HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004/04/19 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
April 19, 2004
7:30 p.m.
6:15 p.m. – Board & Commission Interviews, Westwood Room
7:15 p.m. – Board of Equalization
1. Call to Order
a. Pledge of Allegiance
b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
3. Approval of Minutes
a. City Council Study Session Minutes of March 29, 2004 Document
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
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
8a. Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bond Refunding Document
Groves Academy is requesting approval to refund outstanding Private Activity
Revenue Bonds originally issued in 2001
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve resolution authorizing the issuance, sale, and
delivery of its Educational Facility Revenue Notes (Groves
Academy Project), series 2004
8b. Request by General Growth Properties, Inc. for a Major Amendment to their
Planned Unit Development to eliminate the previous theater approvals, and
approve modifications to the interior floor plan and exterior enhancements to the
existing building to accommodate a new fitness center and a relocated/expanded
TJ Maxx at Knollwood Mall. Document
8332 Highway 7 (Knollwood Mall)
Case No. 04-07-PUD
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving the PUD Major
Amendment subject to conditions as stated in the resolution.
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.
8c. City Engineer’s Report: Alley Paving – 7600 & 7700 blocks of Edgebrook Drive
between Pennsylvania and Rhode Island Avenues Document
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution that accepts the report,
establishes the Improvement Project, and sets a Public Hearing
and Assessment Hearing date of June 7, 2004 – Project No. 03-
15
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL
MEETING OF APRIL 19, 2004
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 Motion to notify the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) that the City
Council does not waive the municipal tort liability limits for the annual insurance renewal
Document
4b Motiong to accept for filing the Planning Commission Minutes of March 17, 2004
Document
4c Motiong to accept for filing the Housing Authority Minutes of February 11, 2004
Document
4d Motion to accept for filing the Housing Authority Minutes of March 19, 2004 Document
4e Motion to accept for the Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of February
18, 2004 Document
4f Motion to accept Vendor Claims for filing (Supplement)
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
April 19, 2004
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
041904 - 3a - Study Session Minutes of 3-29-04
Page 1
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
March 29, 2004
The meeting convened at 7:05 p.m.
Councilmembers present were John Basill, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick,
and Mayor Jacobs.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Human Resources Director (Ms. Gohman),
Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Ms.
Jeremiah), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin), City Engineer (Ms. Hagen), Engineering
Program Coordinator (Ms. Adler) and Administration Secretary (Ms. Olson).
1. Partnership between the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and the City
Ms. Hagen introduced Mike Wyatt, Planner, and Pamela Blixt, Vice President, of the Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District. Mr. Wyatt stated that the district is rewriting its 509 Planning Guide
and it is intended to be a ten year plan. He reported that the district has entered into a contract
for a feasibility study with the U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers to put together a vision for
Minnehaha Creek in the next fifty years.
Mr. Wyatt reported that the Army Corp. would like to create a public stakeholder process. Mr.
Wyatt gave a presentation outlining the various groups included and the general structure of the
group. The public process would have involvement with the cities of Hopkins, Minnetonka,
Minneapolis, Edina and St. Louis Park, Hennepin County and the Minneapolis Park and
Recreation Board. The group would consist of three levels by creating a citizen group, elected
officials group, and a technical advisory group. Mr. Wyatt stated that they are looking for
Council approval and authorization for the City to participate in the process. St. Louis Park
would select two residents and one elected official to serve on the group as city representatives.
Mayor Jacobs inquired when the district would need to have city representatives in place. Mr.
Wyatt replied that they would need to have them by early June. Mr. Wyatt felt they were lucky
to have the Army Corp. working with them on cost sharing and future projects.
Councilmember Santa inquired if the representatives would include residents that live on the
creek. Mr. Wyatt replied that the representatives would have to live within the district but not
necessarily right on the creek. Councilmember Santa felt that property owners along the creek
had a vested interest.
Councilmember Sanger felt that Three Rivers Parks should be involved as well as an
environmental group. Mr. Wyatt replied that Three Rivers Parks does not have parkland in the
lower watershed. Councilmember Sanger inquired if the study would overlap into the type of
buffer yards required for those along the creek. Mr. Wyatt did not feel that this process would
cause any regulatory action from the district. Ms. Blixt clarified that first the vision for the
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 3a - Study Session Minutes of 3-29-04
Page 2
district for the next fifty years and then a list of projects would be developed. She stated that
some cities would like to use matching federal funds to update stormwater sewer projects.
Mr. Harmening suggested possibly using existing board and commission members. Mayor
Jacobs did not feel this would be a problem and suggested publishing a notice in the paper
seeking representatives. Mr. Harmening felt the notice should state the level of commitment
needed. Mayor Jacobs inquired if the meetings of the group are public and Mr. Wyatt replied
that they are. Mr. Wyatt stated that at the meetings they will have a block of time where people
could speak.
Councilmember Basill had concerns about neighborhoods being kept informed. Councilmember
Santa suggested that the representatives be responsible for attending other neighborhood
meetings. Mr. Rardin would like to see an open house where people would have input on the
final version. Mayor Jacobs felt that even though it may be more work, he would like to see the
public involved from the beginning.
Mr. Harmening asked for an update on Rule M. Ms. Blixt stated that the Board took testimony
and has scheduled discussions for early April. She reported that two ordinances were proposed
and later not passed.
2. Excelsior & Grand – Phases E & NW
Bob Cunningham and Trent Mayberry of TOLD were present at the meeting. Dennis Sutliff,
ESG Architecture, was also present.
Mr. Hunt stated that they have moved up Phase E of the project to happen before Phase NW.
Mr. Cunningham stated that they had originally planned on having a boutique office building on
the Phase E site. TOLD would like Council to consider additional condominium residences
rather than a boutique office building due to the current market for office space. They are
contemplating grade level retail with condominiums above. The condos would be more of a first
time homebuyer and small family project.
Mr. Cunningham stated that the are seeking a Comp. Plan amendment to address the proposed
changes. He stated that the architect has created a plan to allow two levels of parking below
grade for residential use. They are currently working with a retailer to occupy the first floor
retail space. Councilmember Sanger inquired why there was a parking lot on the site as they
were trying to avoid open parking spaces. Mr. Cunningham replied they would not be able to
retain the type of retail that they were seeking and they have found that potential buyers prefer
heated underground parking rather than an open structure. Mr. Harmening inquired if they
planned to design an edge to hide the parking lot. Mr. Cunningham stated that they were
planning on decorative elements with the ability to screen the cars. Mr. Basill commented that
the proposed five story building is one story higher than the adjacent building. Mr. Cunningham
stated that in the original plan for a boutique office building it had been originally planned to be
four stories. However, with office buildings the floor to floor ceiling heights are higher. Mr.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 3a - Study Session Minutes of 3-29-04
Page 3
Sutliff clarified that the difference is approximately two feet between the proposed five story
retail/condominium building and a four story office building.
Councilmember Sanger inquired if they were in violation of the Livable Communities principles
by not having any office space in the development. Mr. Harmening did not feel they had any
problems in that area. Ms. Jeremiah stated that the Metropolitan Council’s focus was more on
affordable housing. Councilmember Sanger had concerns that without office space, they lose the
ability to have residents in a position to walk to work. Ms. Jeremiah replied that they actually
have live/work happening in the Phase I apartments and people are also walking to Park Nicollet.
Ms. Jeremiah stated they are revisiting a traffic study for the area and will also be doing a
parking study. She stated that the EDA owned some land on the other side of Monterey and
TOLD is looking at that property for additional parking. Councilmember Sanger inquired about
pedestrian safety when crossing Monterey. Ms. Jeremiah stated that there was an indication in
the previous traffic study that they may want to add a traffic light at Park Commons Drive or by
the Rec Center.
Mayor Jacobs suggested a neighborhood meeting to discuss the changes in the neighborhood and
the difference in the building height. He asked Councilmember Basill if the neighborhood would
be fine with the height change and Councilmember Basill replied that he could not say for sure.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that though they may not have the parking and traffic studies completed by
the time of the neighborhood meeting, they will definitely have them prior to a public hearing.
Councilmember Velick inquired about a timeline. Mr. Cunningham stated that they would like
to begin marketing in the summer. He reported that generally banks require forty to fifty percent
of the units to be pre-sold and they hope to achieve that so that construction can commence this
year.
Councilmember Santa felt it was important to note that when discussing affordability, they were
discussing the median of other housing stock in the city.
Ms. Jeremiah reported that they have asked TOLD to incorporate a Park Commons identification
monument on the corner.
Mr. Sutliff stated that the current comprehensive plan allows six to eight stories for high density
in Phase NW. Mr. Cunningham was not sure that they could absorb the steel and concrete
construction costs. He stated that the plans are similar to Phase NE in shape and price. They are
contemplating more condominiums and are looking at a five story building. He stated they
would market the units in the summer or late fall with construction early next year. Mr. Sutliff
felt that the view and location are excellent at this site.
Councilmember Sanger inquired if there would be town homes at all in the project. Mr.
Cunningham felt that now was not the time to look at town homes but there could possibly be
some property that may work. Mayor Jacobs inquired about the amenities and Mr. Cunningham
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 3a - Study Session Minutes of 3-29-04
Page 4
stated that it would be created so that owner occupied unit residents did not have to cross the
street.
Mr. Harmening asked Mr. Cunningham to talk about retail in Phase NE and NW. Mr.
Cunningham stated that they did not feel comfortable putting a restaurant in an owner occupied
area and are looking for a boutique like retailer. He added that they felt they are one restaurant
short of one hundred percent mix.
Mr. Sutliff stated they are close to hitting 660 units and Ms. Jeremiah felt that if they go over that
amount they should revisit the EAW.
3. Update on Community Development Recruitment Process
Ms. Jeremiah informed the Council that she has withdrawn from the Community Development
Director recruitment process and accepted the Community Development Director position in
Eden Prairie. The Council congratulated Ms. Jeremiah on her new position and expressed how
much they would miss working with her.
Mr. Harmening reported that have selected a finalist for the Community Development Director.
They have extended an offer to Kevin Locke who holds the same position in New Brighton. Mr.
Harmening listed Mr. Locke’s qualifications and felt very pleased to have someone with his
caliber of skills. Ms. Gohman listed some of his traits they found during the evaluations. Ms.
Gohman emphasized how lucky they were to obtain Mr. Locke. She stated that he will begin on
May 3. The Council will need to confirm the appointment of Mr. Locke on April 12.
