an issue during or after the project. He went on to say
that once the first floor is constructed construction parking can take place in the
underground parking. Mr. Parrish said the project will benefit the site for the following
reasons: the design aims to develop a highly visible corner that will define the corner
more appropriately, the property lies behind a City of St. Louis Park monument therefore
it is imperative that the surrounding properties be well-maintained and reflect a positive
image for the City, the project is aimed at attracting young professionals who may work
downtown and utilize the transit service directly across the street, and adequate
landscaping proposed will further enhance the site and be an amenity for the
neighborhood. Landscaped areas are to the south and the east which create an
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 3
appropriate buffer zone for the commercial frontage and residential homes to the south
and east.
Chair Carper opened the public hearing.
Brian Sturz, 1344 Kentucky Ave. S., lives just to the south of the proposed development.
He said he bought his home in a residential neighborhood 9 years ago. He is not happy
about having a three-story multi-family building next door to him.
Chair Carper asked him how far his home is from the proposed structure.
Mr. Sturz responded that the proposed structure would be 65 feet from the base of his
home.
Greg Hansen, represented an owner who is out of town, Dennis Hansen of Viking Blinds,
7035 Wayzata Blvd. Dennis Hansen asked him to convey to the Commission that he is
very disappointed about the proposal. Dennis Hansen did attend the neighborhood
meeting on June 28th. He is concerned about parking issues and the overload of traffic.
Greg Hansen stated that parking is much worse during the winter months. The owner
has maintained the cul-de-sac during the winter as the City has not taken care of it. The
access for Viking Blinds is Kentucky Ave. All shipping and receiving comes through
the cul-de-sac to the rear of the building. The range of traffic includes mini vans to full
size semi-trailer tractors coming into the business 5-6 times per day.
Mr. Hansen said Viking Blinds has no parking except in the cul-de-sac. When they first
moved in they received verbal approval to do some perpendicular parking in the cul-de-
sac. Mr. Hansen commented that residential guests and overflow parking may go into
the Park and Ride parking lot which could result in dangerous crossings of Wayzata
Blvd. He said he believes there will be a lot more traffic and trips per day than the
applicant describes. Mr. Hansen said he believes the site needs to be improved but a
three story 12-unit building, is not the correct project and he would hope the Commission
votes no on the request.
For the record Commissioner Morris acknowledged the Commission’s receipt of a letter
from Dennis R. Hansen, Viking Blinds, dated June 30, 2005, opposing the request.
Chair Carper asked if Viking Blinds is using the cul-de-sac as its only commercial
parking area.
Mr. Hansen responded that the cul-de-sac is used only for customer parking. Delivery
vehicles use the cul-de-sac as a turnaround.
Mr. Fulton said that nose-in parking in cul-de-sacs in St. Louis Park is illegal. Parking
parallel to the curb is the only form of legal parking in cul-de-sacs in the City of St. Louis
Park.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 4
As no one else was present who wished to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson commented that the top of the proposed structure at three
stories is still no taller than the adjacent single family homes. He asked if that was due to
a grade change.
Mr. Fulton responded that there is a slight grade change from the adjacent home.
Commissioner Robertson said concerns about construction disruption are temporary.
Aside from parking and traffic impact, he said he would have liked to see a taller
building as a gateway spot. He said to combine the two lots which are currently
substandard and to provide some residential on a site which won’t be single family is a
good move. He said he looks forward to critiquing further plans at the next stages.
Commissioner Morris said he supports the zoning and Comprehensive Plan change. One
of the criteria he bases that support on is that it abuts a very residential area. This is the
end portion of the commercial. He said it appears to fit into the neighborhood. He
went on to say that were it further down Wayzata Blvd. and surrounded by C-2 on either
side he would be less inclined to support it. The amenities that it could give to property
owners are above standard considering its current use.
Commissioner Morris said he does see some areas that need to be worked on for later
review such as sidewalk on Kentucky Ave. and dedication of easement rights to the City
to better develop the cul-de-sac for the existing right-of-way turnaround and sidewalk. If
that impacts the number of units, so be it, but those are issues he will be looking at during
PUD review. He said he would also be looking at the issue of why there is a double cul-
de-sac. Commissioner Morris said he agreed with Commissioner Robertson about
parking. Public streets are for public parking.
Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said this is the first step in a two step
process. If the request is approved, the applicant would have to apply for a Planned
Unit Development which requires another public hearing and a review of building and
site plans in much greater detail.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the Comprehensive
Plan amendment to change the land use designation from Commercial and Low Density
Residential to High Density Residential and to recommend approval of a zoning map
amendment to change the zoning designation from C2 – General Commercial and from
R2 – Single Family Residential to RC – Multi-Family Residential. Commissioner
Morris seconded the motion and the motion was approved on a vote of 6-0.
B. Conditional Use Permit for Car Rental Facility and Variance for parking
Location: 4150 Excelsior Boulevard
Applicant: Avis Rent a Car
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 5
Case No.: 05-30-CUP and 05-31-VAR
Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report.
Commissioner Morris asked for clarification regarding parking. Parking needs were
reviewed.
Jeff Higginbotham, Avis, said he was flexible on requesting three additional parking
spaces for employees. He said the building owner could probably discuss how that could
be structured. He explained that initially Avis wanted the seven parking spaces to be
designated for the rental vehicles. His understanding is that four bays which are double-
deep could accommodate eight inside, so employees could park inside if necessary. The
maximum number of vehicles which could be stored on site would be 15.
Joe Stranek, part owner of the building and owner/operator of Midas, said there are ample
unassigned parking spots which could be used by Avis employees.
In response to Commissioner Timian’s question regarding number of employees, Mr.
Higginbotham replied that primarily there would be one employee, and two during busy
times.
Commissioner Morris asked about fueling of rental cars.
Mr. Higginbotham said rental cars are driven to a local gas station for fueling.
For clarification Commissioner Morris stated that there are two uses taking place on the
property so any conditional use permit is going to affect the other property owner as well
as Avis.
Chair Carper opened the public hearing.
Ken Faulkner, 4225-27 West 36th Street, said the seven parking spaces being referred to
are within 10 feet of the side of his house. He asked about hours of operation.
Mr. Higginbotham said the hours are 8:00 a.m. – 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, 8:00
a.m. – 4:00 p.m. on Saturdays, and 10:00 a.m. – 2:00 p.m. on Sundays.
Mr. Faulkner said there will be three auto operations in the building, not two. He said
he was concerned about the seven parking spaces. He said the spaces are already in full
use by employees. He added that during the winter months there is less space as plowed
snow takes up some of the spaces. He is concerned about future snow storage and
removal. He said his main objection isn’t the seven parking spaces. He is more
concerned about the operation and the change of the ordinance that would allow a noisy
operation next door.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 6
Mr. Faulkner said when Midas built there was a requirement or ordinance that there
would be no overnight parking in the back lot. He said that is violated up to the present
moment. He said there are currently seven cars sitting there right now and they will be
there all night. He said this goes on all the time. He stated that years ago he spoke to
Midas about this and his complaint was ignored. Junk cars have been parked behind
their building. It has become an attractive nuisance. He asked on what basis the City
feels the applicant will comply with the conditions when Midas has been violating
conditions for many years. Mr. Faulkner said he is stuck between two commercial
properties and sometimes he feels they are closing in on him. He commented that no one
was present representing the double bungalow which is along Midas’ long parking lot.
He said that the property is non-owner occupied and recently has a new owner who may
not know about the Avis proposal.
Chair Carper asked the applicant if cars would be parked outside overnight.
Mr. Higginbotham responded that Avis would request that rental vehicles be left outside
overnight for operational reasons. Cars will be secured. He said needs would change
daily. Numbers of cars left outside overnight could range from 1 to 7.
Chair Carper asked Ms. McMonigal about previous agreements for parking in the lot.
Ms. McMonigal said staff could research that.
Mr. Stranek said perhaps the transmission shop had contributed to overnight parking. He
said by changing the use that problem should be alleviated.
Mr. Faulkner asked about the section number of the Ordinance Code referred to in the
public hearing notice.
Ms. McMonigal said the section number referred to the request for a variance to the
ordinance provision that does not allow parking within 100 feet of a residential area. It
does not refer to the overnight parking question raised by Mr. Faulkner.
Mr. Faulkner said he was not concerned about new rental vehicle parking, but was
concerned about junk vehicles which Midas, not the transmission shop, was responsible
for.
Commissioner Robertson encouraged Mr. Faulkner to attend the City Council meeting
which will consider the Avis request, and hopefully the matters Mr. Faulker has referred
to will have been researched by that time.
Mr. Higginbotham said Avis is very flexible about parking anywhere in the parking lot,
such as moving to the west side of the lot. He said he believes Avis will be a benefit to
the business strip.
Commissioner Morris asked Mr. Stranek where snow is stored.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 7
Mr. Stranek responded that snow is stored on site. There has always been ample parking
available.
As no one else was present wishing to speak, Chair Carper closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson commented that the proposed use fits well. He said the request
doesn’t seem like a hardship variance. It points out to him a weakness in the zoning
code that a small rental facility is classified the same as a car sales lot. If such a use was
reclassified similar to car repair then neither a conditional use permit or variance would
be required.
Chair Carper said for expediency it seemed in this case the variance, if deemed
appropriate, needed to be approved. He said the Commission needed to ask staff to look
at the ordinance and make some recommendation for amendment regarding this kind of
issue.
Ms. McMonigal said she has dealt with this issue in other communities. The industry has
changed to a smaller, neighborhood type of service operation so it does have different
characteristics than the category it falls under in the zoning ordinance.
Commissioner Robertson asked about timing. He said he shied away from setting a
precedence of passing a variance and fixing the ordinance afterwards.
Ms. McMonigal said amending the zoning ordinance takes about three months. As far as
a precedence goes, she said she is not so concerned about precedence as it is a different
facility than car sales.
Commissioner Morris requested that Condition No. 2 be clarified to state that no more
than 7 rental cars can be kept outside on the site. He proposed condition No. 5 be added
to state that no vehicle idling or maintenance is permitted in the 7 outside stalls. He
proposed condition No. 6 be added to state that a prominently displayed 24-hour
emergency response phone number be on site. This would be available for the
neighborhood in the case of car alarms going off/noise complaints after hours.
Commissioner Robertson suggested that vehicles not be backed into spaces.
Commissioner Morris said he understood that rental vehicles needed a warm up time, but
that it shouldn’t be unnecessarily extended.
Mr. Higginbotham said it would be Avis’ preference to back the cars in. In the winter
cars to be rented would be brought inside for snow removal and warm up.
Mr. Faulkner said he was concerned about exhaust pipes within 7-8 feet of bedroom
windows. He said he would not put up with idling engines even for a short period of
time with exhaust pipes facing his home. Employees and customers have never backed
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 8
their cars into the lot. He mentioned that shrubbery along the fence will be destroyed if
cars are backed in.
Commissioner Robertson agreed that reference to which way the car be parked in the
parking stall did not need to be part of the conditions or motion, but the discussion should
be part of the record.
Ms. McMonigal suggested it would be a good condition to include with the variance
rather than the conditional use permit, since it relates to the distance.
Commissioner Morris moved to recommend approval of the conditional use permit to
allow an automobile rental facility with amendment to Condition No. 2, and addition of
Conditions No. 5 and No. 6; and approval of the variance to allow 7 rental cars to be
parked within 100 feet of a residentially zoned property with a friendly amendment to
add as a condition to the variance no backing in of cars. Commissioner Robertson
seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
C. Conditional Use Permit for placement of fill for construction of trail link
Location: Between Cedar Lake Rd. and Cedar Lake Regional Trail
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 05-32-CUP
Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report.
Chair Carper asked how many truck loads would be required for the work.
Ms. McMonigal said it would be 1 – 1 ½ weeks of a fair amount of hauling for 5,800
cubic yards of fill material.
Commissioner Morris asked which direction trucks would go from France Ave. He
pointed out that City of Minneapolis construction is occurring north of France Ave. for
Ewing Avenue construction as well as construction at Cedar Lake Parkway north of the
rail corridor.
Ms. McMonigal said conditions can be specified that trucks go south on France to Lake
Street. Ms. McMonigal said she would ask the City Engineer to consult with City of
Minneapolis prior to consideration of this request by the City Council. The haul route
will also be specified in the contract.
Chair Carper opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the
Chair closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use
Permit to allow the excavation of approximately 5,800 cubic yards of soil from the
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 9
location described subject to conditions. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion.
The motion passed on a 6-0 vote.
4. Unfinished Business: None
5. New Business
A. Elmwood Ave. Street Vacation
Location: Portion of Edgewood Ave. S. lying south of Cambridge
Street
Applicant: William F. Smith, Business Centers
Case No.: 06-27-VAC
Ms. McMonigal stated that the applicant has requested that the application be
withdrawn from the Planning Commission agenda.
6. Communications
A. Recent City Council Action – June 20, July 5
Commissioner Robertson inquired about Planning Commission
recommendations made to the City Council regarding the cluster housing
zoning amendment. Ms. McMonigal responded that the City Council
did not approve the recommendations made by the Planning Commission,
but passed the first reading of the ordinance as originally proposed to the
Commission. Commissioner Robertson stated that as a result, the City
no longer has cluster housing of any form as a tool with which to develop
larger lots.
7. Miscellaneous
Ms. McMonigal said that the Commission is invited to the City Council study
session on July 11th for further discussion on zoning code changes related to
Housing Summit items and process changes.
Chair Carper thanked Commissioners Morris and Robertson for their attendance
and participation at the City Council presentation regarding the condominium
study. Chair Carper also attended that session.
8. Adjournment
Commissioner Robertson moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:40 p.m.
Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of
6-0.
Respectfully submitted,
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4g - Plan Commission minutes 7-6-05
Page 10
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4h - Wolfe Park VIC Program Declaration of Covenants
Page 1
4h Motion to adopt a resolution authorizing submittal of a Declaration of Restrictions
and Covenants and Affidavit Concerning Real Property Contaminated with
Hazardous Substances in Wolfe Park
Background:
Construction activities associated with expansion of the St. Louis Park Recreation Center in
1996/1997 encountered rubbish materials from former dumping activities. Actions were taken
during construction to address environmental concerns through an MPCA Voluntary Inspection
and Cleanup (VIC) program.
Processed and unprocessed rubbish materials were covered with a permeable geotextile fabric as
a physical barrier between the rubbish impacted materials and overlying topsoil. Rubbish
materials in a parking lot area were covered by geotextile and overlying bituminous asphalt
pavement. It was determined that maintenance of the grass vegetated hill slope and pavement
areas would effectively minimize potential for direct contact with the rubbish materials which
remain in place on the site. A groundwater investigation conducted in 2003 found no significant
groundwater impacts requiring remediation.
An Interim Response Action Plan (IRAP) was prepared and submitted to the MPCA on
September 18, 1996. The IRAP provided historical information, results of soil boring and test pit
observations, characterization of waste materials, methane testing and wetland impacts, a plan
for segregation of impacted materials during specific construction activities, and laboratory
analyses and discussion of potential local impacts. Since the submittal of the IRAP document,
remediation has taken place and all actions identified in the IRAP have been completed.
Under the VIC Plan, the City agreed to place a restrictive covenant on the property for the
purpose of protecting the public health and welfare. Now that the City’s remediation efforts are
complete we are prepared to submit the final declaration of restrictions and covenants.
The attached resolution authorizes the City Manager and Director of Parks and Recreation to
endorse and submit the Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants and Affidavit concerning Real
Property Contaminated with Hazardous Substances on behalf of the City. This Declaration of
Restrictions will run with the property and bind the City and all future owners of the property.
The restrictions are unlimited in duration unless terminated, released and/or amended with the
written consent of the MPCA Commissioner.
Attachment: Resolution
Prepared By: Cindy Reichert, City Clerk
Reviewed By: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved By: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 4h - Wolfe Park VIC Program Declaration of Covenants
Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 05-099
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA,
AUTHORIZING SUBMITTAL OF A DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS AND
COVENANTS AND AFFIDAVIT CONCERNING REAL PROPERTY
CONTAMINATED WITH HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES IN WOLFE PARK
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is the fee owner of certain real property commonly
referred to as the St. Louis Park Recreation Center and Wolfe Park located in Hennepin County,
Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, the City entered into an agreement with the Minnesota Pollution Control
Agency (“MPCA”) to clean up and cover contamination as part of the Wolfe Park and Excelsior
& Grand redevelopment project; and
WHEREAS, the City is submitting the final Declaration of Restrictions and Covenants and
Affidavit concerning Real Property Contaminated with Hazardous Substances; and
WHEREAS, this resolution authorizes Thomas K. Harmening and Cynthia S. Walsh to
endorse this document granting a real interest in property for the Wolfe Park and Excelsior and
Grand area;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, by this resolution and public record, authorize Thomas K. Harmening and
Cynthia S. Walsh, on behalf of the City of St. Louis Park, to endorse and submit the Declaration
of Restrictions and Covenants and Affidavit concerning Real Property Contaminated with
Hazardous Substances.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 1, 2005
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 1
6a. Consideration of the establishment of Special Service District #4 (along
westerly Excelsior Boulevard between Highway 100 and Louisiana Avenue)
and the imposition of a service charge within the District.
Recommended
Action:
Close the Public Hearing
1. Motion to approve 2nd reading of the attached ordinance to
create Special Service District #4, adopt ordinance, approve
summary, and authorize summary publication.
2. Motion to approve attached resolution imposing a service
charge for Special Service District #4.
Background:
The city is considering the installation of infrastructure improvements along Excelsior Boulevard
west of Highway 100 to Louisiana Avenue in conjunction with Hennepin County’s planned
street reconstruction project between 2006 and 2008.
These special “streetscape” improvements would be similar to those installed on the east side of
Excelsior Blvd. (from Highway 100 to France Ave.) and would include low level pedestrian
lighting, banner poles, banners, tree lights, and bollards as well as landscaping and irrigation
systems.
To date, three special service districts have been established along the eastern Excelsior
Boulevard corridor. The special service districts provide funding for the proper maintenance of
the streetscape improvements. In order to maintain the proposed streetscape improvements
along Excelsior Boulevard west of Highway 100 a fourth special service district must be
established. As with the other three previous improvement projects, the city has worked with
adjacent commercial property owners along the western portion of Excelsior Boulevard to arrive
at a proposed special service district that would be designed specifically to accommodate their
particular preferences.
At its July 18, 2005 meeting, the City Council unanimously approved the 1st reading of the
ordinance creating Special Service District #4
What has been the extent of communication with the affected property owners?
Three newsletters were mailed to affected commercial property owners regarding how a special
service district would operate and how the fees would be calculated and collected. Two
information meetings were held (February 3rd and March 3rd.) where more specific information
was provided including a Preliminary District Budget and Cost Allocation for each property.
Subsequently, city staff and its consultant, Hoisington Koegler Group Inc (HKGi) met
individually with various property owners within the proposed area of Special Service District #4
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 2
to discuss the potential improvements, the special service district concept, and answer questions
relevant to their particular properties.
In addition, detailed information describing the proposed district and how costs would be
allocated was distributed to all property owners.
Has the city received the sufficient level of petitions required to hold a public hearing?
There are a total of 28 separate, commercial parcels in the proposed district. To date, 10 or 36%
of commercial property owners along the western portion of Excelsior Boulevard submitted
petitions requesting that the City Council conduct a public hearing to discuss the establishment
of a special service district. These property owners represent approximately 81% of the affected
land area and 47% of the tax capacity of property that would be subject to the proposed service
charge. According to state statute, 25% of the land area and 25% of the net tax capacity of
property subject to the service charge are required to petition in order for the Council to convene
a public hearing.
What services will the district provide?
The district will provide for the maintenance of landscape materials, decorative lighting, banners,
banner poles, the irrigation system as well as electric service (see attached List of Proposed
Services). Unlike the other three special service districts, the majority of property owners
expressed little interest in a higher level of snow and ice removal beyond what the city is
currently providing; thus snow removal is not part of the proposed district’s budget. However,
the proposed ordinance includes snow and ice removal in the list of services to be provided
should property owners request it at a later time.
How were the costs allocated to the property owners?
The Annual Service Charge is based on the amount of front footage each commercial property
has along Excelsior Boulevard. While there are other methods, front footage was determined to
be the most easily understood and obtained.
How would the service charges be collected?
The service charges will be collected through annual property tax payments. Due to the lag time
between levy and collection, the service charges will be certified to the County this fall. The
service charges would then be collected along with property taxes in May and October of 2006.
This will enable expenses to be incurred and paid for beginning in 2007.
Is there a cap on the amount of the annual service charges?
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 3
Yes, the maximum service charges to be imposed in 2006 and 2007 are outlined in the attached
Proposed Operating Budget and Service Charge Allocation. Pursuant to the proposed resolution,
the annual service charges may increase or decrease from the maximum authorized budgeted
amount in the preceding year based upon changes in the Consumer Price Index (All Items) for
the Minneapolis/St. Paul area. Such increases or decreases may not fluctuate more than 5% per
year (which is the same for the other three districts).
Who determines and controls the annual operating budget?
As with the other three districts, an advisory board consisting of district property owners
appointed by the City Council will be formed to oversee the district’s operation. The advisory
board will advise the City Council in connection with the maintenance and operation of the
improvements and the furnishing of special services in the district. The advisory board will
recommend the annual budget to the City Council. It will also make recommendations to the City
Council on requests and complaints of owners, occupants, and users of property within the district
and members of the public.
How will the activities approved by the advisory board be implemented?
The city’s Public Works Coordinator will coordinate the advisory board and ensure that the
district’s services are properly implemented.
What is the term of the district? Are there limitations?
The proposed district has a term of 10 years (same as the other three districts) at which time
property owners must formally reapprove the district.
Recommendation:
Given that the minimum petition requirements were more than satisfied and the City Council
unanimously approved the 1st reading of the ordinance at its July 18, 2005 meeting, staff
recommends approval of the 2nd reading of the ordinance creating Special Service District #4
and approval of the resolution imposing a service charge within the district.
Next Steps:
If the City Council approves the recommended action, a 45-day veto period begins August 2,
2005. Provided that 35% of the affected property owners do not submit a petition to veto the
formation of the district by September 15, 2005 the district will be in full force and affect the
following day.
Attachments:
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 4
• Ordinance Authorizing Creation of SSD #4
• Resolution Imposing a Service Charge
• Proposed List of Properties w/in SSD#4
• Proposed Map of Special Service District #4
• Proposed Cost Allocation
• Proposed Operating Budget
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 5
ORDINANCE NO. 2298-05
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING CREATION OF
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 4
WHEREAS, the City has received a petition to establish a special service district pursuant to
Minnesota Statutes, Section 428A.02 (the "Petition") from the owners of certain property located adjacent to
Excelsior Boulevard within an area approximately bounded by Highway 100 westerly to Louisiana Avenue.