Councilmember Velick would like to set aside some time prior to the Council meeting to meet
Mr. Locke.
4. Communications
Councilmember Omodt informed the Council of spray paint graffiti that hit several blocks in his
neighborhood. He expressed his concerns about drug use among kids from the neighborhood as
well as their presence on private property. Mr. Harmening stated that the police department may
have some suspects and has suggested talks with the neighborhood. Council discussed what
restorative justice is and how it operates.
Mr. Harmening reported that the Parks & Recreation department held a very successful meeting
with the Victoria Ponds neighborhood on the off leash dog park. Ms. Walsh, Park & Recreation
Director, will be compiling the comments from the meeting. Councilmember Sanger felt that
concerns about parking had merit. Councilmember Santa inquired about Texa-Tonka park and
how that related to the off leash dog park. Mr. Harmening replied that they may have to look at
the uses there regarding the number of people, traffic and congestions.
Councilmember Basill stated that trash bins are not being left out in the alleys, mostly in rental
areas. He added that he is also receiving calls about damage to the trash lids from raccoons. The
raccoons have been chewing through the lids when trash is left out between pickups. He would
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 3a - Study Session Minutes of 3-29-04
Page 5
like staff to visit to the alley to see the damage done. Mr. Harmening felt that staff would not be
able to comprehensively enforce the ordinance but can certainly do spot checks when needed.
Councilmember Basill had concerns that move up single family homes are being bought and
being split into duplexes. He stated that several years ago they had discussed not allowing
outside stairs which would help prevent this from happening.
5. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
City Clerk Mayor
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4a - Municipal Liability Insurance
Page 1
4a. Motion to notify the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) that the
City Council does not waive the municipal tort liability limits for the annual
insurance renewal.
Background:
The 1999 Legislature increased the municipal tort liability limit to $1,000,000 per occurrence
compared to the previous $750,000. The municipal tort liability limit remains at $300,000 per
claimant per occurrence.
Members of the LMCIT program have the option to waive the limits and buy excess liability
coverage. The LMCIT is requiring City Councils to make this decision and submit a waiver
form as evidence of the decision.
Analysis:
In the past, the City of St. Louis Park has not waived the statutory limit. The City Attorney does
not recommend waiving the statutory limit. Both the City Attorney and Ms. Pat Meger (Arthur J
Gallagher), the City’s insurance agent, noted that the statutory limit does not apply to all claims.
Certain lawsuits, such as those stemming from federal law (e.g., discrimination), would not be
subject to the $1,000,000 liability limit.
The cost of excess liability coverage (for those claims not subject to the statutory limit) is priced
each year and the cost/benefit evaluated. The City has yet to buy any excess coverage based on
the above analysis and cost/benefit analysis.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends not waiving the monetary limits on municipal tort liability established by
Minnesota statutes 466.04.
Attachments: LMCIT Liability Coverage – Waiver Form (Supplement)
Prepared by: Jean D. McGann, Director of Finance
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4b - Planning Commission Minutes of 3-17-04
Page 1
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
March 17, 2004--6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Carl Robertson,
Jerry Timian
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynne Carper, Ken Gothberg, Dennis Morris
STAFF PRESENT: Julie Grove, Janet Jeremiah, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells
1. Call to order- Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of March 17, 2004
Claudia Johnston-Madison moved approval of the minutes of March 3, 2004. The
motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
3. Hearings:
A. Case No. 04-06-ZA—Proposed Amendments to St. Louis Park Ordinance Code
(Zoning) relating to allowing City staff to approve temporary signs in the public
right-of-way, to allow non-commercial messages on private signs and to reduce
the required front yard for signs in the I-P Industrial Park Zoning District.
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented a staff report.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison inquired about issues raised by the City Attorney and a
property owner.
Mr. Morrison said the City Attorney’s recommendation regarding non-commercial messages on
private signs came about as a result of review of the ordinance as it pertains to billboards. The
City Attorney’s review found that the ordinance lacked a statement clarifying that a commercial
or industrial property owner may use some or all of their allowable signage to display a non-
commercial message. The proposed amendment calls that out and clarifies that it is an option or
possibility for the property owner.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked for an example of this issue. Mr. Morrison replied that
he has not encountered this situation yet. He stated that the proposed amendment came about as
a result of review of the ordinance as it pertains to billboards.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4b - Planning Commission Minutes of 3-17-04
Page 2
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she had concerns regarding the display of a non-
commercial message. She commented that billboards can be purchased for commercial or non-
commercial messages. She added that there is a big difference between a billboard and, for
example, the message board at Miracle Mile. She asked if the proposed amendment implies that
a message board could have non-commercial messages.
Mr. Morrison said a billboard would be defined as a sign that advertises a product or service not
necessarily provided on that property, which is still a commercial message. He stated that on
changeable signs, there might be a non-commercial message. For instance, under the current
ordinance Miracle Mile could put up a non-commercial slogan. The proposed amendment
clarifies that it is allowable.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked how the City would handle a non-commercial message
which was offensive.
Mr. Morrison said some State parameters exist that govern or protect the display of non-
commercial messages. He said some new court rulings are expected which would protect the
display of non-commercial messages. Advice would be sought from the City Attorney regarding
non-commercial messages that might be considered offensive.
Mr. Morrison said the issue raised by a private property owner concerned the required setback
for signs in the I-P Industrial Park District. The inconsistency between the I-P and other
Districts was revealed during review of the 2401 Edgewood project.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the proposed amendment regarding temporary signs
would streamline the process.
Mr. Morrison said that was the intent. He explained that the proposed amendment comes as the
result of the City Council’s discussion and direction to streamline the process.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked how often someone could reapply for a temporary sign
on a public right-of-way.
Mr. Morrison said the current code and the proposed amendment do not include a time limit on
reapplying.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she wasn’t comfortable with the temporary sign
amendment. She said she is aware of situations in neighborhoods where there have been
questions about temporary signs in the right-of-way that may contain language or other messages
which could be in dispute within a particular neighborhood. She said she would like to see a
limit to the number of times application can be made for that type of signage.
Ms. Jeremiah remarked that these are public right-of-ways and the City has complete control and
ability to say no to certain requests. She said the City has been very careful in limiting the
approvals. She said the City doesn’t anticipate approving any kind of commercial signs in the
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4b - Planning Commission Minutes of 3-17-04
Page 3
public right-of-way. Those types of signs are prohibited and enforcement is carried out. The
proposed amendment wouldn’t be opening the door to allowing a lot of signage in the public
right-of-way. Staff would consider safety as well as precedent set by past approval of the City
Council. Ms. Jeremiah gave the example of a non-profit event which doesn’t have a good place
to advertise on a very temporary basis, such as the Lion’s Club annual pancake breakfast event.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked for clarification on criteria in the ordinance that could be
used to deny a temporary sign permit. She asked if staff was confident about making those
decisions.
Mr. Morrison said he was confident that the permits can be reviewed and that staff has the
authority to deny signs. Review by the Community Development Director and the Director of
Public Works will cover content, intent, and placement of signs.
Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair
closed the public hearing.
Chair Robertson commented that moving temporary signs within the public right-of-way from
Council review to administrative review is a positive move in streamlining. However, he would
recommend more review by staff and additional language limiting or defining the role.
Regarding the non-commercial signage amendment, Chair Robertson said signage is directional
and informational and isn’t the right vehicle for non-commercial messages. He said it doesn’t
seem to be a free speech issue. Billboards can be rented for non-commercial messages. Chair
Robertson said he thought most businesses don’t consider putting a non-commercial message on
any remaining sq. ft. of allowable signage they may have. He said that stating it in the code may
add to unnecessary clutter and more signage.
Chair Robertson suggested that separate motions be made for each proposed amendment.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to consider each amendment separately. The
motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion recommending approval of the Ordinance Code
text amendment relating to allowing City staff to approve temporary signs in the public right-of-
way subject to further research and review of the language by staff to see if any additional
refinements such as timeframes or content could be established. The motion passed on a vote of
4-0.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion to not recommend approval of the Ordinance
Code text amendment relating to allowing non-commercial messages on private signs. The
motion to recommend denial passed on a vote of 3-1. (Commissioner Timian voted against the
motion to recommend denial.)
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4b - Planning Commission Minutes of 3-17-04
Page 4
Commissioner Johnston-Madison made a motion recommending approval of the Ordinance Code
text amendment to reduce the required front yard for signs in the I-P Industrial Park Zoning
District. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
B. Case Nos. 04-09-CUP and 04-10-VAR--Request by Mark Carlson for a
Conditional Use Permit to allow a window in the second story of a detached
garage and to allow the upper story of the detached garage to be finished and used
as a hobby room together with two variances to allow the detached garage to be
placed in the front yard and a nine foot variance to the required nine foot side yard
for property located at 4332 Brookside Ave.
Mr. Morrison reported that upon further review of the application it was determined that a third
variance was necessary related to the height of the garage. The applicant has requested that the
hearing be continued to April 7.
Chair Robertson opened the hearing. Commissioner Timian made a motion to continue to the
public hearing to April 7, 2004. The motion passed on a 4-0 vote.
C. Case No. 04-07-PUD—Request by General Growth Properties, Inc. for a Major
Amendment to a Planned Unit Development to eliminate the previous theater
approvals, and approve modifications to the interior floor plan and exterior
enhancements to the existing building for property located at 8332 Highway 7
(Knollwood Mall)
Ms. Grove presented a staff report.
Commissioner Timian asked if the applicant is meeting current parking requirements. Ms.
Grove responded that they exceed the requirements by a few spaces. Commissioner Timian
asked if that means there is no more room to do any expansion. Ms. Grove said with the 10%
transit reduction there would be 20-30 extra spaces. She added that shopping centers over
200,000 sq. ft. are allowed parking reductions up to 30% by PUD so in the future there is the
possibility for the PUD to reduce more parking spaces, which could allow room for a stormwater
pond. Commissioner Timian remarked that there seemed to be a lot of parking space available
which is currently not utilized. Commissioner Bissonnette said that seemed to be true in certain
areas, such as the northwest corner in front of Kohl’s. There was agreement that those spaces
would probably be used with the changes currently being proposed.
A discussion was held about landscaping improvements proposed along 36th Street. Ms. Grove
explained that staff is working with the developer to increase the amount of landscaping along
36th St. by filling in any gaps to provide the maximum possible screening. Some internal parking
lot landscaping will also be added to the north parking lot to increase the landscape buffer effect.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the plans were available at the neighborhood meeting.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4b - Planning Commission Minutes of 3-17-04
Page 5
Ms. Grove responded that the plans were presented at the neighborhood meeting.