The specific properties included within this area are identified on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and generally
depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and the right-of-way adjacent thereto; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Council (the "City Council") has determined each of the
following:
(A) The owners of at least twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the land area of property that
would be subject to the service charge have signed the Petition;
(B) The owners of at least twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the net tax capacity of property
that would be subject to the service charge have signed the Petition;
(C) It is appropriate to establish a special service district; and
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing concerning the petition to establish a special service
district was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on June 30, 2005 and July 7, 2005. Additionally, the City
mailed notice of the hearing to the owner of record of each parcel within the area proposed to be included
within the special service district. For the purposes of giving such mailed notice, the notice was sent to
those shown on the records of the County Auditor. The City Council has determined that said notices were
published and sent in accordance with the requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 428A.02. The public
hearing was held on July 18, 2005, before the St. Louis Park City Council.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES
ORDAIN:
SECTION 1. Establishment of District. The City hereby establishes a special service district
pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 428A.01 through 428A.101 (the “Act”) consisting of the properties
identified on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and the right-of-way
adjacent thereto (the "District").
SECTION 2. Services to be Performed.
2.01 Provision of Services. The City may provide or contract for services in the District; except,
however, that the special services provided shall not include a service that is ordinarily provided throughout
the City from the general fund revenue of the City unless an increased level of service is provided in the
District.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 6
2.02 Description of Services. The City may provide or contract for the following services:
(a) Cleaning and scrubbing of sidewalks; cleaning of curbs, gutters, alleys, and streets.
(b) Purchase, installation, maintenance, removal, and replacement of banners and other
decorative items for promotion of the District.
(c) Poster and handbill removal.
(d) Repair and maintenance of sidewalks.
(e) Snow and ice clearance and removal from sidewalks.
(f) Purchase, installation, maintenance, and removal of area-wide security systems.
(g) Coordination of security personnel to supplement regular City personnel.
(h) Purchase, installation, maintenance, repair, cleaning, and removal of area directories,
kiosks, benches, bus shelters, newspaper stands, trash receptacles, information booths,
bicycle racks and bicycle storage containers, sculptures, murals, and other public area art
pieces.
(i) Purchase, installation, maintenance, and removal of decorative lighting on area trees.
(j) Cost of electrical service for pedestrian and decorative tree lighting.
(k) Repair of low-level pedestrian lights and poles.
(l) Comprehensive liability insurance for public space improvements.
(m) Trash removal and recycling costs.
(n) Purchase, installation, maintenance, replacement, and removal of special signage relating to
vehicle and bicycle parking, vehicle and pedestrian movement, and special events.
(o) Watering, fertilizing, maintenance, and replacement of trees, shrubbery, and annual flowers
and perennials on the public right-of-way.
(p) Repair, maintenance and replacement of irrigation system.
(q) Maintenance and operation of a public transit system.
(r) Promotion and administration.
(s) Maintenance of a reserve fund or capital reserve fund.
(t) Installation, maintenance, and removal of capital improvements.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 7
SECTION 3. Service Charge.
3.01 Petition Requirements. Before taking any action to impose a service charge to pay the cost
of services described in Section 2, owners of twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the land area subject to
the proposed service charge must file a petition requesting a public hearing on the proposed action with the
City Clerk. Before taking any action to impose any other type of service charge to pay the cost of services
described in Section 2, owners of twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the net tax capacity subject to the
proposed service charge must file a petition requesting a public hearing on the proposed action with the City
Clerk.
3.02 Relationship to Service. The City may impose service charges against properties located
within the District pursuant to Minnesota Statutes. The City may impose service charges that are reasonably
related to the special services provided. Charges for services shall be as nearly as possible proportionate to
the cost of furnishing the service, and may be fixed on the basis of the service directly rendered, or by
reference to a reasonable classification of the types of premises to which service is furnished, or on any
other equitable terms. Taxes and service charges may be levied pursuant to this ordinance to finance special
services ordinarily provided by the City only if the services are provided in the District at an increased level
and, then, only in an amount sufficient to pay for the increase.
3.03 Limitation of Service Charges. Only property classified under Minnesota Statutes, Section
273.13 as commercial, industrial, or public utility purposes and located within the District may be subject to
the service charges imposed by the City. Property exempt from taxation by Minnesota Statutes, Section
272.02 is exempt from any service charges based on net tax capacity.
SECTION 4. Imposition of Service Charge.
4.01 Public Hearing. Before imposing a service charge in the District, for each calendar year,
the City shall hold a public hearing. At the hearing, a person affected by the District or the proposed service
charge may testify on any issues relevant to the proposed service charge. The hearing may be adjourned
from time to time.
4.02 Notice of Hearing. The City shall give prior notice of the public hearing to impose service
charges required by Section 4.01. Notice of the public hearing must be mailed to any property owner
subject to the proposed service charge. Notice of the public hearing shall be given in two (2) separate
publications of the City's official newspaper two weeks apart and the public hearing shall not be held less
than three (3) days after the later publication. Not less than ten (10) days prior to the hearing, notice shall be
mailed to the owner of record of each parcel of real estate within the District. For the purpose of giving
such mailed notice, owners shall be those shown on the records of the County Auditor. For properties
which are tax exempt or subject to taxation on a gross earnings basis in lieu of property tax and are not listed
on the records of the County Auditor, the owners shall be ascertained by any practical means, and mailed
notice given them.
4.03 Content of Notice. The notice shall include:
(a) a statement that all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard at
the hearing regarding the proposed service charge;
(b) the estimated cost of improvements to be paid for in whole or in part by service
charges imposed, the estimated cost of operating and maintaining the
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 8
improvements during the first year and upon completion of the improvements, the
proposed method and source of financing the improvements, and the annual cost of
operating and maintaining the improvements;
(c) the proposed rate or amount of the proposed service charge to be imposed in the
District during the calendar year and the nature and character of the special
services rendered in the District during the calendar year in which the service
charge is to be collected;
(d) a statement that the petition requirements of Minnesota Statutes have either been
met or do not apply to the proposed service charge; and
(e) if the City is adopting a resolution imposing a service charge for more than one
year, the information required by Section 4.05 below.
4.04 Adoption of Resolution. Within six (6) months of the public hearing, the City may adopt a
resolution imposing a service charge within the District not exceeding the amount or rate expressed in the
notice issued under this Section.
4.05 Multi-year Service Charge. The City may adopt a resolution imposing a service charge for
more than one year. The City must give notice of such a resolution by including with the notice of public
hearing required by Section 4.02, and including with the notice mailed with the adopted resolution the
following information:
(a) In the case of improvements constructed within the District, the maximum service
charge to be imposed in any year and the maximum number of years charges
imposed to pay for the improvements; and
(b) In the case of operating and maintaining services, the maximum service charges to
be imposed in any year and the maximum number of years charges imposed to pay
for the service, or a statement that the service charges will be imposed for an
indefinite number of years.
The resolution imposing a service charge for more than one year may provide that the maximum service
charge to be imposed in a year will increase or decrease from the maximum amount authorized in the
preceding year based on an indicator of increased cost or a percentage amount established by the resolution.
Each calendar year, a public hearing must be held regarding the imposed service charge. Notice of the
hearing must be given and must be mailed to any individual or business organization subject to the service
charge. The notice must be sent in the manner specified in Section 4.02. The notice shall include the
information specified in Section 4.03(a) through (d). The purpose of the hearing shall be to allow persons or
companies affected by the service charge to testify on any issue related to the service charge.
SECTION 5. Imposition of Service Charges. Except as otherwise provided herein, the service
charges imposed shall be imposed against parcels of real estate within the District in the manner and subject
to the procedures provided in Minnesota Statutes. The service charges shall be imposed annually. Service
charges may be collected in advance of, contemporaneously with, or subsequent to the rendering of services
to which the service charges relate.
SECTION 6. Collection of Service Charges.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 9
6.01 Imposition and Collection. The City may impose service charges on the basis of the net tax
capacity of the property on which the service charge is imposed, but must be spread only upon the net tax
capacity of the taxable property located in the District. All service charges may be payable and collected at
the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes. For
purposes of determining the appropriate tax rate, taxable property or net tax capacity shall be determined
without regard to captured or original net tax capacity under Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177 or to the
distribution or contribution value under Minnesota Statutes, Section 473F.08.
6.02 Penalty and Interest. When service charges are made payable in the same manner as
provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes, service charges not paid on or before the
applicable due date shall be subject to the same penalty and interest as in the case of ad valorem tax amounts
not paid by the respective date.
6.03 Due Date. The due date for a service charge payable in the same manner as ad valorem
taxes is the due date given in law for the real or personal property tax for the property on which the service
charge is imposed. Service charges imposed on net tax capacity which are to become payable in the
following year must be certified to the County Auditor by the date provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section
429.061, Subd. 3 for annual certification of special assessment installments. Other service charges imposed
may be collected as provided by the resolution imposing service charges.
SECTION 7. Revenue Surplus. To the extent that the total of service charges collected exceed
the cost of services rendered within the District, at the election of the City, all or a portion of such excess
amount shall either be held as a reserve to pay the cost of future services provided under this ordinance or
applied to reduce the next year’s service charge levy.
SECTION 8. Advisory Board.
8.01 Composition and Appointment. An advisory board to be known as the Special Service
District Advisory Board consisting of a number of members determined by the City Council, at its
discretion, who are residents of the District or owners (or their representatives) of property within the
District, may be created by the City Council by Resolution. At the time of adopting a resolution, the City
Council may approve a set of By-laws which will govern the advisory board's activities. The City Council
at its discretion may pass a resolution terminating or suspending the advisory board.
8.02 Role of Board. The advisory board shall advise the City Council in connection with the
construction, maintenance, and operation of improvements and the furnishing of special services in the
District. The advisory board shall recommend an annual budget to the City Council. It shall make
recommendations to the City Council on requests and complaints of owners, occupants, and users of
property within the District and members of the public. Before the adoption of any proposal by the City
Council to provide services or impose taxes of service charges within the District, the advisory board of the
District shall have an opportunity to review and comment upon the proposal.
8.03 Removal and Termination. The City Council reserves for itself the right, at its sole
discretion, to remove members of the advisory board, with or without cause, or to disband and terminate the
advisory board before the expiration of the District.
SECTION 9. Veto Powers.
9.01 Notice of Veto Right. Within five (5) days after adoption of the ordinance establishing the
District or a resolution imposing a service charge, the City shall mail a summary of the ordinance or
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 10
resolution to the owner of each parcel included within the District and any individual or business
organization subject to the service charge. For the purpose of giving such mailed notice, owners shall be
those shown on the records of the County Auditor. For properties which are tax exempt or subject to
taxation on a gross earnings basis in lieu of property tax and are not listed on the records of the County
Auditor, the owners shall be ascertained by any practical means, and mailed notice given them.
9.02 Content of Notice. The notice must state that the owner, business, or person subject to the
service charge has the right to veto the ordinance or resolution by filing the required number of objections
with the City Clerk before the effective date of the ordinance or resolution. The notice must also state that a
copy of the ordinance or resolution is on file with the City Clerk.
9.03 Requirements for Veto.
(a) Veto of Ordinance. If the owners of thirty-five percent (35%) or more of the land
area in the District subject to a service charge based upon net tax capacity or
owners of thirty-five percent (35%) or more of the net tax capacity in the District
subject to a service charge based on net tax capacity file an objection to this
ordinance with the City Clerk before the effective date of the ordinance, the
ordinance does not become effective.
(b) Veto of Resolution - Net Tax Capacity. If the owners of thirty-five percent (35%)
or more of the land area in the District subject to a service charge based upon net
tax capacity or owners of thirty-five percent (35%) or more of the net tax capacity
in the District subject to a service charge based on net tax capacity file an objection
to the resolution imposing a service charge based upon net tax capacity with the
City Clerk before the effective date of the resolution, the resolution does not
become effective.