Commissioner Bissonnette said the mall has come a long way in the last 5-6 years and it’s good
to see there are additional things planned for it that will continue to keep the space viable.
Chair Robertson asked if any landscaping was planned for the south side.
Ms. Grove replied that is not being reviewed currently.
Debra Kateris, Sr. Director of Development, General Growth, said it has been hard to attract
long-term leaseholders near the existing theatre because of the lack of an anchor store on the
other end. She said General Growth is very optimistic that the TJ Maxx expansion will make the
entire interior much more viable as there will be traffic generators on each end of the mall. A
more functional access point from the north parking area is also an improvement. The proposed
service use also provides the center with more diversity, which is appropriate for its location in
the community.
In response to a question about parking, Alan Young, General Manager, said currently, not
including the lower level, there are about 6 spaces that do not have a permanent lease, which is
about 6% of the leasable square footage on the property.
Chair Robertson said it is a good proposal and he feels confident about not pushing it further on
the north because he believes the changes will attract more tenants who will put their own flavor
on the north end. He said he looks forward to seeing the sign proposal.
Mr. Young said the sign proposal will incorporate the tower design.
Chair Robertson opened the public hearing.
Rolf Peterson, 3536 Zinran, said he was not able to attend the neighborhood meeting. He said he
is excited about the proposal. He has lived in the neighborhood for 18 years. He said that a
prosperous Knollwood is good for the neighborhood. Mr. Peterson said he assumed the wall on
the north side of 36th, which was proposed with the previous theater plan, would be dropped. He
asked if the wall was a topic at the neighborhood meeting.
Ms. Grove responded that the wall was not discussed at the neighborhood meeting. She said her
understanding was that the wall had been proposed to provide a buffer from the headlights and
noise in the proposed theater parking ramp.
Chair Robertson closed the public hearing as no one else was present wishing to speak.
Commissioner Bissonnette made a motion recommending approval of the PUD major
amendment subject to conditions. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4b - Planning Commission Minutes of 3-17-04
Page 6
4. Unfinished Business
5. New Business
6. Communications
A. Recent City Council Action – March 15, 2004
B. Other
7. Miscellaneous
8. Adjournment
Chair Robertson adjourned the meeting at 6:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Administrative Secretary
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4c - Housing Authority Minutes of 2-11-04
Page 1
1
MINUTES
Housing Authority
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Wednesday, February 11, 2004
Westwood Room
5:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Catherine Courtney, Anne Mavity and Judith Moore
Commissioner Shone Row arrived at 5:13 p.m.
STAFF PRESENT: Jane Klesk, Kathy Larsen and Michele Schnitker
1. Call to Order
Commissioner Courtney called the meeting to order at 5:12 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes for January 14, 2003
The January 14, 2003 minutes were unanimously approved with the following amendments:
Delete Commissioner Judith Moore from members absent, and add Commissioner Moore to
members present; and add the following sentence to the end of 3.a., paragraph 2: “There
being no further comments, Commissioner Courtney closed the Public Hearing.”
3. Hearings – None
4. Reports and Committees – None
5. Unfinished Business – None
6. New Business
a. 2004 Proposed CDBG Allocation
Ms. Larsen stated that the proposed CDBG allocation for 2004 is $240,406 and
explained in further detail the various proposed project activities. Ms. Larsen also
briefly described project activity reallocation of 2002 CDBG funds that must be
expended by the end of June, 2004.
b. Approval of Public Housing Operating Budget – FYE 2005, Resolution No. 521
After Ms. Schnitker provided an overview of the budget, Commissioner Moore
moved to approve the Public Housing Operating Budget, Fiscal Year Ending March
31, 2005. Commissioner Row seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote
of 4-0, with Commissioners Courtney, Mavity, Moore and Row voting in favor.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4c - Housing Authority Minutes of 2-11-04
Page 2
2
c. Section 8 Program Utilization Analysis
Ms. Schnitker provided a brief report on Section 8 utilization for fiscal year ending
March 31, 2004, explaining the HA’s ongoing efforts to lower its utilization in
addition to the HA’s estimated liability for over leased units.
d. Public Housing Utility Allowance, Resolution No. 522
Ms. Schnitker explained that the utility allowances are based on actual utility
consumption with the current rates applied. Commissioner Mavity moved to approve
the Public Housing Utility Allowance, Resolution No. 522. Commissioner Moore
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0, with Commissioners
Courtney, Mavity, Moore and Row voting in favor.
e. Approval of Amendment to Audit Contract
Ms. Schnitker stated that the current audit contract with Kern, DeWenter, Viere, Ltd.
would be extended for an additional year to provide auditing services for Fiscal Year
End March 31, 2004 for a fee of $7,350.00. Commissioner Moore moved to approve
the Amendment to Audit Services Contract, and Commissioner Row seconded the
motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0, with Commissioners Courtney, Mavity,
Moore and Row voting in favor.
f. Recognition of Commissioner Shone Row, Resolution No. 523
The Commissioners expressed their thanks to Commissioner Row for serving on the
Housing Authority Board for six years. Commissioner Moore moved to approve
Resolution No. 523, Recognition of Commissioner Shone Row, and Commissioner
Mavity seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 3-0, with
Commissioners Courtney, Mavity, and Moore voting in favor. Commissioner Row
abstained from voting.
g. Recognition of Commissioner William Gavzy, Resolution No. 524
Commissioner Courtney expressed gratitude for Commissioner Gavzy serving on the
Housing Authority Board for six years. Commissioner Moore moved to approve
Resolution No. 524, Recognition of Commissioner William Gavzy, and
Commissioner Mavity seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0 with
Commissioners Courtney, Mavity, Moore and Row voting in favor.
7. Communications from Executive Director
a. Claims List No. 2-2004
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4c - Housing Authority Minutes of 2-11-04
Page 3
3
Commissioner Mavity moved to ratify Claims List No. 2-2004, and Commissioner
Row seconded the motion. The motion passed 4-0, with Commissioners Courtney,
Mavity, Moore and Row voting in favor.
b. Ms. Schnitker provided an update to the Commissioners regarding the status of the
project-based Section 8 units at Lou Park, explaining that owner Ted Bigos has
extended his contract until February 22, 2004, in hopes that a five-year renewal can
be agreed upon.
1. Monthly Report for February, 2004
2. Scattered-Site Houses and Hamilton House (verbal report)
3. Draft Financial Statement
8. Other – None
9. Adjournment
Commissioner Row moved to adjourn the meeting, and Commission Moore seconded the
motion. The motion passed 4-0, with Commissioners Courtney, Mavity, Moore and Row
voting in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Anne Mavity, Secretary
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4d - Housing Authority Minutes of 3-19-04
Page 1
1
MINUTES
Housing Authority
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Friday, March 19, 2004
Conference Call, Community Development Director’s Office
9:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Commissioners Catherine Courtney, Anne Mavity and Judith Moore
STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Anderson, Jane Klesk, and Michele Schnitker
1. Call to Order
Commissioner Courtney called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m.
2. Approval of Minutes for February 11, 2004 – Deferred to April 14th Board Meeting
3. Hearings – None
4. Reports and Committees – None
5. Unfinished Business – None
6. New Business
a. Approval of Insurance Coverage
Ms. Anderson provided an explanation of the HA’s insurance coverage renewal for
the 2004/2005 fiscal year. After discussion, Commissioner Moore moved to accept
the proposal of State Farm at the rate of $34,184 for property, liability and crime,
$2,830 for automobile, and $1,171 for umbrella liability; and to obtain workers’
compensation coverage through the City for approximately $5,000, and errors and
omissions coverage for about $300; and to authorize staff to renew the flood policy
when it is due, at an anticipated premium of approximately $2,000. Commissioner
Mavity seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 3-0, with
Commissioners Courtney, Mavity and Moore voting in favor.
7. Communications from Executive Director
a. Claims List No. 3-2004 – Deferred to April 14th Board Meeting
b. Ms. Schnitker stated that the City Council has approved Steve Fillbrandt as a new
Housing Authority Commissioner, adding that two applications have been received
from parties interested in the resident Commissioner opening.
1. Monthly Report for March, 2004 – Deferred to April 14th Board meeting
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4d - Housing Authority Minutes of 3-19-04
Page 2
2
2. Scattered-Site Houses and Hamilton House (verbal report) – Deferred to April
14th Board meeting
3. Draft Financial Statement – Deferred to April 14th Board meeting
8. Other – None
9. Adjournment
Commissioner Moore moved to adjourn the meeting, and Commission Mavity seconded the
motion. The motion passed 3-0, with Commissioners Courtney, Mavity, and Moore voting
in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 9:17 a.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Anne Mavity, Secretary
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4e - Park & Rec Commission Minutes of 2-18-04
Page 1
1
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 18, 2004 – 7 P.M.
REC CENTER PROGRAMMING OFFICE
MEMBERS PRESENT: R. Bruce Cornwall, Kirk Hawkinson, Dick Johnson, Sarah Lindenberg
and Dana Strong
MEMBERS ABSENT: Tom Worthington
STAFF PRESENT: Rick Beane, Stacy Voelker and Cindy Walsh
1. Call to order
Mr. Strong called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m.
2. Adjustments to the agenda
None.
3. Approval of Minutes
A. December 17, 2003
Kirk Hawkinson moved to approve the minutes of the December 17, 2003 meeting,
Bruce Cornwall seconded. The motion passed 5-0.
B. January 15, 2004
Mr. Strong questioned the statistics included in the sixth sentence under item 4, New
Business – Quadion Development / Park Dedication. After discussion, members and
staff indicated sentence should be removed. Staff will advised members of corrected
funding at next meeting. Mr. Johnson moved to approve the minutes of the January 15,
2004 meeting with the sentence removed, Mr. Cornwall seconded. The motion passed
5-0.
4. New Business
A. Elect and Vote for Chair and Vice Chair Positions
Mr. Strong advised members Ms. Nelson resigned as of February 1, 2004 since she has
moved to Minneapolis. Mr. Worthington previously advised staff he is interested in the
position of Chair. Mr. Cornwall motioned to elect Mr. Worthington as Chair of the
Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, Mr. Hawkinson seconded. The motion
passed 5-0.
The members nominated Mr. Strong as Vice Chair, Mr. Strong accepted. Mr.