(c) Veto of Resolution - Other Basis. If thirty-five percent (35%) or more of the
individuals and business organizations subject to a service charge file an objection
to the resolution imposing a service charge on a basis other than net tax capacity
with the City Clerk before the effective date of the resolution, the resolution does
not become effective.
9.04 Effect of Veto. In the event of a veto, no district shall be established during the current
calendar year and until a petition meeting the requirements set forth in this Section for a veto has been filed.
9.05 Exclusion. The veto powers of this Section do not apply to second or subsequent years'
applications of a service charge that is authorized to be in effect for more than one year under a resolution
meting the petition requirements of Section 3.01 and which has not been vetoed under this Section 9 for the
first years' application.
SECTION 10. Enlargement of District. Boundaries of the District may be enlarged only after
petition, hearing and notices as provided in Minnesota Statutes. Notice must be served in the original
District and in the area proposed to be added to the District. The petition to enlarge the District must include
a request for the imposition of service charges sufficient to provide services to the property. Petition
requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Section 428A.08 and the veto power of Minnesota Statutes, Section
428A.09 shall only apply to owners in the area proposed to be added to the District.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 11
SECTION 11. Definitions and Construction. The terms used herein shall be defined as provided
in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 428A and this ordinance shall be construed consistently therewith.
SECTION 12. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective on the forty-fifth (45th) day
following adoption, which effective date shall be September 16, 2005.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK AUGUST 1, 2005.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By: ____________________________
ATTEST: Mayor
_______________________________
City Clerk
REVIEW FOR ADMINISTRATION: APPROVED AS TO FORM AND EXECUTION:
________________________________ _________________________________
City Manager City Attorney
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 12
RESOLUTION NO. 05-100
RESOLUTION IMPOSING A SERVICE CHARGE
FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT NO. 4
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows:
Section 1. Recitals: Findings.
1.01 Pursuant to Ordinance No. ______, (the “Ordinance”) the City created a special service
district for certain property located adjacent to Excelsior Boulevard within an area approximately bounded
by Highway 100 westerly to Louisiana Avenue. The specific properties included within this area are
identified on Exhibit "A" attached hereto and generally depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto and the
right -of-way adjacent thereto (the "District").
1.02 The City has received a petition requesting a public hearing to impose a service charge
from the owners of property within the District (the "Petition").
1.03 The City Council has determined each of the following:
(a) at least twenty-five percent (25%) of the individuals or business organizations
subject to the proposed service charge have signed the Petition;
(b) only owners of property located within the District have signed the Petition;
(c) only owners of property classified under Minnesota Statutes, Section 273.13 as
commercial, industrial, or public utility purposes, or that is vacant land zoned or
designated on a land use plan for commercial, industrial, or public utility purposes,
have signed the Petition; and
(d) notice of a public hearing has been given and a public hearing has been held.
Section 2. Imposition of Service Charge.
2.01 Amount of Service Charge. There is hereby imposed a service charge in the amounts and
against the properties specified on Exhibit "C" attached hereto (the "Service Charge").
The City imposes a service charge, payable in 2006, for special services provided during the period of
January 2007 - December 2007 in a maximum amount of $37,900. The maximum service charge in all
subsequent years will be calculated pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.04.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 13
2.02 Multi-year Service Charge. The Service Charge imposed by this resolution is a charge for
more than one year. The Service Charge will remain in effect through and including the year 2015 for taxes
payable in said year.
2.03 Calculation of Service Charge. The Service Charge for all costs related to the District shall
be distributed based upon the front feet adjacent to Excelsior Boulevard for each parcel within the District
and subject to the Service Charge.
2.04 Inflation Adjuster. Commencing with the service charge payable in 2006, the maximum
service charge to be imposed in any year (the "Current Year") will increase from the maximum authorized
budgeted amount for the year immediately preceding the Current Year (the "Prior Year") based upon the
following:
The Consumer Price Index (All Items) for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area, published by the United
States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics ("Index"), which is published for the date nearest the
commencement of the Current Year (the "Current Year Index"), shall be compared with the Index published for
the date nearest the commencement of the Prior Year (the "Prior Year Index"). If the Current Year Index has
increased over the Prior Year Index, the Maximum Service Charge shall be increased by multiplying the
Maximum Service Charge by a fraction, the numerator of which is the Current Year Index and the denominator
of which is the Prior Year Index. If the Index is discontinued or revised, such other government index or
computation with which it is replaced shall be used in order to obtain substantially the same result as would be
obtained if the Index had not been discontinued or revised. Notwithstanding increases in the Index of greater
than five percent (5%), the Maximum Service Charge shall not increase from any Prior Year to any Current
Year by an amount greater than five percent (5%) of the Prior Year's Service Charge.
2.05 Distribution of Total Service Charge. The distribution of the total Service Charge among
properties within the District and subject to the Service Charge may vary and shall be recalculated pursuant
to the formula specified in Section 2.03 if and to the extent that: (i) the front footage of sidewalks
constructed on such properties increases or decreases; or (ii) a parcel increases or decreases in size by
acquisition or sale.
2.06 Use of Revenues. Revenues collected through the imposition of service charges may be used
by the City for any purposes authorized in the Ordinance. Exhibit D contains the services proposed for
funding in 2006. The services and the revenues allocated to each service are subject to change at the
discretion of the City.
Section 3. Collection of Service Charges.
3.01 Collection. The Services Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in
the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; except that the City may
directly bill owners of parcels located within the District and subject to the Service Charge for the Service
Charge due and payable in calendar year 2006. For purposes of determining the appropriate tax rate, taxable
property or net tax capacity shall be determined without regard to captured or original net tax capacity under
Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.177 or to the distribution or contribution value under Minnesota Statutes,
Section 473F.08. Any service charge due and payable in calendar year 2006 that remains unpaid as of
October 31, 2006, shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for
payment and collection of ad valorem taxes in the year 2007.
3.02 Penalty and Interest. Service Charges made payable in the same manner as provided for
payment and collection of ad valorem taxes, if not paid on or before the applicable due date, shall be subject
to the same penalty and interest as in the case of ad valorem tax amounts not paid by the respective date.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 6a - 2nd Public Hearing for SSD#4
Page 14
3.03 Due Date. The due date for the Service Charge payable in the same manner as ad valorem
taxes is the due date given in law for the real or personal property tax for the property on which the service
charge is imposed. Service Charges imposed on net tax capacity which are to become payable in the
following year must be certified to the County Auditor by the date provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section
429.061, Subd. 3 for annual certification of special assessment installments.
Section 4. Revenue Surplus. To the extent that the total of Service Charges collected exceed
the cost of services rendered within the District, at the election of the City, all or a portion of such excess
amount shall either be held as a reserve to pay the cost of future services provided under this resolution or
applied to reduce the next year’s service charge levy.
Section 5. Recording. The City may record this Resolution against parcels located within the
District and subject to the Service Charge for the purpose of providing notice of the Service Charge to
prospective purchasers of such parcels.
Section 6. Effective Date. This Resolution shall be effective on the forty-fifth (45th) day
following adoption, which effective date shall be September 16, 2005.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK AUGUST 1, 2005.
____________________________________
Mayor
Attest:
_______________________________
City Clerk
Reviewed for administration: Approved as to form and execution:
_______________________________ __________________________________
City Manager City Attorney
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8a - Park Tavern
Page 1
8a Request by Park Tavern for a Major Amendment to a Special Permit to
construct a building addition at 3401 Louisiana Avenue South.
Case No. 05-15-CUP
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution amending and restating
Resolution No. 6805, authorizing a Major Amendment to a
Special Permit to allow the construction of a building
addition, subject to conditions as recommended in the
resolution.
Zoning Designation: C-2, General Commercial
Comp. Plan Designation: Commercial
SUMMARY:
A Major Amendment to a Special Permit is requested by Park Tavern for the purpose of
the construction of a building addition. Park Tavern has indicated its intent to use the
building addition as a smoking room, subject to conditions outlined by Hennepin County
Ordinance No. 24 “Smoke-Free Ordinance” and related policies.
At a public hearing, the Planning Commission considered Park Tavern’s request and
recommended approval of a major amendment enabling construction of the smoking area
at its June 1, 2005 meeting. No interested parties attended the meeting or spoke either for
or against the smoking area.
The Council first considered Park Tavern’s request at the July 18, 2005 regular meeting.
Due to concerns arising out of potential conflicts between Hennepin County’s ordinance
and policies and the City’s Liquor Ordinance, the Council continued this item until the
August 1, 2005 meeting. As the pertinent land use issues still apply to Park Tavern’s
request, the staff report from the July 18, 2005 meeting is attached. This report will focus
on concerns raised at the previous Council meeting.
Since July 18 staff has had extensive conversations with the City Attorney and Hennepin
County staff. Although verbal exchanges of information occurred, repeated efforts to
secure a letter from the County Attorney’s office regarding Park Tavern’s proposed
addition have been unsuccessful.
In the final analysis, and for the purpose of reviewing Park Tavern’s current proposal, all
that really should be considered by the Council is whether it is appropriate for Park
Tavern to expand the existing facility by 410 square feet in relation to our own codes and
standards. The Planning Commission and staff both recommend approval of the
amendment to the Special Permit, subject to conditions provided in the resolution.
Included in those conditions are items regarding liquor sales and conformity with
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8a - Park Tavern
Page 2
Hennepin County Ordinance No. 24.
ISSUES:
• What is Park Tavern proposing to build?
• What restrictions are placed on Park Tavern’s employees as a result of the
proposed building addition?
ANALYSIS:
What is Park Tavern proposing to build?
Park Tavern is proposing a 410 square foot building addition to the northwest corner of
the existing building. The connection to the proposed addition will be made through Park
Tavern’s existing dining area. Park Tavern plans to use this room as an indoor space for
smoking, as allowed by Hennepin County Ordinance No. 24, Hennepin County’s related
Enforcement Policy, and as confirmed by County staff.
Based on our discussions with the County, Park Tavern is allowed to create an indoor
space for smoking by Hennepin County Ordinance No. 24 due to its status as a multiple-
use facility. So long as no smoke is allowed to migrate between the different portions of
a building, a multiple-use facility is allowed to provide an indoor smoking area based
upon Hennepin County’s enforcement policy.
What restrictions are placed on Park Tavern’s employees if smoking is allowed in
the proposed building addition?
If used for smoking, the proposed building addition will be governed by the policies set
by Hennepin County in relation to Ordinance No. 24. The document states that “Patrons
in the non-food establishment smoking area cannot receive food from the food
establishment if it requires food establishment employees to bring food or take away dirty
dishes from the smoking area.”
In order to maintain compliance with St. Louis Park’s Liquor Ordinance, Park Tavern
employees must have full access to the smoking room during all business hours. To this
end, the Hennepin County policy only precludes employees from entering a smoking
room in regard to table service, and does not specifically address whether employees may
or may not enter a room to monitor the activities taking place therein. For this reason
Park Tavern should be able to operate in conformance with the Liquor Ordinance.
The Liquor Ordinance requires that employees have continuous access to any space
where liquor is consumed. To further facilitate access and visibility, a condition of
approval of the amendment to the Special Permit requires Park Tavern to install windows
between the main dining area and the smoking area to provide visual contact between the
main building and the addition.
Though the policy issued by Hennepin County specifically states that no employee shall
“take away dirty dishes from the smoking area,” the Hennepin County Attorney’s office
and other Hennepin County staff have verbally indicated that they believe it is within the
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8a - Park Tavern
Page 3
bounds of that policy for employees to remove debris and maintain a clean, sanitary
space within a smoking room. However, no staff from Hennepin County has agreed to
provide a written statement to that effect.
RECOMMENDATION:
Motion to adopt a resolution amending and restating Resolution No. 6805, authorizing a
Major Amendment to a Special Permit to allow the construction of a building addition,
subject to conditions as recommended in the resolution.
Attachments:
• Resolution Amending and Restating Resolution No. 6805, to allow the construction
of a building addition
• June 18, 2005 Staff Report for Case No. 05-15-CUP
• Location Map
• Site Plan
• Development plans
• Existing Special Permit
• FAQs – Hennepin County Smoking Ban
• Letter from Philip Weber, owner, Park Tavern
• Photographs, Park Tavern – smoking area location
Prepared by: Adam W. Fulton, Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8a - Park Tavern
Page 4
RESOLUTION NO. 05-101
Amends and Restates Resolution No. 6805
A RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION NO.
6805 ADOPTED ON APRIL 6, 1981, AND GRANTING AMENDMENT
TO EXISTING SPECIAL PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-36 OF THE
ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO
ALLOW A BUILDING ADDITION AT 3401 LOUISIANA AVENUE
SOUTH
FINDINGS
WHEREAS, Philip Weber (Park Tavern – Philips Investment Co.) has made
application to the City Council for an amendment to an existing special permit under
Section 36-36 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code to allow a building addition at 3401
Louisiana Avenue South within a C-2 General Commercial Zoning District having the
following legal description:
Lot 1, Block 6, Oak Park Village (Abstract)
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the information related to Planning
Case Nos. 79-22-SP and 05-15-CUP and the effect of the proposed building addition on
the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and
anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area
and the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan; and compliance with the intent of
the Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a special permit was issued regarding the subject property pursuant
to Resolution No. 6805 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated April 6, 1981 which
contained conditions applicable to said property; and
WHEREAS, due to changed circumstances, amendments to those conditions are
now necessary, requiring the amendment of that special permit; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this resolution to continue and restate the conditions
of the permit granted by Resolution No. 6805, to add the amendments now required, and
to consolidate all conditions applicable to the subject property in this resolution;
WHEREAS, the contents of Case Nos. 79-22-SP and 05-15-CUP are hereby
entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this
case.
CONCLUSION
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8a - Park Tavern
Page 5
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution No. 6805 (document not
filed) is hereby restated and amended by this resolution which continues and amends a
special permit to the subject property for the purposes of permitting a building addition
within the C-2 General Commercial District at the location described above based on the
following conditions:
A special permit for a restaurant/bowling alley and a Class I restaurant is granted
based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions:
1. That the site be developed, used and maintained in accordance
with Exhibit A, Site Plan; Exhibit B, Topography Plan and Utility
Plan; Exhibit C, Elevation Plan, except as modified and as stamped
received by the Planning Department on June 20, 1979 and except
as modified by Exhibit D, New Site Plan, which permits
construction of the southerly wall up to eleven feet off from the
south property line and the northeasterly wall for up to six feet off
from the east property line and provided that said area between the
lot line and the building line be properly backfilled and compacted
to guarantee against settlement, be graded for proper drainage, and
be landscaped with trees and grass and maintained thereafter, and
except that the basement shall be eliminated and comparable
square foot area added at the northeast corner of the structure as
shown on Exhibit E, New Site Plan No. 2; and Exhibit F, New
Floor Plan; and further except that the sidewalk on the east side of
the parking lot south of the entrance area may be deleted.
2. That a chain link fence be allowed against the building and
extending above the rooftop along Oak Leaf Drive and 2nd Street
Northwest.
3. That Exhibit A, Site Plan, with respect to the landscape items can
be amended as follows:
a. Seven sunburst locust can be changed to seven seedless
ash.
b. Nine mountain ash can be changed to seven skyline locust.
c. Four black hill spruce can be added—three at the north end
of the building and one along the southwest wall.
d. Planting of ivy along the northeasterly and southeasterly
wall where the chain link fence exists.
4. That all improvements, including development of the bowling
alley and restaurant and landscaping, paving, curbing, lighting and
other items shown on the exhibits be completed by June 15, 1981.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8a - Park Tavern
Page 6
5. The special permit shall be amended on July 18, 2005 to allow for
construction of a 410 square foot building addition to Park Tavern’s
northwestern corner, and shall incorporate all of the preceding conditions
and add the following conditions:
a. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional
requirements, Park Tavern shall:
1. Meet all Public Works Department/Utility requirements as
recommended by staff.
2. Building and architectural screening materials samples & colors
must be submitted to and approved by Zoning Administrator.
3. Meet any Fire Department emergency access requirements for
during construction.
4. Revise building plan to include a minimum of three windows
measuring no less than 6 square feet to act as a means of viewing
the interior of the building addition from the existing restaurant.
b. Park Tavern shall comply with the following conditions during
construction:
1. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that
there be no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and
7 a.m. on weekdays and 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and
holidays.
2. Loud equipment shall be kept as far as possible from residences
at all times.
3. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto
neighboring properties.
4. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned
as necessary.
5. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it
becomes necessary in order to mitigate the impact of construction
on surrounding properties.
c. Park Tavern shall at all times remain in compliance with Hennepin
County Ordinance #24, “Hennepin County Smoke-Free Ordinance” and
all related Hennepin County enforcement policies.
d. Park Tavern shall at all times remain in compliance with all laws
governing the sale of alcohol in the State of Minnesota and the City of
St. Louis Park.
e. Park Tavern shall repair any portions of the existing on-site parking lot
that are currently in a state of disrepair, by November 1, 2005.
f. No future building expansions, not including interior and exterior
remodeling, shall be permitted without Park Tavern or future occupant
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8a - Park Tavern
Page 7
first coming into full compliance with parking requirements of the
Zoning Code.
g. No future building expansions, including any exterior remodeling and
any improvements to the site’s landscaping or parking lot, but not
including any interior remodeling, shall be permitted without Park
Tavern or future occupant first coming into full compliance with the
City’s requirements for stormwater.
In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee
of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval.
Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or
structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed.
Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if
applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of building permit.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council July 18, 2005
City Mana ger Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
Res-ord/2005/05-15-CUP
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8b - TS 597 Pennsylvania Park Traffic Controls
Page 1
8b. Traffic Study No. 597: Basketweave stop sign pattern in the Pennsylvania Park
neighborhood.
This report considers the installation of a basketweave stop sign pattern in the
Pennsylvania Park neighborhood.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolutions authorizing the
installation of stop signs in a basketweave pattern in the
Pennsylvania Park neighborhood.
Background: The City received a request from a resident in the Pennsylvania Park
neighborhood for the installation of stop signs at the intersection of W. 18th Street and Maryland
Avenue. The request was made due to perceived cut-through traffic and high traffic speed. The
intersection is currently uncontrolled.
Staff from the Traffic Department reviewed the intersection and found that there were no sight
line issues and the observed traffic levels were very low. The Police Department showed only
one accident in the last three years at this intersection. Based on this information, staff
determined the intersection would not meet warrants for a stop sign installation. Staff discussed
the situation with the resident, and advised that the City’s Traffic Control Policy supported the
use of a basketweave stop sign pattern for traffic calming. The resident was interested in
pursuing this alternative. The Pennsylvania Park neighborhood does not have an organized
neighborhood group, so staff set up a neighborhood meeting to discuss the potential basketweave
stop sign pattern. The meeting was held on June 2, 2005, at City Hall.
At the meeting, 12 residents attended, representing seven (7) households. Staff presented two
basketweave options to the residents. The residents supported the basketweave stop sign pattern
which slowed north/south cut-through traffic. They suggested several minor modifications,
including leaving an existing 3-way stop at the intersection of W. 16th Street and Pennsylvania
Avenue as well as removing the proposed stop signs at 13th Lane West and Pennsylvania Avenue
and 13 ½ Street and Pennsylvania Avenue. Staff felt that the 3-way stop condition at W. 16th
Street and Pennsylvania Avenue was warranted due to the pedestrian traffic along the regional
sidewalk at W. 16th Street, and that the removal of the proposed stop signs at 13th Lane and 13 ½
Street was acceptable due to the low volumes of traffic.
One resident was very interested in a stop sign on Pennsylvania Avenue at W. 14th Street for the
southbound direction only. Staff is opposed to this stop as it does not fit with the rest of the
basketweave pattern and because stopping only the southbound traffic creates a dangerous
situation. Other than that intersection, the resident was generally in favor of the proposed
installation.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8b - TS 597 Pennsylvania Park Traffic Controls
Page 2
After the meeting of June 2, a second letter was sent out with a map of the proposed
basketweave. Only two comments were received and were supportive of the proposal.
A final neighborhood meeting was held on Thursday, July 21st at City Hall. The purpose of the
meeting was to gather final comments from residents. Three (3) residents attended, representing
two (2) households. The residents commented that they were supportive of the basketweave
plan, but were concerned about the removal of the northbound and southbound stop signs at
Pennsylvania Avenue and W. 18th Street. The residents stated that they thought that this would
leave too long a stretch on Pennsylvania Avenue with no stops. The removal of the northbound
and southbound stop signs at this intersection is a part of the basketweave pattern, and as there
are no connecting sidewalks at this intersection or other safety issues there is no reason to retain
a three-way stop condition. Staff recommends that the northbound and southbound stop signs at
the intersection of Pennsylvania Avenue and W. 18th Street be removed as proposed.
Analysis: The City’s Traffic Control Policy allows basketweave stop sign installation for traffic
calming, provided there is area-wide resident involvement and support for the basketweave plan.
In this case, the initial request was made by a resident and the residents in the area have been
involved and are supportive of the proposal. Staff feels that the basketweave installation will
help to resolve the north/south cut-through traffic issues the neighborhood is experiencing.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Council approve the attached resolutions
authorizing installation of a basketweave stop sign pattern in the Pennsylvania Park
neighborhood.