Hawkinson motioned to elect Mr. Strong as Vice Chair of the Parks and Recreation
Advisory Commission, Mr. Cornwall seconded. The motion passed 5-0.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4e - Park & Rec Commission Minutes of 2-18-04
Page 2
2
The Commission discussed member openings. Mr. Strong inquired how members were
obtained when openings arose and Ms. Walsh advised the City Clerk publishes a
member opening list in the Sun Sailor. Staff will advise the Clerk’s office of the vacant
position.
B. Dog Park Site Discussion
Mr. Beane distributed map of potential dog park site. Ms. Walsh informed what was
proposed to Council and reasons why this site was chosen. The site is almost two acres
and would have a four foot fence. Ms. Walsh indicated the off-leash area in Minneapolis
parks has been very successful. Members advised the dog parks they have seen are busy,
especially on weekends.
Mr. Beane reviewed site, terrain, fencing, signs, and waste disposal, with Commission
members. Ms. Walsh recommended dog owners purchase a license to use the park.
Suggested when individuals officially license dog with the City, pay an additional fee
for dog park use. Minneapolis charges an annual fee of $25 for residents and $35 for
non residents. This money would go into maintaining the site.
Mr. Hawkinson inquired if the dogs would have access to the lake and Mr. Beane
advised a gate could be installed to access the water. Mr. Johnson inquired if bags
would be available at the site for waste disposal. Ms. Walsh advised other sites have had
success at installing a mailbox where people put their own plastic bags in for all to use.
Mr. Johnson feels its success depends on individual’s ability to self-police the site. Mr.
Beane indicated other areas were researched and found individuals take care of area by
policing themselves as they don’t want to loose the site. Ms. Walsh advised that the
Police Department will enforce the park in a similar manner to other parks. Ms. Walsh
also indicated ROMP has volunteers that go to sites to encourage people get licensed
and take care of the area.
Ms. Walsh advised a letter will be sent to all adjacent property owners and an article in
the Sun Sailor would be published advising of meeting. Mr. Strong suggested posting
signs in other parks advising of the official dog park location. Mr. Beane suggested
posting signs at local veterinary clinics.
Mr. Strong inquired if the new development across the street would be happy with the
site. Ms. Walsh indicated parking may be an issue but unsure of how many pet owners
live in the development. Noise may also be a concern. Ms. Walsh advised Maria Hagen
in Public Works is checking to see if the parking lot could be expanded if needed. Staff
may create a connection to the trail in that area this summer.
Ms. Walsh asked for feedback on parking and members stated go with what is there and
address the issue of expansion if need arises. Ms. Walsh inquired on the fee charged and
if individuals should pay only if they intend to use the area or if everyone should pay an
additional fee. Members questioned how many dog licenses get issued annually and
thought it was over 1,000. Mr. Strong favored having payment as an option but felt it
may be more economical to charge all an additional $5 fee. Mr. Johnson feels 25% of all
would purchase a tab if an option. Members questioned what the annual maintenance
cost would be for the site. Mr. Beane advised start up would be approximately $9,000
with $2,000 as annual maintenance expenses. Mr. Strong inquired on the average fee of
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4e - Park & Rec Commission Minutes of 2-18-04
Page 3
3
other cities and Ms. Walsh advised it is a $25 - $30 fee per user. Ms. Walsh hopes
proposals will answer questions at the neighborhood meeting and this item will go back
to Council after the neighborhood meeting. Members discussed the number of people
needed to get maintenance expenses covered. Mr. Johnson motioned to charge $25 for
residents and $35 for non-residents annually as an option for dog owners to use the off-
leash area with funds going into the Park Improvement Fund. Mr. Hawkinson seconded
the motion. Motioned passed 5-0.
Ms. Walsh would like to make it as easy as possible for individuals to purchase tags and
licenses. Mr. Cornwall motioned a one-stop purchase point for both dog license and off
leash area license/tag to make as easy as possible for users, Mr. Hawkinson seconded
the motion. Motion passed 5-0.
Ms. Walsh discussed potential format for March 23 meeting. In previous meetings, Ms.
Walsh gave a brief overview of the area, different tables were set up each with staff and
Commission members at a table to answer questions and act as a facilitator. One person
at each table would be elected to take notes on comments, and then people would rotate
tables. People felt more engaged with this type of format. Mr. Strong inquired if anyone
was opposed to the format with no response. Ms. Walsh inquired what members were
available to attend and Mr. Cornwall, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Hawkinson and Ms. Lindenberg
are available. Ms. Walsh advised the regular Parks and Recreation Advisory
Commission meeting would follow and the members agreed.
C. Trail Connection Grant from DNR
Ms. Walsh advised Engineering staff is applying for a grant from the Department of
Natural Resources after elevation and surveys have been completed. The grant is a 50-
50 match which would come from Engineering’s budget, not Park and Recreations. Ms.
Walsh advised the grant would cover trail connections added to Edgebrook Park,
Victoria Pond area (near off-leash site), and on France Avenue. Mr. Beane advised that
all locations have visible foot traffic.
5. Old Business
A. Oak Hill Project Update
Ms. Walsh advised bids have been solicited from three companies for splash pads.
Aquatic Recreation Company was selected. Members reviewed diagram of proposed
splash pad and briefly discussed equipment. Ms. Walsh advised it would be activated by
use so not on all the time. Mr. Beane advised company has high recommendations. Ms.
Walsh indicated residents stated they would like area for younger kids to splash around
in which this would include. Mr. Johnson inquired if would be fenced in and Ms. Walsh
advised it would be. Mr. Beane indicated existing pump building will be used as so. Ms.
Walsh indicated shaded areas with benches could be incorporated also. Staff visited the
splash pad in Princeton and revealed they charge a daily rate which will not be charged
in St. Louis Park. Mr. Beane indicated this system is more flexible with the season. Mr.
Strong suggested larger schematic for meeting next week. Mr. Beane advised it will be a
larger picture for the neighborhood meeting.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4e - Park & Rec Commission Minutes of 2-18-04
Page 4
4
Ms. Walsh reviewed the potential schematic of the area including the new building and
splash pad. Ms. Walsh suggested showing attendees schematics and timelines which
Commission members agreed.
6. Communications
A. Chair
None.
B. Commissioners
Mr. Strong inquired on status of Code of Conduct. Ms. Walsh suggested discussing
when Mr. Worthington was present. Mr. Strong suggested adding to March 23 meeting
agenda.
Mr. Johnson suggested discussing the Commissioners’ event at the Aquatic Park on July
17. Members briefly reviewed the event and marketing locations. Members discussed
inviting Council, time lines, and event options. Commission members divvied up tasks
and want to include on every agenda until the event. Staff will provide a flyer at their
March meeting for all to review. Commission thanked Mr. Johnson for his work on the
event.
C. Program Report – Rick Beane
Mr. Beane advised rinks ended Monday and compliments on successful rink season and
dedicated staff have been received. Staff has been repairing and painting picnic tables;
finishing up DED tree removal (bad year); working on maintenance plans for ballfield
renovation; and working on CIP projects that will gear up this summer. Mr. Beane
advised Jim Thomson received Field Supervisor position which is responsible for the
day to day operation of park maintenance. New equipment such as mowers, etc. will be
received this year. One full time employee and a couple of part time employees were
lost due to budget cuts. Mr. Beane stated staff has been working on constructing the
boardwalk at Westwood Hills Nature Center. Staff is anticipating a busy summer with
projects. Mr. Strong inquired on new soccer league in which Mr. Beane advised field
usage would be affected. Ms. Walsh indicated the Soccer Association advised their in-
house league participation initial sign up has been low.
Mr. Beane indicated Wolfe Lake has been stocked by the DNR. The waterfall was
started last week and will run through winter to aerate the water for fish. Mr. Beane
feels the program is great and the DNR will stock again in spring.
D. Director’s Report
Ms. Walsh advised there will be a Commissioners’ thank you on Monday, March 22 at
6:30 p.m. in Council Chambers and asked for a volunteer to give a brief presentation on
what Commission does. Ms. Walsh will follow up with Tom Worthington to see if he
can attend.
Ms. Walsh indicated a resident inquired on developing a therapeutic garden which they
would like to present to the Commissioner’s. Commission members agreed to hear
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 4e - Park & Rec Commission Minutes of 2-18-04
Page 5
5
presentation at their April meeting and requested materials be presented at March
meeting for review.
7. Adjournment
Moved by Kirk Hawkinson and seconded by Bruce Cornwall to adjourn. Motion passed 5-0.
With no further business, the Commission adjourned at 9:08 p.m.
Minutes prepared and
respectfully submitted by,
Stacy M. Voelker
Recording Secretary
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8a - Groves Academy Refunding
Page 1
8a. Groves Academy Private Activity Revenue Bond Refunding
Groves Academy is requesting approval to refund outstanding Private Activity
Revenue Bonds originally issued in 2001
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve resolution authorizing the issuance, sale, and
delivery of its Educational Facility Revenue Notes (Groves
Academy Project), series 2004
Background:
In 2001, the City of St. Louis Park issued $5,400,000 of Educational Facility Revenue Bonds in
the form of Private Activity Revenue Bonds. These bonds were issued under Minnesota
Statutes, Chapter 462C for a program consisting of the expansion of the existing schoolhouse
facility by approximately 45, 000 square feet and renovating the existing 35,000 square foot
building located at 3200 Highway 100 South in St. Louis Park. This project is owned and
operated by Groves Academy
Current Request:
The City has been asked to consider the refunding of the 2001 bonds on behalf of Groves
Academy. Groves Academy has submitted the appropriate application materials and fees.