Attachments: Pennsylvania Park Basketweave Map (Supplement)
Resolutions (2)
Prepared By: Laura Adler, Engineering Program Coordinator
Reviewed By: Scott A. Brink, City Manager
Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved By: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8b - TS 597 Pennsylvania Park Traffic Controls
Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 05-102
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PLACEMENT OF
STOP AND YIELD SIGNS FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL
AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 4385
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 4385, adopted November 1, 1971 by the City Council
authorized and directed the placement of stop and yield signs at various locations; and
WHEREAS, some stop signs at those locations should be removed since the signs are no
longer necessary, and some stop signs are still necessary.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota that Resolution No. 4385 is rescinded, and
LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Public Works is hereby
authorized to remove the following control:
Ÿ Stop signs on Pennsylvania Avenue at West 18th Street for north and south bound
traffic
LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Public Works is hereby
authorized to install the following controls:
Ÿ Four-way stop signs at Dakota Avenue and West 28th Street
Ÿ Stop signs on Brunswick, Colorado, Edgewood, Florida, Georgia, Idaho and Jersey
Avenues where they intersect with 28th Street
Ÿ Stop signs on 29th Street at the intersection with Hampshire Avenue
Ÿ Stop signs on 27th Street at Hampshire and Dakota Avenues
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 1, 2005
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8b - TS 597 Pennsylvania Park Traffic Controls
Page 4
RESOLUTION NO. 05-103
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION OF BASKETWEAVE STOP SIGN
PATTERN IN THE PENNSYLVANIA PARK NEIGHBORHOOD AND RESCINDING
RESOLUTION NOS. 5053 AND 84-132
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 597
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has been requested, has studied, and
has determined that traffic controls are necessary in the Pennsylvania Park neighborhood, and
WHEREAS, Resolutions No. 5053, adopted May 6, 1974, and Resolution No. 84-132
adopted August 20, 1984 by the City Council authorized and directed the placement of stop signs
in the area described above; and
WHEREAS, some stop signs at these locations should be removed since they are no
longer necessary and some stop signs are still necessary.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota that
Resolution No. 5053, adopted May 6, 1974, and Resolution No. 84-132, adopted August 20,
1984 are hereby rescinded, and
LET IT FURTHER BE RESOLVED that the Director of Public Works is hereby
authorized to remove the stop signs at the following locations:
Ÿ Eastbound and westbound W. 16th Street approaches to Nevada Avenue
Ÿ Northbound and southbound Nevada Avenue approaches to W. 18th Street
LET IT FURTHER BE RESOLVED that the Director of Public Works is hereby
authorized to install the following controls:
Ÿ Northbound and southbound Maryland Avenue approaches to W. 18th Street
Ÿ Northbound Maryland Avenue approach to W. 14th Street
Ÿ North bound and southbound Nevada Avenue approaches to W. 16th Street
Ÿ Southbound Nevada Avenue approach to Franklin Avenue
Ÿ Northbound and southbound Oregon Avenue approaches to W. 18th Street
Ÿ Eastbound and westbound Franklin Avenue approaches to Maryland Avenue
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8b - TS 597 Pennsylvania Park Traffic Controls
Page 5
Ÿ Eastbound and westbound Franklin Avenue approaches to Oregon Avenue
Ÿ Eastbound and westbound W. 18th Street approaches to Nevada Avenue
Ÿ Eastbound and westbound W. 16th Street approaches to Maryland Avenue
Ÿ Eastbound and westbound W. 16th Street approaches to Oregon Avenue
Ÿ Eastbound and westbound W. 14th Street approaches to Nevada Avenue
Ÿ Eastbound W. 14th Street approach to Pennsylvania Avenue
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 1, 2005
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8c - Salary Cap
Page 1
8c Salary Cap Changes Effective August 1, 2005
This report explains how recent salary cap legislation affects St. Louis Park
employees
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution revising employee salaries affected
by the change in the salary cap, removing PTO and revising a
section of our personnel manual.
Background: At the June 27, 2005 Council Study Session, we discussed the salary cap and
change of legislation and how it relates to St. Louis Park. With the change in the salary cap, we
are able to revise the compensation of the 2 positions affected by the cap: City Manager and
Public Works Director.
Changes to the law: Below is a listing of changes to the salary cap which will give us some
assistance in compensation. In general, the changes are as follows:
• The Governor’s salary is $120,303/year. The cap has moved from 95% of the
Governor’s salary ($114,288/yr) to 110% ($132,333/yr).
• The change is effective August 1, 2005.
• Beginning in 2006, the limit shall be adjusted annually in January. The limit shall equal
the limit for the prior year increased by the percentage increase, if any, in the Consumer
Price Index for all–urban consumers from October of the second prior year to October of
the immediately prior year.
• Those with a waiver above the cap shall be adjusted by the same percentage increase (as
above).
What does this mean for our employees affected by the cap?
We have 2 positions at the cap - City Manager and Public Works Director. As discussed at the
Study Session, we would like to move them off the PTO (paid time off) program since we now
have the ability to compensate them at the salary level set by Council for 2005, without use of
paid time off.
Question – what to do with PTO balance for City Manager?
The 2005 salary range set for City Manager is $115,097 - $135,408. The Council approved an
annual salary of $127,200 for City Manager for 2005. Car allowance is set at $600/mo. To
comply with the salary cap (our limit based on the waiver we received was $116,600), part of
this compensation level was converted to PTO.
The City Manager will have a balance of 199.85 PTO hours as of July 31, 2005 (balance from
2004 and part of 2005). The value of this balance is $11,203.19. At the June Council Study
Session, Council stated they would like to move ahead and make adjustments as follows:
1. Transfer the PTO hours of the City Manager into a Health Care Savings Plan (HCSP).
This can be set up to automatically with an effective date of July 31st .
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8c - Salary Cap
Page 2
2. Add a section to our personnel policy that any PTO in future years will automatically
transfer to a HCSP each July 31st.
Salary & PTO balance for Public Works Director
The salary range for Public Works Director is $97,750 - $115,000/year. The Council approved
an annual salary of $115,000 for the Public Works Director for 2005. To comply with the salary
cap, $114,288/year was paid as salary and $712/year was planned to be set as PTO (0.5 hours
accrued per pay period). With the change to the salary cap in 2005, the amount placed in PTO
for the Public Works Director will be able to be paid as compensation so he can receive
$115,000 in 2005 (no PTO).
Funding
Funds for compensation and PTO are included in the annual budget.
Recommendation
The attached resolution will:
• Transfer the PTO balance of the City Manager into a HCSP effective July 31, 2005.
• Approve a change from PTO to compensation for the City Manager and Public Works
Director.
• Add a section to our personnel policy that will automatically move any PTO earned in
future years to a Health Care Savings Plan each July 31.
Prepared & Approved By: Nancy Gohman, HR Director/Deputy City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8c - Salary Cap
Page 3
RESOLUTION NO. 05-104
RESOLUTION REVISING EMPLOYEE SALARIES AFFECTED BY THE CHANGE IN
SALARY CAP, REMOVING PTO AND REVISING A SECTION TO OUR PERSONNEL
MANUAL
WHEREAS, The City Council wishes to adopt policies for City employees which ensure
adequate compensation, leave and benefits for City employees and which protect the ethical
standards of the City of St. Louis Park;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park
approves the:
A. Transfer of the PTO balance of 199.85 hours with a value of $11,203.19 for Tom
Harmening, City Manager to a Health Care Savings Plan.
B. Change PTO balance to compensation for Mike Rardin, Public Works Director.
C. Compensate the City Manager at $127,200/year, and Public Works Director at
$115,000/year, the salary levels set by Council on 1/3/05, and eliminate the use of PTO
effective 8/1/05.
D. PTO will not be used unless approved salaries exceed the salary cap.
E. Add the following language to the PTO Section of the Personnel Manual: Each July 31,
all hours in the PTO balance must transfer to a Health Care Savings Plan account
established for the employee in accordance with plan requirements.
Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council
City Manager: Mayor:
Attest:
City Clerk:
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 1
8d. Request of Mr. Parrish Hemmeke for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment
from Commercial and Low Density Residential to High Density Residential;
and a Zoning Map Amendment from C2 – General Commercial and R2 –
Single Family Residential to RC – Multi-Family Residential.
Location: 1324 and 1332 Kentucky Avenue
Applicant: Mr. Parrish Hemmeke
Case No.: 05-28-CP and 05-29-Z
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt Resolution No. 000, approving an amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan for 1324 and 1332 Kentucky Avenue
South; and a motion to approve the publication of a summary of
Resolution No. 000.
Motion to adopt the first reading of Ordinance No. 00, an
ordinance amending the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code
changing boundaries of zoning districts for 1324 and 1332
Kentucky Avenue South from C2 and R2 to RC, Multi-Family
Residential
Current Zoning:
1324 Kentucky: C2 – General Commercial
1332 Kentucky: R2 – Single Family Residential
Comprehensive Plan:
1324 Kentucky: Commercial
1332 Kentucky: Low Density Residential
Parcel Size: 0.37 acres when combined
Current Land Use Vacant/Parking/Single Family Home
Proposed Land Use Residential Condominiums
Other required approvals: Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Background:
Mr. Parrish Hemmeke has applied for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Official
Zoning Map for 1324 and 1332 Kentucky Avenue. At the present time, 1324 Kentucky Avenue
is an underutilized vacant commercial parking lot, and 1332 Kentucky Avenue is a renter-
occupied single family home. Mr. Hemmeke has indicated that if he should receive approval of
his proposed amendments, he intends to apply for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the
construction of a 3-story 12-unit condominium building. In addition, the existing parcels will
need to be replatted. Mr. Hemmeke’s proposal calls for the inclusion of underground parking and
uses a portion of the land for a stormwater pond. The proposal will also require Mr. Hemmeke
to replat the existing lots.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 2
The applicant held a neighborhood meeting to explain the project and to improve the project
after listening to neighborhood concerns. That meeting was held on June 28, 2005, at the Lenox
Community Center. Nine residents from the surrounding area attended the meeting, and voiced
concerns regarding the building’s proximity to the neighboring properties, whether or not
parking could be accommodated, and if the project would result in additional traffic problems in
the neighborhood.
Subsequent to the neighborhood meeting, a public hearing was held before the Planning
Commission at its July 6, 2005 meeting. The concerns of those who spoke at the Planning
Commission meeting are detailed below. The Planning Commission recommended approval of
the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning.
Issues:
• What is the Comprehensive Plan and zoning history of the properties?
• What is the current status of the existing property?
• What other uses would be permitted under the proposed rezoning?
• How will the proposed Comprehensive Plan & zoning amendments affect neighboring
properties?
• How will the proposed amendment affect local traffic?
• What issues arose during the public hearing before the Planning Commission?
• What issues may arise as part of the forthcoming PUD review?
What is the Comprehensive Plan and zoning history of the property?
The northern parcel, 1324 Kentucky, was traditionally a commercial property zoned C-2. At the
time I-394 was constructed, any former structures on the parcel were demolished and a
significant portion was taken for highway purposes, leaving a small commercial parcel of 5,517
square feet. The parcel was originally used as excess parking for the gasoline station at 7005
Wayzata Boulevard. The southern parcel is zoned R-2 and has been used as a location for a
detached single-family home.
At the current time, the Comprehensive Plan calls for dense commercial development along the
south I-394 frontage road, provided that adequate buffering between commercial and residential
uses is a part of any development plans. The Comprehensive Plan currently dictates that the
northern parcel be used for commercial and that the southern parcel be used for low-density
residential.
The Eliot Plan by Neighborhood section of the Comprehensive Plan indicates a desire for better
pedestrian lighting, more neighborhood sidewalks, and additional on-street parking.
What is the current status of the existing property?
The northern parcel is currently used as small parking lot and is in poor condition. At the current
time, there is no assigned user of the parking lot, though it has been informally used for the
storage of derelict vehicles and as a parking lot for adjacent businesses. The southern parcel is
currently used for a single family home. The parking lot is accessed through a cul-de-sac that
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 3
terminates prior to meeting the southern lot; consequently, the parking lot cannot be accessed
from the majority of the Eliot neighborhood except by traveling first along the southern I-394
frontage road.
Kentucky Avenue was split into two cul-de-sacs during the construction of I-394 because policy
makers at that time believed a through street would result in excess cut-through traffic in the
Eliot neighborhood. The attached site plan graphically indicates the two cul-de-sacs on
Kentucky Avenue.
What other uses would be permitted under the proposed amendments?
The proposed amendments allow high density residential development. On this particular site
residential development would be constrained by the available parking and required setbacks.
Though it is not required, Mr. Hemmeke has indicated that he intends to apply for a PUD to
complete a condominium project that will be of superior quality. The RC zoning district allows
for structures up to 75 feet in height at a density not to exceed 50 units per acre. The lots in
question are quite small and construction will not approach the maximum limits allowed in the
RC zoning district. A PUD must be used because the proposal exceeds maximum setback and
floor area requirements.
The proposed amendments would eliminate the possibility that the southern lot could be used for
a single family home. However, it would enable the use of the non-conforming northern
commercial parcel, which because of its size and dimensions cannot be redeveloped without
being joined together with an adjacent parcel.
How will the proposed Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments affect neighboring
properties?
The requested amendments to the northerly commercial parcel will reduce the intensity of the
potential use from commercial to residential. The requested amendments to the southerly parcel
will increase the intensity of use from low density residential to high density residential.
As a consequence, the effect upon neighboring properties is significant. Eliminating a
commercial district that is directly adjacent to a low-density residential neighborhood would
benefit the neighborhood. However, such a development comes only after the loss of an existing
single-family home. The development proposed for the two lots would act as a buffer between
the existing residential neighborhood, the adjacent interstate highway and adjacent commercial
uses.
At the present time, the two lots are adjacent to property owned by the Minnesota Department of
Transportation. That property is located to the west of 1324 and 1332 Kentucky, and is currently
zoned R-4 Multi-Family Residential. It is unlikely that the parcel will be developed for
residential purposes in the near future, because located on that parcel is a significant vegetated
berm and a monument sign welcoming people to St. Louis Park.
How will the proposed amendment affect local traffic?
The site in question is quite small and very few dwelling units can be built on this site, even
under the requirements of the RC zoning district. While the RC zoning district allows up to 75
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 4
units per acre, the applicant is planning to build only 12 units; resulting in a density of 32 units
per acre on the 0.37 acre site. Traffic impacts resulting from a project of this scale would be
limited.
City staff is currently investigating whether a traffic study of the intersection of Wayzata
Boulevard (I-394 Frontage Road) and Louisiana Avenue would be necessary prior to the
consideration of the proposed PUD application. Initial data from the Institute of Transportation
Engineers Trip Generation manual indicates that each condo unit will generate up to 5.86 trips
per day, for a total of 70 additional trips to and from the proposed condo building. It also
indicates that no more than 6.25 trips entering or exiting can be expected from the proposed
condo building during a single hour of peak traffic in the morning or the evening.
At the time I-394 was built, Kentucky Avenue was split into two adjacent cul-de-sacs to
minimize cut-through traffic in the neighborhood. At this time, the parking lot was also created
at 1324 Kentucky Avenue. It is the northern cul-de-sac that would be used for an entrance to the
proposed site, resulting in any new traffic emptying onto Wayzata Boulevard. The neighborhood
to the south would be inaccessible to those residents except by foot or bicycle.
The existing northern cul-de-sac provides some parking for the retail business to the east.
Parking in cul-de-sacs is allowed in St. Louis Park so long as it does not interfere with traffic
safety measures required by the Fire Marshal or City Engineer. In addition, no parking is
allowed within five feet of the intersections between public roads, public and private driveways,
and even then on-street parking may only be parallel to the curb. Only parallel parking may take
place within the cul-de-sac.
The site has the potential of acting as a transit-oriented development. The proposed
condominiums would place a 12-unit owner-occupied building less than a block from an existing
park-and-ride location with regular service to downtown Minneapolis. It is possible that
residents of a future condominium building in this location would choose to live there for that
reason.
What issues arose during the public hearing before the Planning Commission?
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan
amendments and rezoning on July 6, 2005. At that meeting, several concerned parties spoke in
regard to the proposed condominium building. The owner of the commercial property to the east
of the proposed condos indicated concerns regarding parking during the construction period.
Owners of residential properties located to the south of the proposed condos indicated concern
regarding noise during the construction period, the location of the proposed building in relation
to their homes, and the changing character of the Eliot neighborhood.
In response to these concerns, the Mr. Hemmeke indicated that the builder would attempt to
shorten the construction period as much as possible by using pre-fabricated concrete for the
structural portions of the building. Mr. Hemmeke also stated that the building is located 65 feet
from the existing residential property to the south, which was as far as was possible given the
site’s size. He also explained that the building would be designed so as to have as low a height
as possible in relation to the neighboring properties. The elevation on the site is lower than the
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 5
elevation of the properties to the south, allowing Mr. Hemmeke to build a 3-story building at a
height not exceeding 30 feet; 30 feet is the height limit in the R-2 zoning district.
The Planning Commission ultimately voted unanimously to recommend approval of the
proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezoning. Two Commissioners spoke directly to
the prominence of the site and explained their view that the proposed condominium building will
act as a gateway to the community from the north. It was acknowledged that the building will act
as a buffer between the freeway and the residential properties to the south. The Planning
Commission also noted that a portion of the existing northern cul-de-sac is located within the
subject property, as shown on the as-built survey. The Planning Commission recommended that
the applicant grant those portions of the cul-de-sac within their property to the City during the
replatting process.
It was noted at the Planning Commission meeting that only parallel parking is allowed in the cul-
de-sac. The cul-de-sac is currently typically parked with cars facing perpendicular to the street,
which is illegal. However, such parking concerns are enforced on a complaint-only basis. It is
expected that if the proposed condominium building is ultimately approved, illegal parking in the
cul-de-sac would cease to occur on a regular basis.
What issues may arise as part of the forthcoming PUD review?
At the time of application for Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments, the applicant
indicated his intent to apply for a PUD for the proposed development. Because of the relatively
small size of the proposed lot, the development project will be carefully analyzed with respect to
such code requirements as floor area ratio, designed outdoor recreation area (DORA), setbacks,
stormwater, and parking.
The applicant plans to apply to replat the two existing parcels into condominium ownership at
the time of the application for a PUD.
Summary:
Mr. Hemmeke’s properties at 1324 and 1332 are currently zoned and guided residential and
commercial. The proposal calls for both parcels to be zoned RC – Multi-Family Residential and
to be guided for a high density residential use in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Hemmeke is
proposing the construction of a 3-story condominium building that will include twelve single-
family attached dwelling units. All required parking at the proposed condominium building
would be accounted for underground; the proposal also accounts for garbage and recycling
storage in the underground parking ramp. To accommodate the City’s requirements for
stormwater management, the proposal includes a stormwater pond along the south side of the
property.
Recommendation:
Motion to adopt Resolution No. XX, a resolution approving an amendment to the
Comprehensive Plan for 1324 and 1332 Kentucky Avenue South; and a motion to approve the
publication of a summary of Resolution No. XX.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 6
Motion to adopt the first reading of Ordinance No. XX, an ordinance amending the St. Louis
Park Ordinance Code changing boundaries of zoning districts for 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Avenue South.
Attachments: Location Map
Existing and Proposed Comprehensive Plan Map
Existing and Proposed Zoning Map
Proposed Condominium Building
Site Plan
Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Associate Planner
Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director
Approved by: Nancy Gohman, Deputy City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 7
RESOLUTION NO. 05-102
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364
1324 and 1332 KENTUCKY AVENUE SOUTH
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 was adopted by the City Council on
May 17, 1999 (effective September 1, 1999) and provides the following:
1. An official statement serving as the basic guide in making land use, transportation and
community facilities and service decisions affecting the City.
2. A framework for policies and actions leading to the improvement of the physical,
financial, and social environment of the City, thereby providing a good place to live and work
and a setting conducive for new development.
3. A promotion of the public interest in establishing a more functional, healthful,
interesting, and efficient community by serving the interests of the community at large rather
than the interests of individual or special groups within the community if their interests are at
variance with the public interest.
4. An effective framework for direction and coordination of activities affecting the
development and preservation of the community.
5. Treatment of the entire community as one ecosystem and to inject long range
considerations into determinations affecting short-range action, and
WHEREAS, the use of such Comprehensive Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and
more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and
will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and
WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change,
thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities
of adjacent units of government, and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning
Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified according to
procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and
are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan, and
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 8
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended
adoption of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 on July 6, 2005, based on
statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, extensive research and analyses involving the
interests of citizens and public agencies;
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the
Planning Commission (Case No. 05-28-CP);
WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case File 05-28-CP are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that the
Comprehensive Plan, as previously adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council, is
hereby amended as follows:
Change the land use designation as shown on the attached map from Low Density to
High Density Residential (1332 Kentucky) and Commercial to High Density Residential (1324
Kentucky).
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 1, 2005
Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan
Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 9
SUMMARY
RESOLUTION NO. 05-103
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364
1324 and 1332 KENTUCKY AVENUE SOUTH
This resolution states that Comprehensive Plan land use designations will be changed from Low
Density to High Density Residential (1332 Kentucky) and Commercial to High Density
Residential (1324 Kentucky).
Adopted by the City Council August 1, 2005
Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council
Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this resolution is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: August 11, 2005
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8d - Urban Lofts 1324 and 1332 Kentucky
Page 10
ORDINANCE NO.__________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE
CHANGING BOUNDARIES OF ZONING DISTRICTS
1324 and 1332 KENTUCKY AVENUE SOUTH
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the
Planning Commission (Case No. 05-29-Z).
Section 2. The St. Louis Park Zoning Ordinance adopted December 28, 1959,
Ordinance No. 730; amended December 31, 1992, Ordinance No. 1902-93, amended December
17, 2001, Ordinance No. 2216-01, as heretofore amended, is hereby further amended by
changing the zoning district boundaries by reclassifying the following described lands from their
existing land use district classification to the new land use district classification as indicated for
the tract as hereinafter set forth, to wit:
Parcel 1: Lots 357 and 358, “Richmond”
Parcel 2: That part of Lots 355 and 356, “Richmond”, lying Southeasterly of the
following described line: beginning at a point on the West line of said Lot 356, distant 3
feet North of the Southwest corner thereof; thence run Northeasterly to the Northeast
corner of Lot 355, said Richmond and there terminating, except any portion thereof taken
for highway or street purposes.
from R-1 Single Family Residential to RC Multi-Family Residential (Parcel 1) and C-2 General
Commercial to RC Multi-Family Residential (Parcel 2).
Section 3. The contents of Planning Case File 05-29-Z are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Section 4. The ordinance shall take effect upon Metropolitan Council approval of
associated Comprehensive Plan amendment.
(Insert Signature Block Here)
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
Item: 080105 - 8e - AVIS CUP and Variance
Page 1
8e. Request by AVIS Rent-A-Car for a Conditional Use Permit to allow an
automobile rental facility together with a variance to allow 7 rental cars to be
parked within 100 of a residentially zoned property.
Case Nos. 05-30-CUP and 05-31-VAR
4150 Excelsior Blvd.
Recommended
Action:
• Motion to adopt a resolution approving a Conditional Use
Permit to allow an automobile rental facility at 4150
Excelsior Blvd.
• Motion to adopt a resolution approving a variance to allow 7
rental cars to be parked within 100 feet of a residentially
zoned property.
Site Map:
Excelsior BoulevardM
o
n
t
e
r
e
y
D
riv
e
36 1/2 Street West
Site
Zoning: C-2 General Commercial
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial
Proposal:
AVIS Rent-A-Car is proposing to open a car rental office at 4150 Excelsior Blvd. The operation
entails maintaining a small office, cleaning cars returned to this site, and keeping up to 7 cars
outside the building.
AVIS would occupy the space recently vacated
by Auto Glass Specialists. Auto Glass
Specialists had a small office in the front of the
building along Excelsior Blvd, with four
service bays behind the office space. AVIS
would continue to use the office space as an
office, and would use the four service bays to
clean the rental cars that are returned to this site
by customers. In addition to this, they would
like to store up to seven rental cars outside the
building along the northeast property line.
These seven parking spaces would serve as
spaces for customers to park a car when
returning it, and for parking a car waiting to be
picked up by a customer. The applicant states
that AVIS will never have more than seven
rental cars parked outside the building.
A conditional use permit is required because the proposed use qualifies as the “motor vehicle
sales” land use as defined in the zoning ordinance. The motor vehicle sales land use, as defined,
covers both the sale and rental of motor vehicles. Therefore, the proposed use of automobile
rental qualifies as the “Motor Vehicles Sales” land use even though the applicant is not
proposing to sell vehicles at this site. Some conditions, however, are required, one of which is
that the storage lot shall be no closer than 100 feet from a residentially zoned property. The
adjacent property to the north east is zoned R-3, and the required 100 foot setback covers the
entire width of the existing parking lot of the subject property.