The outstanding bond amount is currently $5,400,000. The refunded bond issue principal
amount will not exceed $3,250,000. Groves Academy will make a principal payment of
approximately $2,150,000 on the date of refunding. Groves Academy is requesting to issue this
bond using a private placement. They have received confirmation that private investors will
purchase the approximate $3,250,000 at an interest rate not to exceed 4%. The City of St. Louis
Park is not responsible for any repayment of this debt. The responsibility lies solely with Groves
Academy.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the $3,250,000 Educational Facility Revenue Bonds and asks the
Council to approve the attached resolution.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared By: Jean D. McGann, Director of Finance
Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8a - Groves Academy Refunding
Page 2
RESOLUTION NO. 04-053
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK,
MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE, AND DELIVERY OF ITS
EDUCATIONAL FACILITY REVENUE NOTES (GROVES ACADEMY PROJECT),
SERIES 2004; PAYABLE SOLELY FROM REVENUES PLEDGED TO THE NOTES;
APPROVING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF THE NOTES AND THE RELATED DOCUMENTS; AND PROVIDING
FOR THE SECURITY, RIGHTS, AND REMEDIES WITH RESPECT TO THE NOTES
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”), is a home rule city and
political subdivision duly organized and existing under its Charter and the Constitution and laws
of the State of Minnesota; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, particularly
Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.152-469.165, as amended (the “Act”), the City is authorized to
carry out the public purposes described therein and contemplated thereby by issuing its revenue
bonds or other obligations to make a loan to finance or refinance a revenue producing enterprise,
including the financing of the costs of the construction of an expansion to and remodeling of an
existing educational facility; and
WHEREAS, the City received a request from Groves Academy, a Minnesota nonprofit
corporation (the “Borrower”), that the City issue its revenue obligations to finance the
renovation, expansion, and improvement of its independent co-educational day school facilities
located at 3200 Highway 100 South in the City (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, after satisfying certain procedural requirements imposed by the Act and
certain requirements imposed by applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended (the “Code”), and applicable regulations promulgated thereunder, the City issued its
Educational Facility Revenue Bonds (Groves Academy Project), Series 2001 (the “Prior
Bonds”), in the original aggregate principal amount of $5,400,000; and
WHEREAS, the proceeds derived from the sale of the Prior Bonds were loaned to the
Borrower pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated as of June 1, 2001, between the City
and the Borrower, and the Borrower applied the proceeds of such loan to the acquisition,
construction, and equipping of the Project, the funding of capitalized interest, and the funding of
a reserve fund to secure the Prior Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the Prior Bonds are first subject to optional redemption and prepayment on
June 1, 2004, and, therefore, the Borrower has recently requested that the City issue a new series
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8a - Groves Academy Refunding
Page 3
of revenue obligations to refund the Prior Bonds and refinance the Project in order to realize
interest savings due to the current low interest rates; and
WHEREAS, the Borrower has proposed that the City issued its Educational Facility
Revenue Refunding Notes (Groves Academy Project), Series 2004 (the “Notes”), in the original
aggregate principal amount not to exceed $3,250,000; and
WHEREAS, Karen B. Frey and Lloyd A. Amundson and Barbara A Amundson, as
trustees under the Lloyd A. Amundson Revocable Trust (collectively, the “Lenders”) have
agreed to purchase the Notes through a private placement facilitated by Miller Johnson Steichen
Kinnard, Inc. in minimum denominations of $100,000 in a manner consistent with the policies of
the City relating to the issuance and sale of non-rated conduit bonds; and
WHEREAS, the proceeds derived from the sale of the Notes are proposed to be loaned to
the Borrower under the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated on or after May 1, 2004 (the “Loan
Agreement”), between the City and the Borrower, and applied by the Borrower, together with
other funds of the Borrower, to redemption and prepayment of the outstanding Prior Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the Notes and the interest on the Notes: (i) shall not constitute general or
moral obligations of the City and shall be payable solely from the revenues pledged therefor;
(ii) shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory
limitation; (iii) shall not constitute nor give rise to a pecuniary liability of the City or a charge
against its general credit or taxing powers; and (iv) shall not constitute a charge, lien, or
encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City other than the City’s interest in
the Project and the Loan Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the loan repayments required to be made by the Borrower under the terms of
the Loan Agreement will be assigned to the Lenders under the terms of a Pledge Agreement,
dated on or after May 1, 2004 (the “Pledge Agreement”), between the City and the Lenders;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City acknowledges, finds, determines, and declares that the issuance of the
Notes is authorized by the Act and is consistent with the purposes of the Act and that the
issuance of the Notes and the other actions of the City under this Resolution, the Notes, the Loan
Agreement, and the Pledge Agreement constitute a public purpose and are in the best interests of
the City.
2. The City understands that the Borrower will pay directly or through the City any
and all costs incurred by the City in connection with the issuance of the Notes and the
redemption and prepayment of the Prior Bonds, whether or not the Notes are issued or the Prior
Bonds are redeemed and prepaid.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8a - Groves Academy Refunding
Page 4
3. For the purposes set forth above, there is hereby authorized the issuance, sale, and
delivery of the Notes in one or more series in the maximum aggregate principal amount not to
exceed $3,250,000. The Notes shall bear interest at a rate not to exceed 4.00 percent per annum.
The Notes shall be designated, shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall mature, shall be subject to
redemption prior to maturity, shall be in such form, and shall have such other terms, details, and
provisions as are set forth in the forms of the Notes now on file with the City, with the
amendments referenced herein. The City hereby authorizes the Notes to be issued as “tax-
exempt bonds” the interest on which is not includable in gross income for federal and State of
Minnesota income tax purposes.
All of the provisions of the Notes, when executed as authorized herein, shall be deemed
to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein
and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Notes
shall be substantially in the forms on file with the City, which forms are hereby approved, with
such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions and insertions (including changes to the
aggregate principal amount of the Notes, the stated maturities of the Notes and the maturity
dates, the interest rates on the Notes, and the terms of redemption of the Notes) as the Mayor and
the City Manager (the “Mayor” and “City Manager”), in their discretion, shall determine. The
execution of the Notes with the manual or facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City
Manager and the delivery of the Notes by the City shall be conclusive evidence of such
determination.
4. The Notes shall be special limited obligations of the City payable solely from the
revenues provided by the Borrower pursuant to the Loan Agreement, and other security pledged
by the Borrower to the Lenders.
5. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute and
deliver the Loan Agreement and the Pledge Agreement. All of the provisions of the Loan
Agreement and the Pledge Agreement, when executed and delivered as authorized herein, shall
be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated
verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery
thereof. The Loan Agreement and the Pledge Agreement shall be substantially in the forms on
file with the City which are hereby approved, with such omissions and insertions as do not
materially change the substance thereof, or as the Mayor and the City Manager, in their
discretion, shall determine, and the execution thereof by the Mayor and the City Manager shall
be conclusive evidence of such determination.
6. The Notes shall be revenue obligations of the City the proceeds of which shall be
disbursed pursuant to the terms of the Loan Agreement, and the principal, premium, and interest
on the Notes shall be payable solely from the revenues derived from the Loan Agreement, and
the revenues and assets pledged and assigned by the Borrower under the terms of the Mortgage,
Security Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement, dated on or after May 1, 2004 (the
“Mortgage”).
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8a - Groves Academy Refunding
Page 5
7. The Mayor and City Manager of the City are hereby authorized to execute and
deliver, on behalf of the City, such other documents as are necessary or appropriate in
connection with the issuance, sale, and delivery of the Notes, including the City Tax Certificate,
the Tax Exemption Agreement, the Information Return for Tax-Exempt Private Activity Bond
Issues, Form 8038, and all other documents and certificates as shall be necessary and appropriate
in connection with the issuance, sale, and delivery of the Notes. The City hereby approves the
execution and delivery by the Borrower of the Mortgage and all other instruments, certificates,
and documents prepared in conjunction with the issuance of the Notes that require execution by
the Borrower. The City hereby authorizes Kennedy & Graven, Chartered, as bond counsel of the
City, to prepare, execute, and deliver its approving legal opinion with respect to the Notes.
8. The City has not participated in the preparation of any disclosure documents
relating to the offer and sale of the Notes (the “Disclosure Documents”), and has made no
independent investigation with respect to the information contained therein and the City assumes
no responsibility for the sufficiency, accuracy, or completeness of any such information.
9. Except as otherwise provided in this resolution, all rights, powers and privileges
conferred and duties and liabilities imposed upon the City or the City Council by the provisions
of this resolution or of the aforementioned documents shall be exercised or performed by the
City or by such members of the City Council, or such officers, board, body or agency thereof as
may be required or authorized by law to exercise such powers and to perform such duties.
No covenant, stipulation, obligation or agreement herein contained or contained in the
aforementioned documents shall be deemed to be a covenant, stipulation, obligation or
agreement of any member of the City Council of the City, or any officer, agent or employee of
the City in that person’s individual capacity, and neither the City Council of the City nor any
officer or employee executing the Notes shall be liable personally on the Notes or be subject to
any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof.
No provision, covenant or agreement contained in the aforementioned documents, the
Notes or in any other document relating to the Notes, and no obligation therein or herein
imposed upon the City or the breach thereof, shall constitute or give rise to any pecuniary
liability of the City or any charge upon its general credit or taxing powers. In making the
agreements, provisions, covenants and representations set forth in such documents, the City has
not obligated itself to pay or remit any funds or revenues, other than funds and revenues derived
from the Loan Agreement and the Pledge Agreement which are to be applied to the payment of
the Notes, as provided therein.
10. Except as herein otherwise expressly provided, nothing in this resolution or in the
aforementioned documents expressed or implied, is intended or shall be construed to confer upon
any person or firm or corporation, other than the City or any owner of the Notes issued under the
provisions of this resolution, any right, remedy or claim, legal or equitable, under and by reason
of this resolution or any provisions hereof, this resolution, the aforementioned documents and all
of their provisions being intended to be and being for the sole and exclusive benefit of the City
and any owner from time to time of the Notes issued under the provisions of this resolution.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8a - Groves Academy Refunding
Page 6
11. In case any one or more of the provisions of this resolution, or of the
aforementioned documents, or of the Notes issued hereunder shall for any reason be held to be
illegal or invalid, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this
resolution, or of the aforementioned documents, or of the Notes, but this resolution, the
aforementioned documents, and the Notes shall be construed and endorsed as if such illegal or
invalid provisions had not been contained therein.
12. The Notes, when executed and delivered, shall contain a recital that they are
issued pursuant to the Act, and such recital shall be conclusive evidence of the validity of the
Notes and the regularity of the issuance thereof, and that all acts, conditions, and things required
by the laws of the State of Minnesota relating to the adoption of this resolution, to the issuance of
the Notes, and to the execution of the aforementioned documents to happen, exist and be
performed precedent to the execution of the aforementioned documents have happened, exist and
have been performed as so required by law.
13. The officers of the City, bond counsel, other attorneys, engineers, and other
agents or employees of the City are hereby authorized to do all acts and things required of them
by or in connection with this resolution, the aforementioned documents, and the Notes for the
full, punctual and complete performance of all the terms, covenants and agreements contained in
the Notes, the aforementioned documents and this resolution. In the event that for any reason the
Mayor of the City is unable to carry out the execution of any of the documents or other acts
provided herein, any other member of the City Council of the City shall be authorized to act in
his capacity and undertake such execution or acts on behalf of the City with full force and effect,
which execution or acts shall be valid and binding on the City. If for any reason the City
Manager of the City is unable to execute and deliver the documents referred to in this
Resolution, such documents may be executed by any member of the City Council or any officer
of the City delegated the duties of the City Manager, with the same force and effect as if such
documents were executed and delivered by the City Manager of the City.
14. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 1
8b. Request by General Growth Properties, Inc. for a Major Amendment to their
Planned Unit Development to eliminate the previous theater approvals, and
approve modifications to the interior floor plan and exterior enhancements to
the existing building to accommodate a new fitness center and a
relocated/expanded TJ Maxx at Knollwood Mall.
8332 Highway 7 (Knollwood Mall)
Case No. 8332 Hwy 7
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving the PUD Major
Amendment subject to conditions as stated in the resolution.
Zoning: C-2, General Commercial
Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial
Background:
On November 11, 1999 the City Council approved a Planned Unit Development (PUD) for
Knollwood Mall. The PUD approved a redevelopment project at the mall for the addition of a
16-screen modern theater, 500-stall parking deck, other parking and circulation changes, interior
renovation to reconfigure existing tenants, reconstruction of a portion of the south façade for a
new tenant, and the concept of a six foot screen wall to buffer the neighborhood to the north.
Subsequently, on February 7, 2000 the City Council approved a minor amendment to approve the
screen wall design.
Prior to the PUD approval in 1999, the Mall property was covered by a Continued Special Permit
that was originally approved when the first section of the Mall was built in the 1960’s. The PUD
approval replaced all previous conditions.
General Growth Properties, the owner and manager, is now requesting an amendment to
eliminate the previous theater approval and permit interior modifications to the Mall’s floor plan
and exterior building enhancements to portions of the north and south sides of the building to
accommodate a new fitness center tenant and relocate and expand TJ Maxx.
The project requires a Major Amendment to their PUD that eliminates the theater approval and
incorporates all of the relevant conditions approved as part of that PUD and subsequent PUD
amendments.
A neighborhood meeting was held on March 3, 2004. Several residents provided suggestions on
the types of new uses they would like to see in the mall, i.e. hardware store, children and family
amenities, bookstore, food establishments, community space, etc. The majority of the residents
supported the proposed changes.
SRF consulting was hired to complete a traffic analysis. The study analyzed anticipated effects
on traffic, peak hour operations and site access with the proposed changes and fitness center
addition. The results are analyzed below.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 2
On March 17, 2004, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this PUD amendment.
One resident spoke in favor of the project. The Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend
approval of the amendment subject to the conditions recommended by staff.
Issues:
• What plan changes are proposed to the approved PUD plans?
• How are existing nonconformities proposed to be addressed?
• Are the PUD plan amendments consistent with zoning ordinance requirements
including the PUD requirements?
• What are the results of the traffic study?
• Are there any other issues?
Issues Analysis:
• What plan changes are proposed to the approved PUD plans?
General Growth (Knollwood) is requesting the PUD amendment to facilitate physical
improvements to their property, specifically to enhance the appearance of some entrances and the
building design. The owners objectives are to utilize the 56,000 square feet of existing
unoccupied space at the east end of the mall by relocating the exiting TJ Maxx store, which
occupies approximately 31,000 sq. ft., to the unoccupied area (See attached site plan). TJ Maxx
would increase their floor area to 53,000 sq. ft, and implement their TJ Maxx & More strategy.
The area (31,000 sq. ft) vacated by TJ Maxx is proposed to be occupied by a fitness center. As a
result of the new location for TJ Maxx & More, a new mall corridor and mall entry will be added
at the north side of the exiting mall. The existing entry, just west of Cub on the north side, will
be removed. A new mall entry for the south mall entry is also planned (next to Applebees).
The updated south entry will incorporate a “tower” element that will consist of brick piers, EIFS,
translucent glass wall panels, and pre-finished metal cornice detailing. New signage for TJ Maxx
& More is also proposed. The new north mall entry will utilize a similar design component at
the updated north entry. A similar tower using similar materials is proposed to provide a
consistent mall entry design. New signage is also proposed here.
An upgraded “Convenience Center” signband/storefront is also proposed as part of this project
(for the convenience strip on the south façade on the east end). This includes two of the “tower”
elements for design consistency, as well as lighting and signband improvements. A decorative
metal cornice and new EIFS signband is proposed along the south side of the “Convenience
Center”. Brick piers, EIFS and translucent glass wall panels are proposed for the “towers”.
• How are existing nonconformities proposed to be addressed?
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 3
There are a number of nonconformities on site today, which were to be removed as part of the
theater expansion. The theater was never constructed and is no longer an option for the mall.
Therefore, the nonconformities continue to exist.
The Zoning Ordinance requires that all nonconformities be removed as a condition of any PUD
approval that increases the leaseable floor area or density (The proposed changes to the floor plan
would increase the leaseable floor area by approximately 8,700 square feet). However, the
ordinance permits an exception for multitenant buildings when there are no exterior
modifications that result in an increase in the floor area, ground floor area, density or building
height. PUD amendments for multitenant properties containing nonconformities that fall under
this exception may be approved if nonconformities are brought into greater or complete
compliance to the extent reasonable or possible.
Staff believes the mall is a multitenant building, and that the proposal meets the requirements for
this exemption. Staff does not interpret the “tower” elements as increasing the height of the
building. One reason for this interpretation is these are decorative architectural features only and
do not add floor area or increase the size of the mall. The intent of the “tower” elements is to
incorporate a design element that provides consistency throughout the mall. Also, in Section 36-
78, the ordinance provides flexibility to the height limits by allowing the height of decorative
features such as cupolas and domes, which do not add additional floor area, to be increased by
50% of the height limit set by ordinance. Staff and the Planning Commission believes the
“towers” meets the intent of this section as well. Therefore, staff and the Planning Commission
believe the existing nonconformities should be brought up to compliance to the extent reasonable
and possible.
The applicant has proposed both interior and exterior building improvements with no additional
site changes anticipated. However, since submitting their application General Growth has met
with staff and developed a plan to bring many of the exiting nonconformities into greater
compliance. These are as follows:
Architectural standards: The proposed changes to entrances on the north and south facades and to
the convenience strip meet the Ordinance’s exterior architectural material requirements. They
are composed primarily of brick, glass with some EIFS. However, even with the improvements
the north side of the mall continues to be out of compliance with the City’s architectural
standards. The applicant anticipates the proposed change will help to lease the remaining
unoccupied space on the north side of the mall (i.e. the old theater space) and that any new
tenants would prefer the flexibility to build to suit their needs and therefore would like the option
to make additional facade changes as the spaces are leased. The applicant believes that
additional façade changes will be needed to meet the needs of new tenants and would like to see
the north side redevelop in a similar fashion as the south. Staff and the Planning Commission
recommend as new tenants lease the unoccupied space and/or new entrances or facades are
constructed, that architectural enhancements similar to the current proposal be added to the north
façade. Staff and the Planning Commission also recommend a condition that prior to issuance of
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 4
building permits, building material and color samples of the EIFS, transparent glass, brick and
metal be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator
Landscape:
Several areas on site currently do not meet the requirements for landscaping and bufferyards.
The previous theater PUD approved an ordinance modification to maintain the existing
bufferyards as they are, except that enhancements were required along 36th Street and Aquila
Avenue. Other areas are landscaped per an approved landscape plan from 1996 in which the City
approved reduced bufferyard requirements. The approval was through a provision in the Zoning
Ordinance which allows bufferyards to be reduced for existing properties where the setback
distance is not adequate to meet the requirements. The south side of the mall and most of the
east side is well landscaped and there does not appear to be additional space for more
landscaping. Staff and the Planning Commission believe the previous modifications are
acceptable.
Staff anticipates that the health club and new entrances on the north side of the mall will increase
the use of the north parking area. Therefore, staff and the Planning Commission believe
additional landscaping should be required along the north property line (36th Street) to provide
more of a buffer between the mall and the residential properties to the north. Staff is working
with the developer to increase the amount of landscaping along 36th Street and fill in any gaps to
provide the maximum possible screening. The landscaping may not reach the required
Bufferyard E. Thus staff and the Planning Commission are recommending additional
landscaping be required with future changes to the north façade or when the remaining
unoccupied spaces are leased and would result in an increased utilization of the north parking
area.
Staff and the Planning Commission are also recommending that additional internal parking lot
landscaping be added to the north parking lot to increase the landscape buffer effect. The
applicant is working on their plans to incorporate additional landscaping throughout the site and
staff is comfortable working with the applicant on a revised landscape plan that incorporates all
existing and proposed landscaping for the site. An irrigation plan will also be required for the
newly landscaped areas.
The previous PUD approval required that the developer work with staff to plan for additional
landscaping along Aquila Avenue to screen the parking lot more effectively. Along the west
property line, the City recently installed a new sidewalk and boulevard along the east side of
Aquila Avenue. As part of that project the City also added some boulevard trees.
Lighting:
A photometrics plan was submitted with the application and shows the existing light levels
exceed ordinance standards in a few places along the south property lines adjacent to Hwy 7 &
Aquila Ave. Light levels are also lower than the minimum ordinance requirements in a portion
of the parking lot north and west of the Cub building. The applicant is currently taking another
look at the lighting to ensure the lighting plan is accurate. The City’s policy has been to require
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 5
compliance once we become aware of noncompliance thorough complaints or application
reviews. Therefore, staff and the Planning Commission recommend the lighting be brought into
compliance prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
Parking lot design:
The parking lot on the north side of the property does not conform with ordinance design
requirements. The proposed building changes will increase the use of this parking area.
Therefore staff and the Planning Commission are recommending this portion of the parking lot
be brought into greater compliance with the design standards, i.e. addition of curb islands where
needed at the end of parking rows, additional landscaping as appropriate, etc. The applicant has
agreed to work with staff and is currently drafting revisions. Staff and the Planning Commission
recommend these be finalized and approved by staff prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Are the PUD plan amendments consistent with zoning ordinance requirements, including
the PUD requirements?
The originally approved PUD for the theater at Knollwood Mall included the following
ordinance modifications:
• The main mall identification/pylon sign may be 38 feet in height.
• Landscaping: Existing bufferyards along Highway 7 is approved as is. Bufferyard
along 36th Street is approved per Official Exhibit H, Landscape/Screen Plan.
• Overall parking reductions based upon access to transit.
The applicant is requesting the same modifications be approved with this PUD Amendment.
These are discussed below:
Parking:
The existing parking stalls, approximately 2290, are shared between the various uses in the mall.
Based upon parking requirements for a shopping mall, with the addition of a health club, the
exiting parking meets ordinance requirements (approximately 2286 stalls are required).
However, a few of the existing stalls will need to be removed for the addition of curb islands as
discussed above and more will need to be removed based upon the recommendation by SRF’s
traffic study (this will be further discussed below). A 10% transit reduction was approved with
the previous theater approval. Staff and the Planning Commission deem this reduction
appropriate as this site is located on a frequently operated transit line and the reduction will
ensure the parking requirements on site are met. Shopping centers over 200,000 sq. ft. are
allowed parking reductions up to 30% by PUD, so the requested reduction is not excessive.
Signage:
The developer is proposing to add wall signs on the north and south side of the mall which
appear to meet ordinance requirements. They are also putting together specifications on the
existing monument sign and are working on concept plans for its replacement. The applicant is
proposing this pylon sign be allowed to be 38 feet in height as approved with the previous PUD.
The Zoning Ordinance sets a maximum for this type of sign at 300 square feet and 25 feet high.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 6
This standard applies to properties in the C-2 District of 200,000 square feet in area or larger.
Staff believes that the increased sign height as previously approved is appropriate, given that the
retail space alone is over 200,000 square feet and the property is over 10 acres. The proposed
height is less than the current identification sign, which is 45 feet high. However, increases to
sign height can no longer be approved by PUD unless addressed in a Redevelopment Plan of the
Comprehensive Plan. This site does not have a Redevelopment Plan, so a variance would be
required. This would have to be run separately or with a future PUD amendment since it was not
advertised. In the meantime, staff and the Planning Commission recommend that they be
allowed to keep the existing sign.
Landscape: See landscaping discussion above.
PUD Requirements: Higher standard of building and site design: While the existing architectural
design and layout of the mall are not ideal or superior, staff and the Planning Commission
believe the targeted building improvements of the project area still result in an improved overall
appearance. Staff and the Planning Commission propose that the site plans be changed to reflect
the parking lot enhancements, and improved landscaping along the north property line. These
improvements are not shown on the attached plans, but are required as a condition of approval.
Staff and the Planning Commission believe the PUD requirements are met.
What are the results of the traffic study?
A traffic study was completed by SRF to analyze the traffic impacts on the adjacent roadway
systems related to the proposed relocation of TJ Maxx and the health club and determine what, if
any, improvements are necessary to accommodate the increase in traffic.
Traffic counts and levels of service:
SRF analyzed adjacent intersections to determine current levels of service and future levels of
service assuming the relocation. All key intersections currently operate at a LOS B or better
during peak hours. This is deemed acceptable. The projected levels of service at the same
intersections are expected to remain at a LOS B or better. However, one intersection, Texas Ave.
and 36th St is projected to go from an LOS A to an LOS B in the morning peak hours. Overall,
traffic at this intersection will increase and most of the vehicular movements will be north-bound
Texas to west-bound 36th St. and vice versa. The overall average daily trips projected by SRF are
within the ranges expected for these types of roads, according to the City’s Comprehensive Plan.
Site Access:
SRF reviewed the existing site access and internal roadway system for Knollwood Mall. Based
upon this review, SRF recommended that the west mall access along 36th St. be modified. To
promote better circulation and create a better drive aisle for drivers as they enter and exit this
access, four parking stalls located directly south of the access should be replaced with a curb
island. Currently motorists entering the site may potentially conflict with drivers backing out of
the existing parking stalls directly south of this access. This modification would provide safer
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 7
operations for vehicles entering and exiting this access. It is expected to have little impact on the
overall mall parking, since these stall are located so far from the mall and are likely not used
frequently. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend this modification as a condition of
approval.
• Are there any other issues?
Stormwater:
The existing on-site storm water system is not proposed to be changed with this proposal as the
majority of construction will be to the building only. Staff and the Planning Commission
recommend that the applicant work with the City to bring on-site stormwater management into
compliance with City standards with any future projects that affect any portion of the parking lot
or building additions. Staff suggests a parking study be conducted at that time to determine if
some of the remote parking spaces could be removed with further PUD parking reductions (these
have not been applied to this site) to make room for stormwater ponds.
Utility comments: The Inspections Department provided the following comments in reference to
the proposed plumbing/utility disconnects: Properly plug the unused plumbing/utility openings at
the nearest live main or branch on the sanitary waste, storm vent, water pipes and services.
Cement is not an acceptable method of disconnect. Approved plumbing materials must be used.
Dead ends are not permitted except where necessary to extend piping for a clean out, service
valve to be accessible. A plumbing/utility inspection is required before concealing. Staff and the
Planning Commission recommend these issues be addressed prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
Fire Lanes:
The Fire Department reviewed the plans and recommends the exiting fire lane Resolution 6685
from October 6, 1980 be updated. They have recommended locations for fire lanes be added to
the site plan per their approval. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the site plan be
revised to identify the fire lanes as indicated by the Fire Department. The applicant has indicated
they have incorporated the fire lanes into their revisions.
Tenant changes:
The fitness center and expanded TJ Maxx have the same parking requirements as general retail
uses. Therefore, staff is recommending that these tenants could change to other retail uses
without future amendments to the PUD.
Recommendation:
Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending approval of the Major Amendment to the
PUD, subject to the conditions stated in the resolution.
Attachments: Location Map
Resolution
Traffic study (supplement)
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 8
Development plans (supplement)
Prepared by: Julie Grove, Associate Planner
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 9
Location Map
36TH ST W
3 7 T H S T W XYLON AVE SYUKON AVE SAQUILA CIR
S T A T E H I G H W A Y N O . 7
37TH ST WTEXAS AVE SVIRGINIA AVE SWYOMING AVE SAQUILA AVE SZINRAN AVE SSUMTER AVE SUTAH AVE SWALKER
KNOLLWOOD
MALL
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 10
RESOLUTION NO. 04-054
Amends and Restates Resolution 01-151
Rescinds Resolutions 00-012, 99-125 and 98-103
A RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION NO. 01-151
ADOPTED ON DECEMBER 17, 2001,
GRANTING AN AMENDMENT TO AN EXISTING PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
FOR A SHOPPING CENTER OVER 200,000 SQUARE FEET WITH A
GROCERY STORE UNDER SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK
ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-2
GENERAL COMMERCIAL FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT
8332 STATE HIGHWAY NO. 7
WHEREAS, General Growth Properties, Inc. has made application to the City Council
for a major Amendment to a Final Planned Unit Development (Final PUD) under Section 36-367
of the St. Louis Park Ordinance code to eliminate the previous theater approval, and approve
modifications to the interior floor plan, and exterior façade and entrances changes to the existing
building at 8332 State Highway No. 7 within a C-2 General Commercial Zoning District having
the following legal description:
See Attached Legal Description
WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the information related to Planning Case
No. 04-07-PUD and the effect of the proposed exterior façade and entrance changes 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
WHEREAS, a Final PUD was approved regarding the subject property pursuant to
Resolution No. 99-125 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated November 1, 1999 which
contained conditions applicable to said property; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 99-125 was rescinded and a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) was approved regarding the subject property pursuant to Resolution No. 00-012 of the St.
Louis Park City Council dated February 7, 2000 which contained conditions applicable to said
property; and
WHEREAS, Resolution No. 00-012 was rescinded and a Planned Unit Development
(PUD) Amendment was approved regarding the subject property pursuant to Resolution No. 01-
151 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated December 17, 2001 which contained conditions
applicable to said property; and
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 11
WHEREAS, due to changed circumstances, amendments to those conditions are now
necessary, requiring the amendment of that Final PUD; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of this resolution to continue and restate the conditions of the
permit granted by Resolution No. 01-151 to add the amendments now required, and to
consolidate all conditions applicable to the subject property in this resolution; and
WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case File 04-07-PUD are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing and the record of decision for this case.
CONCLUSION
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution No. 01-151 is hereby restated
and amended by this resolution which continues and amends a Final Planned Unit Development
to the subject property at the location described above for a shopping center over 200,000 square
feet with a grocery store 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 City Code and the
approved Official Exhibit A, Existing Conditions-Site Plan. (Amended by Condition 2
on December 17, 2001, and Condition 3 on April 19, 2004).
2. The PUD shall be amended on December 17, 2001 to allow certain façade changes and
additional entrances on the south side in accordance with Exhibit B/C- Site Plan and
elevations stamped as received November 27, 2001, and the following conditions.
a. All food service facilities shall be as approved by the Inspections Department.
b. No outdoor sales or storage is allowed (other than temporary sales in accordance
with Code provisions). Temporary permits for outdoor sales shall be issued only
as the Zoning Administrator determines that adequate parking remains for the rest
of the mall.
c. By February 7, 2005, all landscaped areas including parking islands shall have
automatic irrigation.
d. Developer shall work with staff to provide evergreen plantings along Aquila
Avenue if possible.
e. All building facades must maintain true cement stucco at the pedestrian level as
approved by the Zoning Administrator.
f. All existing and proposed stucco and EIFS must be painted to match Kohl’s and
Old Navy.
g. Fire lanes shall be provided as required by the Fire Marshall.
h. Prior to any site work related to the façade changes and additional entrances per
December 17, 2001 amendment, the applicant shall obtain a building permit,
which may impose additional requirements.
i. Prior to installation of any new signs, the applicant shall obtain sign permits,
which may impose additional restrictions.
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 12
3. The Planned Unit Development shall be amended on April 19, 2004 to eliminate the
previous theater approvals, approve modifications to the interior floor plan and exterior
enhancements to the existing building, and to incorporate all of the other preceding
conditions and add the following conditions:
a. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the approved
Official Exhibits A1, Site Survey, B1, Existing Site Plan, C1 & 2, Exterior
Elevations, D1, Landscape Plan as modified prior to signing to meet required
conditions of this approval, documents incorporated by reference herein.
b. Prior to issuance of any building permits for interior floor plan modifications or
exterior enhancements, which may impose additional requirements, the developer
shall comply with the following:
i. Meet all Inspection Department/Utility requirements as recommended by
staff.
ii. Meet any Fire Department emergency access requirements for during
construction.
iii. Building materials samples/colors shall be submitted to and approved by
the Zoning Administrator.
iv. An irrigation plan meeting the ordinance regulations shall be submitted to
and approved by the Zoning Administrator.
v. Revised site lighting plan/photometric shall be submitted to and approved
by the Zoning Administrator.
vi. Developer/Owner must sign the Assent Form and approved official
Exhibits.
c. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction:
i 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.
ii. Loud equipment shall be kept as far as possible from residences at all
times.
ii. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto
neighboring properties.
iv. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as
necessary.
v. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes
necessary in order to mitigate the impact of construction on surrounding
properties.
d. Prior to issuance of a new Certificate of Occupancy or Registration of Land Use
for the portion of the Mall proposed for the fitness center or relocated/expanded
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 13
TJ Maxx, (which may be approved for other retail) the developer shall comply
with the following:
i. On-site lighting, other than the transit lighting, must be brought into
compliance with City requirements.
ii. Parking area improvements must be completed in accordance with the
signed Official Exhibits.
iii. Fire lanes shall be in accordance with the signed Official Exhibits.
iv. Landscaping and irrigation shall be in accordance with the signed Official
Exhibits and approved irrigation plan except that a temporary C of O can
be issued prior to completion of landscaping and irrigation improvements
provided an irrevocable, automatically renewable letter of credit is
submitted in the amount of 125% of all landscaping and irrigation
improvements.
v. Exterior building improvements shall be complicated in accordance with
the signed Official Exhibits and approved materials and colors.
e. Prior to issuance of any Certificate of Occupancy or Registration of Land use for
additional tenants or tenant changes along the north building façade, that portion
of the north building façade must be brought into full compliance with the City’s
architectural requirements. Any new entry or any exterior building changes to the
north façade must also be in full compliance with the City’s Architectural Code.
f. On-site storm water management must be brought into compliance with City
standards when any future projects affect the parking lot or with any future
building expansions.
g. Prior to the installation of any new signs, including temporary signs or new sign
faces, the applicant shall obtain sign permits, which shall comply with ordinance
requirements unless variances are obtained.
h. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fine of $750 per violation of
any condition of this approval.
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
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8b - Knollwood PUD Amendment
Page 14
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8c - Edgebrook Drive Alley Paving
Page 1
Background: On October 11, 2002, the residents in the 7600 & 7700 blocks of Edgebrook
Drive between Pennsylvania Avenue and Rhode Island Avenue submitted a petition to the City
requesting that the alley adjacent to their properties be paved in accordance with the City’s
standard for alleys. The petition was signed by enough property owners (78%) to advance the
project. The City’s policy states that at least 51% of the properties must sign the initial petition.
The north side of the alley abuts the homes on Edgebrook Drive while the south side runs
adjacent to Edgebrook Park. One of the parcels located at 7701 is owned by the city. As with
similar projects in the past where the alley abuts City property or a railroad, the city pays for the
costs associated with that amount of land. In this case, this makes the city responsible for
approximately 60% of the entire cost of the alley.
Due to the high cost to the city, the project was delayed so that it could be included in the 2004 -
2008 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The CIP calls for the alley to be built in 2004 and
financed with General Obligation Bond proceeds. The CIP was approved by the City Council
late in 2003, therefore staff is moving forward with the project.
City Alley Paving Special Assessment Policy:
The City’s Alley Paving Special Assessment Policy is as follows:
A. The cost of alley improvements for residential properties shall be assessed when at least 51
percent (alley front feet) of the property owners petition for the improvement:
1. Thirty (30) percent of the cost of the improvement shall be assessed against all
properties abutting the alley. (INDIRECT BENEFIT)
2. Seventy (70) percent of the cost of the improvement shall be assessed against directly
benefited properties as defined in paragraph 5(B). (DIRECT BENEFIT)
B. A property is directly benefited if it has an existing garage with direct access to the alley, if
an access to the alley could be constructed from an existing garage, or if no garage exists,
there is sufficient area on the lot to build a garage with access to the alley.
C. Commercial and multi-family property owners shall be assessed 100 percent of the cost of
the improvement.
D. Alleys shall be constructed of concrete and shall be assessed for a period of 20 years.
8c. City Engineer’s Report: Alley Paving – 7600 & 7700 blocks of Edgebrook Drive
between Pennsylvania and Rhode Island Avenues
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution that accepts the report,
establishes the Improvement Project, and sets a Public Hearing
and Assessment Hearing date of June 7, 2004 – Project No. 03-
15
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8c - Edgebrook Drive Alley Paving
Page 2
Analysis: The City’s standard design for alley paving specifies a six (6)-inch thick concrete
pavement, 10 feet in width, with driveway apron connections between the paved alley and
abutting paved driveways. Private driveways outside the alley right-of-way are the responsibility
of the property owner. In accordance with City practice, the driveway connections will match
existing materials and grades. Pavement grades will be established to provide positive drainage
without requiring additional storm sewer construction, whenever possible.
Public Involvement Process: Staff held an informational meeting on March 24, 2004 to inform
residents of the assessment process and to review the preliminary plans. The meeting was held
in conjunction with a South Oak Hill Neighborhood meeting, sponsored by the Parks and
Recreation Department, to select new playground features for Edgebrook Park. The meeting
attracted 16 residents, 4 of whom are in the assessment area. Staff provided an overview of the
project and answered the resident’s questions. The only issue discovered was that residents in
the blocks of 7400 and 7500 Edgebrook Drive are now considering a petition of their own to
have their alley paved as well. Staff will be providing them with a petition form and estimate of
cost to pave the alley in those two blocks of Edgebrook Drive.
After the meeting date, staff mailed a follow-up letter to the residents of the 7600/7700
Edgebrook Drive. The letter included a review of the information provided at the neighborhood
meeting along with an estimated assessment for each for the abutting parcels. The letter also
offered those residents unable to attend the meeting an opportunity to contact staff with any
question or even arrange a meeting to view the plans at City Hall.
Once a contract has been awarded and a contractor identified, staff will schedule another meeting
with the affected property owners to discuss the construction schedule.
Financial Considerations: The City’s Policy for funding alley improvements requires the
abutting property owners to pay 100% of the improvement costs. The Policy also provides for
the assessments to be levied as direct and indirect benefits based upon abutting frontage. To
assist the petition sponsor, City staff provides the petition forms and a rough estimate of the alley
construction cost before the sponsor begins to gather signatures. Based on the preliminary plans
prepared by staff, the estimated cost is approximately $38,600. An estimate of the assessment
amount for each property is attached. A summary of the estimated costs and revenue sources is
as follows:
Estimated Costs:
Construction Costs $ 34,472
Engineering & Administrative (12%) $ 4,136
TOTAL $ 38,608
Revenue Sources:
Special Assessments $ 15,184
City General Obligation Bonds $ 23,424
TOTAL $ 38,608
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8c - Edgebrook Drive Alley Paving
Page 3
Alley Improvement Project Timetable:
Should the City Council approve the City Engineer’s Report, it is anticipated that the following
schedule could be met:
• Informational meeting with residents March 24, 2004
• City Engineer’s Report to City Council April 19, 2004
• City Council holds Public Hearing & Assessment Hearing June 7, 2004
• Advertise for bids June
• End of 30 Day Appeal on Assessments July 7, 2004
• Bid Opening July 8, 2004
• Bid Tab Report to Council, Council can award the bid and order
the project or delay the project if there are any assessment
appeals
July 19, 2004
• Construction August, 2004
Feasibility: The project, as proposed herein, is cost-effective and feasible under the conditions
noted and at the costs estimated.
Attachments: Resolution
Property owner list with estimated assessments
Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Maria Hagen, City Engineer
Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8c - Edgebrook Drive Alley Paving
Page 4
RESOLUTION NO. 04-055
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT,
ESTABLISHING AN ALLEY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 03-15
AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING AND ASSESSMENT HEARING
DATE OF JUNE 7, 2004
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
City Engineer related to the alley paving in the 7600 and 7700 blocks of Edgebrook Drive
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The City Engineer’s Report regarding the alley paving in the 7600 and 7700 blocks of
Edgebrook Drive is hereby accepted.
2. This proposed alley paving improvement project is hereby established.
3. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 7th day of June,
2004, in Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 p.m. and the Clerk shall give mailed
and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council April 19, 2004
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Meeting
041904 - 8c - Edgebrook Drive Alley Paving
Page 5
PROPOSED ALLEY PAVING
7600 BLOCK OF
EDGEBROOK DRIVE
ESTIMATED COST:$38,608.0870% Direct Benefit (garage or access)
30% Indirect Benefit (dust, noise, and mud)
Direct Benefit cost: 671 feet at $20.14 per lineal footIndirect Benefit cost: 430 feet at $13.47 per lineal lineal foot
TOTALtotal$19,304.00 $38,608.08direct$13,512.80indirect$5,791.20
********* Indirect ******************** Direct **********Total
Indirect Direct Direct &Address Ind feet % Indirect Allocation Dir feet % Direct Allocation Indirect
7601 Edgebrook Dr.56 8.35 $483 0 0.00 $0 $483
20-117-21-21-0083
7605 Edgebrook Dr.50 7.45 $432 50 11.63 $1,571 $2,003
20-117-21-21-0084
7609 Edgebrook Dr.45 6.71 $388 50 11.63 $1,571 $1,960
20-117-21-21-00857613 Edgebrook Dr.50 7.45 $432 50 11.63 $1,571 $2,003
20-117-21-21-00867701 Edgebrook -CITY 95 14.16 $820 105 24.42 $3,300 $4,120
20-117-21-21-00877705 Edgebrook Dr.75 11.18 $647 75 17.44 $2,357 $3,004
20-117-21-21-00887709 Edgebrook Dr.50 7.45 $432 50 11.63 $1,571 $2,003
20-117-21-22-01257713 Edgebrook Dr.50 7.45 $432 50 11.63 $1,571 $2,003
20-117-21-22-01267717 Edgebrook Dr.50 7.45 $432 0 0.00 $0 $432
20-117-21-22-01277721 Edgebrook Dr.50 7.45 $432 0 0.00 $0 $432
20-117-21-22-01287725 Edgebrook Dr.50 7.45 $432 0 0.00 $0 $432
20-117-21-22-0129
7729 Edgebrook Dr.50 7.45 $432 0 0.00 $0 $432
20-117-21-22-0130
Total 671 100.00 $5,791 430 100.00 $13,513 $19,304