Existing Conditions:
The subject property, shown to the right
as viewed from Excelsior Blvd, is made
of brick, and is nicely landscaped. The
office portion of the building faces
Excelsior Blvd, and there are four service
bays that face the commercial building
next door, and are barely visible from
Excelsior Blvd. The building to the east
is constructed at the side property line,
and has no windows or doors opening
toward the subject property.
7 parking spaces
4 service bays
Office
Excelsior Blvd
The area where the rental cars are proposed
to be parked is well screened from the
neighboring property by a 6 foot privacy
fence and mature landscaping. These
proposed parking spaces would be signed
for AVIS use only. In the past, the parking
spaces were used for customer and
employee parking for the auto glass shop,
Cottman Transmission Center and Midas
repair shop.
The proposed AVIS use reflects a reduction
in the required parking for the site, even
though they would reserve 7 spaces for
parking of rental vehicles. The auto glass
repair shop was a motor vehicle repair land
use, and required 17 parking spaces. The
AVIS rental facility requires 3 parking spaces for customers and employees, and will keep up to
7 rental cars parked on site, for a total of 10 spaces.
Planning Commission Action:
Commissioner Morris moved to recommend approval of the conditional use permit to allow an
automobile rental facility with amendment to Condition No. 2 to state that no more than 7 cars
can be parked outside, and addition of Conditions No. 5, 6 and 7 prohibiting idling and
maintenance of cars outside the building, and providing for a 24 hour phone number, together
with approval of the variance to allow 7 rental cars to be parked within 100 feet of a residentially
zoned property with a condition that cars cannot be backed into the spaces. Commissioner
Robertson seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
Some comments were made at the public hearing and a copy of the minutes pertaining to this
application are attached for your review. As part of that discussion, the Planning Commission
asked if Midas was approved with a condition that prohibited overnight parking of cars. Staff
reviewed the history, and was not able to find such a condition. Therefore, it appears that
overnight parking of vehicles is currently allowed.
Issues:
• What will be the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of
occupants of surrounding lands?
• What will be the effect on existing and anticipated traffic conditions, including parking
facilities on adjacent streets?
• What will be the effect on property values in the surrounding area?
• What will be the effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan?
• Does the proposed variance meet the required findings?
Issues Analysis:
What will be the effect of the proposed use on the health, safety and welfare of occupants of
surrounding lands?
Staff believes that the proposed application does not have an effect on the health, safety and
welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands. The parking lot is existing, and is currently
being used for parking customer and employee vehicles, some of which are in various stages of
repair. There is an existing 6 foot privacy fence between the parking lot, together with mature
landscaping that provides a buffer and screen which protects the residents from any visual and
noise effects from the parking lot. AVIS will reserve the parking spaces immediately adjacent to
the duplex to the east, so these spaces will be occupied by new vehicles, rather than vehicles that
are in various stages or repair.
What will be the effect on existing and anticipated traffic conditions, including parking
facilities on adjacent streets?
Staff believes that the AVIS use will generate less traffic and require less parking than the
previous Cottman Transmission and auto glass repair shop, which is evident by the reduced
parking required by the zoning ordinance.
What will be the effect on property values in surrounding the area?
Staff believes that the AVIS application will not have an affect on property values. The building
and parking lot are existing, and AVIS is not proposing any changes to either the building or
parking lot. The parking lot is screened from the adjacent duplex with a 6 foot privacy fence, and
mature landscaping, which includes a wall of arborvitae and over story trees.
What will be the effect of the proposed use on the Comprehensive Plan?
The Comprehensive Plan guides the property to a commercial use, and the property is zoned C-2
General Commercial which is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is
allowed in the C-2 District by Conditional Use.
Does the proposed variance meet the required findings?
The applicant is requesting 1 variance to allow up to 7 rental cars to be parked within 100 feet of
a property zoned Residential. The adjacent property to the east is zoned R-3 Two Family
Residential, and is occupied by a duplex. The required 100 foot setback extends across the entire
existing parking lot, so there is no way to park the 7 rental cars without a variance to the required
setback.
In order to grant a variance, the city needs to find in favor of all of the following 7 criteria:
1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of the lot, or where by reason of
exceptional topographic or water conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional
conditions of such lot, the strict applications of the terms of this ordinance would result
in a peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the
owner of such lot in developing or using such lot in a manner customary and legally
permissible within the zoning district in which said lot is located.
The required 100 foot setback extends across the entire width of the existing parking lot.
Because of the narrowness of the parcel, there are no legal alternatives to park the vehicles on
this property. Staff believes this criterion has been satisfied.
2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property
or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to other land or
structures in the district in which said land is located.
Staff believes that the 100 foot setback is required to mitigate the impacts of a sales and display
lot typically the size found at a car dealership or equipment rental shop. AVIS is proposing to
maintain a small satellite rental office, and will keep no more than 7 new cars on site. The small
size of the operation is peculiar to this application, and is in scale with other uses along Excelsior
Blvd. It is not in scale with a typical car dealership or equipment rental shop. Staff believes this
criterion has been satisfied.
3. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant.
As noted above, because of the narrowness of the lot, AVIS is not able to meet the required 100
foot setback. The parking lot is existing, and cars are currently being parked there, so staff
believes the variance is necessary to allow AVIS to continue to use the parking lot in a manner
that it was used in the past, and would be used by other uses that don’t require a conditional use
permit or special approvals from the city. Staff believes this criterion has been satisfied.
4. The granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the
adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets, increase
the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety.
The parking required for this site by the zoning ordinance is actually reduced by AVIS occupying
the space previously occupied by Auto Glass Specialists, and there are no known parking
problems resulting from the previous uses, so staff believes the congestion and parking would
not be increased as a result of this variance. Staff believes this criterion has been satisfied.
5. The granting of the variance will not unreasonably impact on the character and
development of the neighborhood, unreasonably diminish or impair the established
property values in the surrounding area, or in any other way impair the health, safety,
comfort, or morals of the area.
The parking lot is existing, and therefore, has an existing and mature bufferyard between the
parking lot and adjacent residential property. This bufferyard consists of a 6 foot privacy fence
which is doubled up by an 8 foot hedge of arborvitae. Staff believes this criterion has been
satisfied.
6. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance
or Comprehensive Plan.
Staff believes the 100 foot setback requirement was intended for larger display areas which are
typical for automobile dealerships and equipment rental shops. This application will have no
more than 7 rental vehicles, and is more in scale with other uses along Excelsior Blvd. Staff
believes this criterion has been satisfied.
7. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant,
but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty.
As noted in criterion #1 above, the 100 foot setback covers the entire width of the parking lot,
and as a result, there are no legal options for parking the 7 rental cars on this property. Staff has
worked with AVIS for approximately 1 year to find a suitable site, and this is the first one to
come available that meets the needs of AVIS, our zoning ordinance (with the exception of the
one variance), and is compatible with the neighborhood. Staff believes this criterion has been
satisfied.
Recommendation:
Variance:
Based on the analysis that the proposed variance meets the required findings, staff recommends
approval of the variance to allow the parking of no more than 7 rental cars within 100 feet of a
residentially zoned property with the following condition:
1. Cars shall not back into the 7 spaces.
Conditional Use Permit:
Based on the analysis provided above, staff recommends approval of the application for a
conditional use permit to allow an automobile rental facility with the following conditions:
1. Only cars can be rented from this site.
2. No more than 7 rental cars can be kept on site outside the building.
3. Vehicles cannot be marked for sale, or in any way sold from this site.
4. All rental cars will be driven to and from the property. They will not be delivered or
picked up by a flat bed truck or other car carrying vehicle.
5. Vehicles cannot be left idling outside the building.
6. Maintenance on the vehicles outside the building is not allowed.
7. A sign shall be posted outside the building displaying a phone number where someone
can be reached 24 hours a day if there is a problem pertaining to the vehicles.
Attachments:
• Existing Conditions Aerial photo
• Proposed Site Plan
• Applications with comments from applicant
• Proposed Resolution approving variance request
• Proposed Resolution approving CUP request
Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator
952-924-2592
gmorrison@stlouispark.org
Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
RESOLUTION NO. 05-106
A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER
SECTION 36-194(d) (2) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE
RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A CAR RENTAL FACILITY FOR
PROPERTY ZONED C-2 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATED AT 4150
EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. Avis Rent A Car has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit
under Section 36-194(d) (2) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of permitting
a car rental facility within a C-2 Commercial District located at 4150 Excelsior Boulevard for
the legal description as follows, to-wit:
Lot 1, Block 1, Perkins St. Louis Park Addition (Abstract)
2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning
Commission (Case No. 05-30-CUP) and the effect of the proposed car rental facility on the
health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated
traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use
on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance.
3. The Council has determined that the car rental facility will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor
hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed car
rental facility is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and
the Comprehensive Plan.
4. The contents of Planning Case File 05-30-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of
the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Conclusion
The Conditional Use Permit to permit a car rental facility at the location described is granted
based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions:
1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with Exhibit A such
documents incorporated by reference herein.
2. Only cars can be rented from this site.
3. No more than 7 rental cars can be kept on site outside the building.
4. Vehicles cannot be marked for sale, or in any way sold from this site.
5. All rental cars will be driven to and from the property. They will not be delivered or
picked up by a flat bed truck or other car carrying vehicle.
6. Vehicles cannot be left idling outside the building.
7. Maintenance on the vehicles outside the building is not allowed.
8. A sign shall be posted outside the building displaying a phone number where someone
can be reached 24 hours a day if there is a problem pertaining to the vehicles.
9. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee
of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval.
10. Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the
building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed.
11. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if
applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of a building permit.
12. Approval of a Building Permit, which may impose additional requirements.
13. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of
the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 1, 2005
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
VARIANCE
RESOLUTION NO. 05-107
A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 36-194(d)(2)o. OF THE
ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT 7 RENTAL CARS TO BE
PARKED WITHIN 100 FEET OF A RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY FOR
PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AT 4150
EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota:
FINDINGS
1. Avis Rent A Car has applied for a variance from Section 36-194(d)(2)o. of the Ordinance
Code relating to zoning to permit 7 rental cars to be parked within 100 feet of a
residentially zoned property for property located in the C-2 General Commercial District
at the following location, to-wit:
Lot 1, Block 1, Perkins St. Louis Park Addition (Abstract)
2. On July 6, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received testimony
from the public, discussed the application and recommended approval of a variance to
permit 7 rental cars to be parked within 100 feet of a residentially zoned property.
3. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the
health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions,
light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on values of property in
the surrounding area, and the effect of the proposed variance upon the Comprehensive
Plan.
4. Because of conditions on the subject property and surrounding property, it is possible to
use the property in such a way that the proposed variance will not impair an adequate
supply of light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in
the public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, unreasonably
diminish or impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to
the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan.
5. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such
property or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to other land or
structures in the district in which such land is located.
6. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a
substantial property right of the applicant. It will not merely serve as a convenience to the
applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty as the required
100 foot setback covers the entire parking lot.
7. The contents of Planning Case File 05-31-VAR are hereby entered into and made part of
the public hearing record and the record of decision of this case.
8. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this variance shall be deemed to be abandoned, revoked, or
canceled if the holder shall fail to complete the work on or before one year after the
variance is granted.
9. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this variance shall be revoked and cancelled if the building
or structure for which the variance is granted is removed.
CONCLUSION
The application for a variance to permit 7 rental cars to be parked within 100 feet of a
residentially zoned property is granted based upon the finding(s) set forth above, and with the
following conditions:
1. Cars shall not back into the 7 spaces.
2. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of
the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 1, 2005
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk