HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002/12/16 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularREVISED AGENDA SUMMARY
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
December 16, 2002
7:00 p.m.
7:20 p.m. – Economic Development Authority
Special Meeting – Immediately following City Council meeting
1. Call to Order
a. Pledge of Allegiance
b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
a. Defibrulator Presentation
3. Approval of Minutes
a. City Council Minutes of December 2, 2002 Document
b. City Council Study Session minutes of November 25, 2002 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
a. Reappointments to Boards and Commissions
The commissioners listed below have their term expiring at the end of the year and all
have indicated that they wish to be re-appointed to a new term.
FN LN COMMITTEE
James Gainsley Board of Zoning Appeals
Susan Bloyer Board of Zoning Appeals
Tom Powers Board of Zoning Appeals
Colleen Clark Human Rights
Kristin Siegesmund Human Rights
Cassandra Boddy Human Rights
Tom Worthington Parks/Recreation Advisory
Richard Johnson Parks/Recreation Advisory
Bruce Cornwall Parks/Recreation Advisory
Nancy Nelson Parks/Recreation Advisory
Phil Finkelstein Planning Commission
Carl Robertson Planning Commission
Bruce Browning Telecommunications
Robert Jacobson Telecommunications
Mary Jean Overend Telecommunications
b. Human Rights Commission Appointments
Motion to appoint Kristen Edsall and Ganesh Rameshrathinam to the Human Rights
Commisson.
6. Public Hearings
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
8a.. Vision St. Louis Park Outcomes and Indicators Related Targets Document
Resolution granting support of the Vision St. Louis Park 2005 and 2010 Targets
Related to Outcomes and Indicators.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the resolution
8b. Adopt 2003 Budget, 2002 Revised Budget, 2003 Property Tax Levy, and HRA
Levy Document
This is the final step in approving the 2003 budget, 2002 revised budget, 2003
property tax levy, and 2003 HRA levy.
Recommen
ded Action:
Adopt the 2003 budget, 2002 revised budget, approve 2002 property
tax levy collectible in 2003, and approve HRA levy.
9. Communications
10. Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make
arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD
952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL
MEETING OF December 16, 2002
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 transfer funds from the Water Enterprise Fund to Development Fund
Document
4b Motion to authorize execution of a one (1) year extension to Contract No. 123-01 with
ENSR Consulting and Engineering for consultant services related to the implementation
of the Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation (Reilly) Remedial Action Plan (RAP) during
year 2003 Document
4c Motion to authorize execution of a contract extension to Contract No. 1893 with Severn
Trent Services (STL - Denver) for laboratory services related to the Reilly Tar &
Chemical Corporation groundwater sampling program through year 2003 Document
4d Motion To Adopt Resolution Accepting Work On Concrete Alley Paving 2900 Block –
Edgewood & Florida Avenue City Project No. 02-13 Contract No. 116-02 Document
4e Resolution Accepting Work On Park Commons Watermain Installation City Project No.
01-19 Contract No. 131-01 Document
4f Motion to accept for filing Housing Authority Minutes of October 9, 2002 Document
4g Motion to accept for filing Housing Authority minutes of November 13, 2002 Document
4h Motion to accept for filling BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002 Document
4i Motion to accept for filing Telecommunication Minutes of October 17, 2002 Document
4j Motion to accept vendor claims for filing (Supplement)
AGENDA SUPPLEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
December 16, 2002
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 Agenda
Item: 121602 - 3a - Council Minutes December 2, 2002
Page 1 of 6
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
December 2, 2002
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
The following Councilmembers were present at roll call: Jim Brimeyer, Ron
Latz, Chris Nelson, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Councilmember Susan Sanger was absent.
Also present were the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Scott);
Director of Finance (Ms. McGann); Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin);
Director of Human Resources (Ms. Gohman); Public Works Coordinator (Mr.
Merkley); Administrative Specialist Public Works (Ms. Hellekson); and
Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson).
Additional staff present was the City Assessor (Mr. Stepnick).
2. Presentations--None
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. City Council Minutes of November 18, 2002
3b. City Council Special Meeting Minutes of November 18, 2002
3c. City Council Study Session Minutes of November 12, 2002
3d. City Council Study Session Minutes of October 28, 2002
All minutes were approved as presented.
4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered
to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by
one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of
the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular
agenda for discussion.
4a Adopt Resolution No. 02-129 declaring a vacancy in At-Large A Council seat
4b Motion to adopt Resolution No. 02-130 authorizing the installation of
Permit Parking restrictions on Idaho Avenue, 2nd Street, and 1st Street
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 3a - Council Minutes December 2, 2002
Page 2 of 6
4c Approve Ordinance No. 2234-02 zoning ordinance text amendments to
add large item retail as a separate land use classification, correct the table
of bulk regulations to reflect previous amendments to residential setbacks,
allow use of certain exterior building materials for park buildings, and
correct a code formatting error relating to the location of required parking
in the R-1, R-2 and R-3 residential districts, approve summary ordinance
and authorize publication
4d Motion to approve Resolution No. 02-131 authorizing final payment to
Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. for random curb replacement.
4e Motion to accept for filing the Human Rights Commission Minutes for
October 16, 2002
4f Motion to approve Resolution No. 02-132 authorizing execution of a
Limited Use Permit with the Minnesota Department of Transportation for
the construction, maintenance and operation of a pedestrian trail over
Trunk Highway 100
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to approve
the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar.
The motion passed 6-0.
5. Boards and Commissions--None
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing on the 2003 Budget and Tax Levy
Director of Finance Jean McGann reported on the 2003 proposed budget and
property tax levy. Ms. McGann said the 2003 proposed budget includes the
general operating budget, the debt service budgets, and the enterprise fund
budgets. The City’s objective is to maintain the current level of services. Ms.
McGann reported that the operating levy increase is 1.9%, and the overall general
fund increase is 4.7%. There are no projected increases for the enterprise funds
for 2003, i.e., the water utility or the sewer utility. Ms. McGann added that the
storm water utility rates are being reviewed. The refuse contract from the utility
fund is being negotiated.
Ms. McGann continued: Within the general operating budget, two information
technology (IT) staff persons are expected to be added in order to maintain the
City’s current technology and to be poised for future changes. Thirteen percent of
the expense of the two positions will be covered by the general operating budget,
and remaining dollar amounts will be derived from the enterprise funds and other
funding sources. Ms. McGann said a 3.0% cost of living increase is proposed for
union and nonunion employees. Two of the City’s five contracts are under
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 3a - Council Minutes December 2, 2002
Page 3 of 6
negotiation at this time. A Capital Improvement Expense (CIP) is the need for the
Rec Center roof replacement. Ms. McGann stated that from property tax dollars
collected, the City receives 25%, the County 34%, the school district 33%, and
other taxing jurisdictions such as the Metropolitan Council and the Mosquito
Control District receive 8%.
Ms. McGann discussed property tax refunds, special tax refunds, and the senior
deferred property tax program. She said the market value of a home is not
correlated with the dollar amount the City will collect. An e-permitting system
for City permits will be available soon, however, exceptions to the e-permitting
system will be if a planned review is required. The final budget adoption will be
held on December 16, 2002.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No one came forward and Mayor
Jacobs closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Nelson said he thinks the 2003 proposed budget is a good budget.
He said the replacement of the Rec Center roof is estimated to cost $2.6 million.
Russ Lewellen, 3053 Zarthan Avenue South, asked about the funding for the two
information technology positions. Ms. McGann said to cover the expense of the
two positions, 13% will come from the general operating budget, 70% will come
from the police and fire pension fund interest earnings, and the remainder from
the utility funds.
Mr. Lewellen asked if the 1.9% operating levy increase could be lowered to a
.95% increase; and add just one IT position rather than two. Also, Mr. Lewellen
would like to know if an internship position would be a viable option for one of
the IT positions.
City Manager Charlie Meyer commented that there is only one IT staff person at
this time, and no one is currently available to maintain the City’s GIS systems.
Mr. Meyer said the City would like one individual to support the City’s PC
network and provide training, and one individual to maintain the GIS systems.
The IT positions represent an impact on the tax levy of approximately no more
than one or two tenths of one percent.
Mr. Lewellen would still like to submit a decrease from 1.9% to .95%, and fill
only one IT position.
Mayor Jacobs said final approval of the budget will take place on Monday,
December 16, 2002.
Councilmember Latz responded to Mr. Lewellen’s concerns. Councilmember
Latz said to decrease the operating levy from 1.9% to .95% would cut far more
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 3a - Council Minutes December 2, 2002
Page 4 of 6
than two IT positions. He thinks the budget has been assembled in a measured
way with minimal impact on individual property taxpayers, and the budget still
provides for the services residents want and expect.
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public--None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
8a. Recommended program changes for residential solid waste collection
Director of Public Works Mike Rardin introduced Scott Merkley, Public Works
Coordinator, and Sarah Hellekson, Administrative Specialist Public Works. Mr.
Merkley gave a brief overview of the proposed solid waste program changes.
Proposed changes include elimination of one pass trucks, carts for refuse paid for
by the City, an optional user credit for reduced summer yard waste collection,
citywide spring cleanup day, use of performance indicators, and multi-family
residential recycling program. He reported that some of the goals are to increase
recycling and reduce the amounts going to landfills, cost effective services,
effective communication, and continual evaluation of the program and industry.
Susan Bloyer, 2935 Pennsylvania Avenue South, stated that she does not favor the
purchase of the refuse carts by the City, especially during these difficult economic
times; she suggested that perhaps the hauler should be solving the refuse problems
that have been cited; she would like greater recycling capability; and she would
prefer a pay-as-you -throw system for lawn refuse.
Gordon Anderson, 4246 Vernon Avenue South, reported that a letter he sent to
the Sun Sailor was published several weeks ago, however, the newspaper edited,
i.e., deleted, two paragraphs. Mr. Anderson read the two paragraphs to the
Council, the essence of which was a quarterly fee is being charged for those
residents who require walk-up service. Mr. Anderson cited the Waste
Management contract as providing doorstep service upon application to the
contractor under certain conditions, and nowhere is a fee mentioned. He provided
two examples of cases that were resolved in favor of the complainants.
Robert Olson, 2840 Glenhurst Avenue South, asked what the refuse fees will be.
Mr. Rardin said the fees are subject to negotiations.
Mr. Meyer said the City sets the rates the residents pay, not the hauler.
John Mayer, 7704 Victoria Circle, is very pleased to hear about the use of smaller
refuse vehicles. Mr. Mayer said a lawn service for the townhome owners of
Victoria Ponds removes their lawn refuse, therefore, is it correct that credit will be
given for the 72 units? Mayor Jacobs replied yes. Ms. Hellekson said because
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 3a - Council Minutes December 2, 2002
Page 5 of 6
the refuse trucks are about one-half the size of the current refuse trucks, two
trucks will be required, one for refuse and one for recycling.
It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to
direct staff to prepare contract documents incorporating program changes as
outlined in this staff report.
Councilmember Latz commented that the contract sets the right incentives, and he
is pleased to see public support for the proposed changes. He said the walkup
service of five years ago was very informal. The Council thought there were a
few hundred residents receiving walkup service, however, when a new contractor
came on board, it was discovered that about 900 residents were receiving walkup
service—and every household was paying for that service. Councilmember Latz
stated that Council thought it unfair for everyone to pay for those who didn’t
require but benefited from the walkup service. Council did not want Staff to
make medical and disability decisions on behalf of those who required any kind
of proof of a physical disability.
Mr. Anderson stepped forward and said to be sure all Councilmembers get a copy
of the two cases he mentioned earlier. Mayor Jacobs said that will be done and
the City Attorney will also receive a copy.
Councilmember Nelson said everyone is charged the same fee. He said Council
did not want to screen residents for disability and income when this issue came up
in 1998, therefore, Council made a policy decision not to subsidize walkup
service.
The motion passed 6-0.
8b. Paid Time Off Policy - Resolution No. 02-127
Director of Human Resources Nancy Gohman discussed paid time off in regard to
salary limitations.
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Velick to
adopt Resolution No. 02-127 revising the City of St. Louis Park Personnel
Manual by adding a Paid Time Off Policy.
The motion passed 6-0.
8c. 2003 General Pay Increase
Ms. Gohman reported on the 2003 general pay increase for non-union employee
compensation, the paid-on-call Firefighter Performance Program and the City
Manager’s contract.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 3a - Council Minutes December 2, 2002
Page 6 of 6
It was moved by Councilmember Velick, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to
adopt Resolution No. 128 confirming a general increase for non-union
employees, increasing performance program pay for Paid-on-call Firefighters,
and adjusting compensation for the City Manager.
The motion passed 6-0.
9. Communications
From the City Manager: Mr. Meyer reported that on November 27th, a
certificate of occupancy was issued for the Excelsior and Grand project.
From Councilmember Nelson: Councilmember Nelson announced that the bike
trail that runs along the Southwest LRT line is now complete.
From the Mayor: Mayor Jacobs announced a Council vacancy due to Ron Latz’
January 2003 departure to the State Legislature. Applications to fill the At-Large
Council position are being accepted through December 9, 2002. Mayor Jacobs
said the Council anticipates filling the seat in early January 2003.
10. Adjournment
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 9:01 p.m.
City Clerk Mayor
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 3b - Study Session Minutes November 25, 2002
Page 1 of 4
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
November 25, 2002
The meeting convened at 7:08 p.m.
Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Jim Brimeyer, Chris Nelson, Sally Velick, Susan
Santa and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Councilmembers Ron Latz and Susan Sanger were absent.
Staff present were City Manager (Mr. Meyer); Director of Community Development (Mr.
Harmening); Director of Finance (Ms. McGann); Economic Development Coordinator (Mr.
Hunt); Planning Coordinator (Ms. Erickson); Director of Human Resources (Ms. Gohman);
Director of Parks and Recreation (Ms. Walsh); Parks and Recreation Superintendent (Mr. Birno);
and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson).
Guests present were Mr. David Cooke, Park Nicollet Senior Vice President & Chief Financial
Officer; Mr. Duane Spiegle, Park Nicollet Vice President of Real Estate and Support Services;
Mr. Tony Kuechle, United Properties; and Mr. Steven Bubul, Bond Counsel from Kennedy &
Graven.
1. Update on Park Nicollet Health Services Growth Plans and Interest in Issuance of
Private Activity Revenue Bonds
Mr. Cooke and Mr. Spiegle briefly reviewed Park Nicollet’s preliminary plans, and the
preliminary costs associated with their campus expansion plans. Mr. Spiegle said Park Nicollet
would like to have the heart and vascular center at Methodist Hospital operational by June of
2005. Mr. Spiegle said the potential schedule for a blue lot parking deck or ramp is slated for
June of 2004 to June of 2005. Mr. Spiegle commented that Park Nicollet would like to
consolidate their information into one document.
Mr. Cooke reported that financing for the heart and vascular center would involve $60 million in
private activity revenue bonds for a term of 30 years at a fixed rate, and the uses are listed as:
$50 million for the heart and vascular center, $5 million refunding Series 1990-B, and $5 million
debt reserve fund.
Among those who attended the neighborhood meetings regarding the Park Nicollet campus
expansions, it was agreed that the meetings were informative for all.
Councilmember Santa asked for general information about the heart and vascular center. Mr.
Spiegle answered that the center will provide in-patient and out-patient care. Park Nicollet will
require about 34 cardiologists and, it is important to note, all physicians will be Park Nicollet
staff, i.e., no independent physicians. Mr. Cooke remarked that to keep up with technology,
additional space is a necessity. An additional 200-250 parking spaces will be needed.
Councilmember Nelson suggested having Park Nicollet officials appear on Deputy City Manager
Clint Pire’s community television program. Civic Television Coordinator Reg Dunlap is
working with Park Nicollet.
Mr. Cooke stated that the bond rating would be approximately A-, however, few entities are
interested in Minnesota debt. Mr. Cooke added that there may be a potential mortgage, as an
additional security, in order to finance the bonds.
Council agreed that they will consider private activity revenue bonds for Park Nicollet.
Mr. Harmening remarked that perhaps there could be a June 2003 issuance.
Councilmember Nelson took advantage of the transition between items 1 and 2, and offered his
comments regarding the Vision St. Louis Park presentation, which took place just prior to
tonight’s study session.
2. Options Regarding United Properties’ Proposed Commercial Development at the
Southwest Corner of Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue
Mr. Hunt reported on Staff’s endeavors to explore development options 1-4 (see below) for the
southwest corner of Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue. Those options were:
1. Condemn and remove the billboard
2. Relocate the billboard
3. Billboard remains in place; developer purchases excess billboard property
4. Sell the City’s property outright
5. Do nothing and continue to hold the property
Mr. Kuechle, United Properties, reported that no construction would take place for five years.
Because the demand for office space is currently weak, Mr. Kuechle said likely occupants would
be a bank of 6,000 or 12,000 square feet; a Culver’s restaurant of 4,500 square feet; and a
medical user of 10,000 square feet on the first floor and an additional 5,000 square feet upper
floor. Mr. Kuechle distributed drawings titled “Modified Scheme B,” “Scheme C,” and “Scheme
F.”
A modified Scheme C was discussed, and Mr. Kuechle stated that United Properties would pay
$150,000 for such. It was noted that the land is valued at $4.00 per square foot, which equals
$545,000.
Councilmember Santa asked about a traffic signal at 37th and Louisiana Avenue, and the
response was that there would be one at that location. Mr. Hunt indicated that Cardinal Glass
will be vacating their facility.
Councilmember Nelson would like to discuss the development potential of this corner with
physician providers.
Mr. Kuechle said he will submit a modified Scheme C on paper. He added that United
Properties does not need financial assistance from the City; it will cost $15,000 to engineer the
site.
Council directed Staff to proceed with option 4 (sell the City’s property outright). Mr.
Harmening will present a formal proposal.
3. Proposed Commercial Development at the Northeast Corner of Louisiana Avenue
and Walker Street
Mr. Hunt briefly reported on ALDI’s interest in building a 15,150 square foot grocery store on
property owned by the EDA at the corner of Louisiana Avenue and Walker Street.
Mayor Jacobs expressed concern for and asked about overflow parking from Park Tavern. There
is no answer tonight but Park Tavern overflow parking is and would be a concern no matter what
future use is established for this corner.
Mr. Hunt said the market value of this EDA property is $270,000.
Mayor Jacobs remarked he is concerned about traffic volume in this area.
It was stated that ALDI would require 90 parking spaces.
Council’s directive for Staff is to pursue ALDI and Park Tavern’s owner Mr. Phil Weber to work
out a deal and return to Council.
4. Sponsorship Program for Parks and Recreation Special Events
Ms. Walsh and Mr. Birno bring this item forward because they would like to link partnerships,
e.g., Target, to generate sponsorships. Mr. Birno said they would like to initiate such
sponsorships for the fall of 2003. It is anticipated that sponsorships could generate $20,000
annually. Additionally, Staff would prefer to focus on one-time special events as opposed to
programs that continue for several weeks.
Mayor Jacobs expressed approval—if the sponsorships are done in a tasteful fashion.
Councilmember Velick and Mr. Meyer said it would be imperative not to lean on businesses to
sponsor a program. Ms. Walsh and Mr. Birno said sponsorship would be secured once a year.
Mayor Jacobs strongly stated that businesses are to come to the City, therefore, cautiously go
forward with the sponsorship program.
Council will review Staff’s information before it is public.
5. Paid Time Off Policy
Ms. Gohman reported on paid time off as it relates to salary limitations, i.e., a salary cap.
Councilmember Brimeyer suggested a float with the cap.
There was discussion and agreement among the Mayor, Councilmembers, and Staff that salary
caps are highly restrictive, burdensome, and a pain in the neck.
Ms. Gohman will prepare a policy statement for the Council.
6. Communication from the City Manager
Mr. Meyer discussed a public art project along Excelsior Blvd. and other major thoroughfares
involving banners. The City would purchase blank banners and members of the St. Louis Park
community would silkscreen the banners under the supervision of artists. Special Service
Districts may help with funding. Council is very receptive to this idea.
7. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m.
City Clerk Mayor
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4a - Transfer of funds
Page 1 of 2
4a. Motion to transfer funds from the Water Enterprise Fund to Development Fund
Background:
At the December 9, 2002 City Council Study Session the 1997 transfer of funds from the
Development Fund to the Water Enterprise Fund were reviewed and discussed. The transfer that
occurred in 1997 was in the amount of $4,871,000 and was for reimbursement of past costs
associated with the site clean-up activities at the former Reilly Tar site. This transfer has
accumulated interest through December 31, 2001 of $1,490,825 bring the total amount to
$6,361,825.
As discussed at the Study Session, staff is requesting these dollars be transferred back to the
Development Fund for the following reasons;
• Property tax reform has made it difficult to continue with redevelopment within the City
• The Water Enterprise Fund has sufficient funds available for operations as well as
infrastructure improvements without the utilization of these funds.
Timeline for transfer of funds:
Staff is requesting the transfer of $6,361,825 before December 31, 2002. Staff is also requesting
that an additional transfer of the 2002 interest accumulated on this transfer occur in 2003 after
the 2002 books have been closed.
Recommendation: Approve resolution authorizing transfer of $6,361,825 from the Water
Enterprise Fund to the Development Fund.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Jean D. McGann, Director of Finance
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4a - Transfer of funds
Page 2 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 02-137
RESOLUTION AURTHORIZING A TRANSFER FROM THE
WATER ENTERPEISE FUND TO THE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DEVELOPMENT FUND
WHEREAS: Economic Development Authority of St. Louis Park transferred $4,871,000
from the Development Fund to the Water Enterprise fund in 1997;
WHEREAS: The transfer from 1997 has accumulated interest through December 31,
2001 of $1,490,925;
WHEREAS: the City has determined it is necessary to transfer the principal and
accumulated interest to the Development Fund
WHEREAS:: an additional transfer of the 2002 interest earned will be transferred in 2003
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that
$6,361,825 is to be transferred from the Water Enterprise Fund to the Development Fund prior to
December 31, 2002 and the 2002 interest earned is to be transferred in 2003.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 16, 2002
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4b - Reilly Site Consultant
Page 1 of 4
4b. Motion to authorize execution of a one (1) year extension to Contract No. 123-01
with ENSR Consulting and Engineering for consultant services related to the
implementation of the Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation (Reilly) Remedial
Action Plan (RAP) during year 2003.
Background: In September, 1986, the Reilly Consent Decree became effective and the City
accepted responsibility for a number of environmental remediation tasks contained in the Reilly
RAP. Over the last 16 years the City has retained the services of nine consulting engineers or
firms to provide for the design and/or implementation of the RAP activities. One firm, ENSR,
has served as the cornerstone of the professional “consortium” because of its extensive historical
relationship with the Reilly project. Currently the City has a one (1) year Contract with ENSR
for consultant services. The current contract expires December 31, 2002 but has renewal options
for the years 2003 and 2004. The activities or services provided by this contract are:
Groundwater sampling and analysis
Preparing annual reports for agency review
Aquifer studies
Investigation of leaking wells
Laboratory audits and coordination
Historical file searches
General project administration
Discussion: While many of the studies required by the Reilly RAP have been completed by
ENSR and others, certain tasks such as groundwater sample retrieval and annual reporting
represent ongoing activities which will require consultant assistance in year 2003 and into the
foreseeable future. ENSR has provided consultant services for the ongoing tasks in the past, and
as such, has been recognized by the United States Environmental Protection Agency and
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (Agencies) as an approved consultant for such activities.
Staff supports the continued use of ENSR for such services.
The general ongoing tasks identified above vary from year to year. The following tasks are
planned for 2003:
Task 100 – 2002 Annual Monitoring Report: This task involves drafting text and preparing
figures and tables to assist the City in completing the 2002 Annual Monitoring Report. The
Annual Monitoring Report includes analytical results from the past year sampling efforts, as well
as groundwater contour maps. Additionally, a historical summary of analytical results is
provided in the Annual Monitoring Report. This report is due to the U.S.EPA and MPCA
(Agencies) on March 15, 2003.
Task 150 - 2002 Annual Progress Report and GAC Plant Report: ENSR will assist the City in
completing these two reports for submittal to the Agencies on March 15, 2003.
Task 400 – Groundwater Monitoring: This task involves groundwater sample collection in
accordance with the 2003 Sampling Plan and water level measurements pursuant to that Plan.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4b - Reilly Site Consultant
Page 2 of 4
Table 1 indicates a cost of $38,000 for this work, based on the average amount spent on this task
for the last five years.
Task 500 – Prairie du Chien-Jordan Aquifer Remedy Implementation: The Prairie du Chien-
Jordan Remedy includes pumping the SLP municipal wells currently being used (e.g., SLP-10 or
SLP-15 and SLP-4), and monitoring the groundwater. The potential complication presented by
pumping at the Meadowbrook golf course (well W119) has not been officially resolved, but it is
likely that the well will not be used for irrigating the golf course.
In 2003, changes to the remedy may include the installation and monitoring of well W413. Also,
MPCA may require sampling at W119. If there are indications of contamination spreading
southward, then well SLP-6 would be activated for gradient control. The costs in Table 1 reflect
a task structure to track costs in accordance with Exhibit A of the City-Reilly Cost Sharing
Agreement. Task 530 includes ENSR’s assistance to the City in preparing the well W413
drilling bid package, limited oversight of the well construction, and a brief report of the
installation to the Agencies. Task 540 will cover ENSR’s costs to collect 12 groundwater
samples (quarterly sampling of three wells), including $1,500 for subcontractor costs each time
well W119 is sampled. ENSR does not expect any further costs associated with the NPDES
permit, however, the agency negotiations and any administrative or miscellaneous costs incurred
by ENSR related to the implementation of the remedy for this aquifer will also be included in
Task 550.
The Task 500 budget can be viewed as a contingency fund for the project, because the only costs
incurred in 2002 were for quarterly monitoring at well W48. This amounted to approximately
$1,200 in 2002.
Task 600 – Laboratory Coordination: This task includes two subtasks:
1. Working with STL on implementing the new and improved QAPP, coordinating
sampling events, and updating and maintaining the water quality database.
2. Providing data review and data validation at the levels described in the new QAPP.
Because the data validation and data quality review will be a more formalized process
under the new QAPP, and will be documented for the Annual Monitoring Report for
2002 (prepared in March 2003), the task budget shown in Table 1 includes $5,000 for
these activities.
Task 700 – Site Closure: In 2003, this task includes one subtask:
1. Well abandonment for many unused monitoring wells throughout the City. The costs
shown in Table 1 cover ENSR’s labor and expenses for coordinating the
abandonment of various wells with MPCA, the City, water well contractors, and other
parties, as necessary. Contractor costs for actual well abandonment are not included
in this budget.
Task 810 – Program Management and Miscellaneous: This task includes overall planning,
directing, and controlling ENSR’s resources to perform this project. This task also includes
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4b - Reilly Site Consultant
Page 3 of 4
miscellaneous activities throughout the year such as next year’s Sampling Plan (due October 31,
2003), that includes the Site Management Plan and the Quality Assurance Project Plan. ENSR’s
average costs for the past several years have been approximately $25,000 for Task 810.
Financial Considerations: Recent correspondence with ENSR estimates the cost for year 2003
work tasks at $127,000. Following is a summary of the year 2003 tasks and estimated costs:
TABLE 1
Task Estimated Cost, $
Task 100 2002 Annual Monitoring Report (due March 15, 2003) $ 25,000
Task 150 2002 Progress Report and GAC Plant Report 4,000
Task 400 Groundwater Monitoring in 2003 38,000
Task 500 Prairie du Chien Aquifer Remedy Implementation 20,000(a)
Subtask 530 W413 Installation $ 5,000(a)
Subtask 540 W48, W119, W413 Monitoring 10,000(a)
Subtask 550 NPDES Permitting 5,000(a)
Task 600 Laboratory Coordination 10,000
Subtask: Lab Coordination $ 5,000
Subtask: Data Validation and Review $ 5,000
Task 700 Site Closure 5,000
Subtask: Well Abandonment $ 5,000
Task 810 Project Management/Miscellaneous 25,000
Total Estimated Project Cost for 2002 $ 127,000
(a) Costs will be split with Reilly.
The 2003 Reilly Budget contains funding for these Reilly related consultant activities.
Attachments: Contract Extension Agreement
Prepared by: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4b - Reilly Site Consultant
Page 4 of 4
EXTENSION TO
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
AGREEMENT FOR CONSULTING SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT is made on December 16, 2002, by and between the CITY OF ST.
LOUIS PARK, Minnesota, a Minnesota municipal corporation (hereinafter referred to as ‘City”),
and ENSR CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING, a Delaware corporation (hereinafter referred
to as ‘ENSR”).
1. BACKGROUND. The parties have previously entered into an agreement for consulting
services dated December 17, 2001 (“Initial Agreement”). The Initial Agreement
authorizes the CITY to extend its terms for up to two (2) additional one-year periods.
2. EXTENSION. Subject to the modifications set forth herein, the Initial Agreement is
extended for a one (1) year period terminating on December 31, 2003.
3. SCOPE OF WORK AND BUDGET FOR YEAR 2003 ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES. The Council report dated December 16, 2002, from the City Manager,
describing the year 2003 project tasks and estimated costs, is incorporated herein by
reference.
IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be
executed by their respective duly authorized officers.
ENSR CONSULTING AND ENGINEERING CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By:________________________________ By:________________________________
Jeff Jacobs, Mayor
Title:_______________________________ and ________________________________
Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4c - Reilly Site Lab
Page 1 of 4
4c. Motion to authorize execution of a contract extension to Contract No. 1893 with
Severn Trent Services (STL - Denver) for laboratory services related to the Reilly
Tar & Chemical Corporation groundwater sampling program through year
2003.
Background: The City has maintained a contractual relationship with STL - Denver (formerly
Quanterra Corporation and previously Rocky Mountain Analytical Laboratory for the analysis of
groundwater in accordance with the provisions of the consent decree with Reilly Tar & Chemical
Corporation (Reilly) since 1988. Staff has identified only two firms capable of providing
necessary laboratory services. STL - Denver and CH2M Hill, the laboratory used by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Insofar as the USEPA remains opposed to the
use of its laboratory consultant by either the City or Reilly, STL - Denver remains the only
available consultant for laboratory services.
The contract with STL – Denver has been amended each year since 1988. The City Council has
previously authorized staff to negotiate contract amendments with STL – Denver. The staff has
completed negotiations in costs (unit prices) for the laboratory analysis to be performed in year
2003.
Additional Information: The City, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and the
United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) acknowledge advances in the technology
of groundwater analysis methods since the original testing methodology was agreed to in 1986.
City staff has been advocating for several years to update the testing methodology at the Reilly
site. Staff also determined the procedures for laboratory data reporting, data validation and data
quality review needed updating and simplifying. The entire groundwater monitoring process,
which is outlined in the Reilly Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP), was just recently re-
formatted by the City, with EPA guidance, to current acceptable methodologies. As a result of
this, the proposed 2003 monitoring program and this contract amendment include changes which
significantly reduce the cost of the overall monitoring program. A summary of recent expenses
follows:
YEAR AMOUNT COMMENT
1995 132,070 Actual
1996 178,640 Actual
1997 174,695 Actual
1998 123,500 Actual
1999 125,620 Actual
2000 86,020 Actual
2001 85,300 Actual
2002 70,000 Estimated
2003 70,000 Projected
Financial Considerations: Contract authorizations from 1988 through 2002 provide for a
cumulative contract amount of $2,076,000 with total estimated expenses of $2,033,597 thereby
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4c - Reilly Site Lab
Page 2 of 4
creating an estimated contract balance of $42,403 at the end of 2002. Based on the updated
analytical process and other changes related to data, staff estimates that approximately $70,000
will be expended for water sample analysis during year 2003. Therefore, staff is seeking an
additional authorization of $28,000 to the contract to cover the expected 2003 costs plus
unanticipated contingencies.
Recommendation: Staff recommends Contract No. 1893 be amended to increase the contract
amount by $28,000 to provide for groundwater sample analysis during year 2003.
Attachments: Amendment No. 13 to Contract No. 1893
Prepared By: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4c - Reilly Site Lab
Page 3 of 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
AMENDMENT NO. 13 TO CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACT NO. 1893
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 13 to Contract No. 1893 is made on December 16, 2002, by
and between the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation hereinafter
referred to as “CITY”, and SEVERN TRENT SERVICES (formally QUANTERRA
CORPORATION AND PREVIOUSLY ROCKY MOUNTAIN ANALYTICAL
LABORATORY/ENSCO) hereinafter referred to as “STL - DENVER”.
BACKGROUND
On December 12, 1988, the CITY and STL - DENVER entered into Contract No. 1893
for consultant services related to certain rights and responsibilities the CITY accepted under an
agreement with Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation (Reilly) which is attached as Exhibit B to a
Consent Decree in United States of America, et al. vs. Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation,
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of St. Louis Park, Oak Park Village Associates, Rustic
Oaks Condominium, Inc. and Philips’s Investment Company, United States District Court,
District of Minnesota, Civil File No. 4-80-469.
Pursuant to communication between the CITY and STL – DENVER, it has been determined that
it is in the best interests of the CITY and STL - DENVER to extend the term of Contract No.
1893 to December 31, 2003, and amend the provisions of Contract No. 1893 and amendments
issued thereto dated June 29, 1989, March, 1990, November 18, 1991, February 22, 1994,
January 11, 1995, February 20, 1996, December 2, 1996, March 2, 1998, December 7, 1998,
December 6, 1999, January 16, 2001, and December 17, 2001, incorporating responsibilities
each party will assume through year 2003 to discharge those responsibilities the CITY has
accepted under Exhibit B to the Consent Decree.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above facts and mutual covenants herein
contained, it is hereby agreed that Contract No. 1893 and all previous Amendments are amended
as follows:
I. Contract Period
1. The length of Contract No. 1893 shall be extended to December 31, 2003.
2. Total compensation to STL – DENVER for all services rendered pursuant to
Contract No. 1893, as amended, shall not exceed $2,104,000.
IT IS FURTHER AGREED that all other provisions of Contract No. 1893 and all
previous Amendments shall remain unchanged and fully effective, and this Amendment shall
become an integral part thereof.
EXECUTED as to the day and the year first above written.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4c - Reilly Site Lab
Page 4 of 4
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK,
MINNESOTA
SEVERN TRENT SERVICES
By:
Mayor
City Manager
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4d - Resolution Final Payment 116-02 Kassa
Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. 02-138
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON
CONCRETE ALLEY PAVING
2900 BLOCK – EDGEWOOD & FLORIDA AVENUE
CITY PROJECT NO. 02-13
RON KASSA CONSTRUCTION, INC.
CONTRACT NO. 116-02
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated September 17, 2002, Ron Kassa
Construction, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the concrete alley paving in the 2900 block of
Edgewood Avenue and Florida Avenue as per Contract No. 116-02.
2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 16, 2002
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4e - Resolution Final Payment 131-01 Imperial Dev
Page 1 of 1
RESOLUTION NO. 02-138_
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON
PARK COMMONS WATERMAIN INSTALLATION
CITY PROJECT NO. 01-19
CONTRACT NO. 131-01
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated December 3, 2001, Imperial Developers, Inc.
has satisfactorily completed the installation of watermain at Park Commons Development
along W. 39th Street as per Contract No. 131-01.
2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 16, 2002
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4f - Housing Auth Minutes of October 9, 2002
Page 1 of 7
MINUTES
Housing Authority
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Wednesday, October 9, 2002
Westwood Room
5:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Catherine Courtney, William Gavzy, Anne Mavity,
Judith Moore and Shone Row
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Anderson, Tom Harmening, Jane Klesk,
Kathy Larsen, Jean McGann, Michele Schnitker,
Nancy Sells, Brian Swanson
OTHERS PRESENT: Steve Wishman, Kern DeWenter Viere, Ltd.
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 5:08 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes for September 11, 2002
Commissioner Mavity noted a revision to be made to page four, paragraph three.
Sentence two should be revised to read, "The link has been demonstrated to be very
strong…" Commissioner Mavity moved approval of the minutes of September 11, 2002
as revised. Commissioner Row seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of
3-0, with Commissioners Courtney, Mavity and Row voting in favor. (Note:
Commissioner Gavzy arrived at 5:09 p.m. and Commissioner Moore arrived at 5:15 p.m.)
3. Hearings: None
4. Reports and Committees: None
5. Unfinished Business: None
6. New Business
A. Fiscal Year End March 31, 2002 Audit Presentation
Ms. Schnitker introduced Steve Wishman of Kern DeWenter Viere, Ltd. She said
2
that Jean McGann and Brian Swanson of the City’s Finance Dept. were also in
attendance for questions and discussion.
Mr. Wishman distributed the Audit Management Letter and Auditor’s Financial
Statements. He stated that there is no reportable condition in this audit.
There was a discussion about $58,000 deferred revenue which is being held by the
Authority as a deposit for the Louisiana Court project.
Mr. Wishman discussed a disparity which exists in Section 8 Voucher numbers as
a result of HUD’s recalculations of required contributions for year-end settlement.
He said that Brian Swanson has been researching the calculations.
Mr. Swanson explained that every year the Authority submits to HUD a year-end
settlement statement. Staff is now doing an analysis to see if the Authority is in
agreement with the calculations that HUD provided.
Mr. Wishman reported that the Housing Authority received an unqualified
opinion, the highest level that can be issued.
There was a discussion about the auditor’s role in research and readjustment of
the Section 8 funds.
Commissioner Mavity thanked everyone involved in addressing segregation of
accounting responsibilities.
Commissioner Courtney expressed appreciation for the timeliness of the report.
Commissioner Gavzy thanked the audit firm and Finance Department for their
efforts and for the report. He added that oversight of the Authority’s finances
through the audit process may be the most important fiduciary obligation the B
Board has to the citizens of St. Louis Park.
There was a discussion about the revised monthly financial statement. Ms.
McGann said that staff will bring an Investment Policy to the board for its review
in the next couple of months. She added that beginning with the November
report, the monthly report could include a schedule indicating investments.
Before considering Item 6b. of the agenda, Ms. Schnitker said that staff wanted to
add item 6c. Home Renewal Program Candidate to the agenda.
B. Cedar Trails Condominium Housing Improvement Area
Ms. Schnitker reported that at the October 7 City Council meeting a public
hearing was held regarding a proposal to designate Cedar Trails Condominium
Association a Housing Improvement Area, thereby allowing the City to loan them
3
funds to make improvements to the property.
Ms. Schnitker stated there was favorable reaction from the City Council, and
asked Ms. Larsen to further update the Board on the current status of the project.
Commissioner Gavzy confirmed this was simply an update and that no action was
required from the Board.
Ms. Larsen reported that Cedar Trails Condominium Association requires
approximately $1.3 million in funds to make basic common-area improvements,
and has adequately demonstrated that improvements can not be made without a
loan from the City. It has been determined by the Finance Department and
financial advisors that an internal loan would be possible.
Ms. Larsen explained that a development agreement would be drafted, ensuring
the loan is guaranteed by the Association's assets, and by owners paying back
money through their property taxes. Owners will be assessed an average of
approximately $5,000 per unit.
Council set a second reading for November 4, 2002, at which time they will
review the development agreement and adopt a resolution establishing the
improvement area and the internal fund for the loan.
Ms. Schnitker stated that construction could be started as early as spring, 2003.
There was further general discussion about the assessed and market values of
Cedar Trails condominium units. Commissioner Gavzy asked what the average
rental rate was. Ms. Larsen responded that it ranges from $350 to $550 for a one-
bedroom unit, plus association fees of approximately $300.00 per month.
Commissioner Gavzy asked who the general contractor or architect was. Ms.
Larsen stated that Park Midwest Management Co. has a contract with Park
Midwest Maintenance Co. Ms. Larsen added that the same inspecting architect
used at Louisiana Court has reviewed the bids, as has the City's mechanical
inspector and Chief Building Official.
Commissioner Gavzy inquired why the City has $1.3 million to lend out. Mr.
Harmening answered that the proposed funding source is an EDA Development
Fund. This fund was created in 1996. The dollars in this fund were originally
included in the City's tax increment fund balances, but by law were not
considered to be tax increment. Due to concerns at the time about potential
legislative action which would restrict the use of tax increment dollars, the
Development Fund was created. The fund has a current balance of approximately
$15 million, and is intended to be used to further economic development in St.
Louis Park. The monies are invested, as are all City funds. The Cedar Trails
project is a good fiscal investment, given the rate of return and security risk. The
4
Housing Rehab Fund was also considered, but since that fund is not as well
capitalized, a decision was made not to use it.
Commissioner Gavzy asked if the money would be paid back through special
assessments on each unit. Mr. Harmening answered that when a mortgage
company or property owner makes a property tax payment, the County collects
that as they collect special assessments, and they will send a check to the City
semiannually. The City will apply that money against the loan.
Commissioner Gavzy asked if there are other condominium co-op projects in the
City that are in a similar situation. Ms. Larsen stated the City has been in
discussions with a total of five. The other associations found alternative ways to
fund their projects, but all had similar circumstances of deferred maintenance and
inadequate reserves to address their maintenance needs. Cedar Trails is one of the
older and more modestly priced complexes. City Council has decided that this
tool can not be used for upper-end condo associations. There was further general
discussion about other suburban areas having also used this tool.
Mr. Harmening acknowledged the hard work involved to initiate this project, and
that the City should recognize the efforts of Ms. Larsen and Ms. Schnitker to
guide the Association through the set-up process that statute and policy requires.
Commissioner Gavzy inquired if there were significant up-front fees for the
homeowner association. Mr. Harmening stated that the City will charge all the
consulting fees and a nominal application fee, built into the loan. Commissioner
Gavzy asked if the loan does not got through, will the association pay these fees?
Ms. Schnitker answered not in this particular case, but in the future associations
will be required to pay a non-refundable fee up-front.
C. Home Renewal Program Candidate
Ms. Schnitker described the modification of the Home Renewal Program, stating
that a new program was created to purchase properties that are blighted, but not in
teardown condition. A property being considered is located at 1850 Nevada Ave.
S. The 2002 assessed value is $43,000 for the land and $107,000 for the building.
The property was appraised at $160,000. A housing inspector determined the
house is structurally sound, but needs work including an updated heating system,
complete rehab of the interior, and exterior improvements. The renovated house
would replace a smaller, lower-value home with a newly constructed, larger,
higher-value home. The house also meets the substandard selection criteria, since
the owner has not been successful in maintaining the interior or exterior. It's a
small home on a relatively valuable piece of land, so it could sustain a higher-
value property. The property can be expanded within the zoning and coding
requirements of the City, and the design meets the City plan book and could act as
a model. The homeowner is interested in selling to the City, negotiations have
5
taken place, and the parties have tentatively agreed upon a purchase price of
$150,000.
Ms. Schnitker stated that a purchase agreement could be ready at the November
meeting, or the Board could immediately authorize entrance into a purchase
agreement with the owner, up to an amount not to exceed $152,500. Additional
stipulations in the purchase agreement would be that the property must favorably
pass an environmental with due process, and a special assessment search. A
survey will be conducted to confirm everything is in order.
There was further general discussion concerning the value of the property, with an
after-renovation value of $250,000 estimated, dependent upon the design. Ms.
Larsen stated the goal is to make builders and developers aware of the plan book
and strongly encourage them to incorporate this design into their proposal. Ms.
Larsen added most of the home developers have done new construction
exclusively, but some also do major renovations. Some developers that have been
used in the past have already expressed interest.
Commissioner Gavzy moved to authorize staff to enter into a purchase agreement
for the property for approximately $152,500. Commissioner Mavity seconded the
motion. Commissioner Mavity stated, for the record, that it seemed consistent
with City policy, however, she does not approve of the fact that an affordable
home is being made unaffordable.
Commissioner Courtney recommended that a purchase agreement not be
approved until the actual document is presented to the Board.
Commissioner Gavzy then asked the consequences if this issue were delayed one
month. Ms. Schnitker answered it could be delayed, but that negotiations would
continue for the property purchase. Ms. Larsen added the purchase agreement
could be drafted, with the closing between 30 to 60 days after the purchase
agreement is signed. Commissioner Moore stated she was in favor, since this is a
demonstration house, and that one less affordable home will not have an
unfavorable impact. Commissioner Gavzy then withdrew his motion, stating he
wished to make it very clear that he supported the program, but wished to delay
approval for one month.
In response to Commissioner Mavity's inquiry regarding the status of the Housing
Summit, Ms. Schnitker answered that a decision was made to hold the initial
meeting in mid to late January. It will be a large, group meeting and will include
all members of the City Council, Planning Commission, Housing Authority,
School Board, and a business representative. The focus will be educational,
providing information on resident demographics, metro-wide housing data, and
housing trends. The final decision whether to hold two group meetings will be
made at the first meeting.
6
7. A. Claims List No. 10-2002
Commissioner Courtney requested a motion to ratify the claims. Commissioner
Mavity initiated the motion; Commissioner Row seconded, and the motion
passed, with all Commissioners voting in approval.
8. A. Other
Commissioner Moore stated there were two corrections to the September, 2002
minutes. She requested that on page 5, the question, "Commissioner Moore asked
staff, will feedback will be provided by the community?", be changed to read
"Commissioner Row…". Additionally, on page 4, where Commissioner Moore is
recorded as stating, "…the School Board's main interest is education." should
read, "…their main interest is not housing." Commissioner Moore made a motion
to correct the minutes; Commissioner Gavzy seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 5-0.
Ms. Schnitker introduced Jane Klesk, the new housing secretary.
Ms. Schnitker mentioned that notification was received from HUD that the
Housing Authority would receive another renewal grant for the Self-Sufficiency
Program, in the amount of $20,778.
Commissioner Moore relayed her attendance at the Duluth, MN NAHRO
meeting, and learned that some housing authorities are operating in a different
manner. She requested that the St. Louis Park Housing Authority take a look at
this issue.
Ms. Schnitker provided background on the separation of housing and
redevelopment in St. Louis Park. Commissioner Moore asked if the HRA had
autonomy. Commissioner Mavity stated St. Louis Park seemed like an anomaly.
Commissioner Courtney stated it was not; that within the Twin Cities it is to some
extent, but not out-state, where it is probably 50-50. Ms. Schnitker added it was
perhaps due to size and availability of resources. Ms. Schnitker stated she would
like a better understanding of what the concerns and issues are. Commissioner
Gavzy stated the Housing Authority could adopt a leadership role without
additional authority.
Commissioner Gavzy asked if staff would be willing to do some research on the
HRA/HA specific models in similar inner-ring suburbs of the Twin Cities.
Commissioner Mavity asked if funds could be authorized to hire someone to do
an analysis on this subject. Ms. Schnitker suggested that staff first take a look,
and bring back their findings to the December Board meeting.
Commissioner Courtney moved for adjournment; Commissioner Row seconded
the motion, and all Commissioners voted in favor of adjournment.
7
The meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
______________________________
Shone Row, Secretary
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4g - Housing Auth Minutes of November 13, 2002
Page 1 of 6
MINUTES
Housing Authority
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
Wednesday, November 13, 2002
Westwood Room
5:00 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Catherine Courtney, William Gavzy, Anne Mavity,
Judith Moore
MEMBERS ABSENT: Shone Row
STAFF PRESENT: Sharon Anderson, Tom Harmening, Jane Klesk,
Kathy Larsen, Michele Schnitker
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 5:05 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes for October 9, 2002
Ms. Schnitker distributed a correction to page three, last paragraph, regarding an excerpt
on the Development Fund.
Commissioner Courtney stated that she had a correction to page five, fourth paragraph.
The sentence should read, "Commissioner Courtney recommended that a purchase
agreement not be approved until the actual document is presented to the Board."
Commissioner Moore added that she had corrections to comments regarding her
attendance at the Duluth, MN NAHRO meeting. Page six, paragraph five should state
that Commissioner Moore attended the meeting and learned that some housing authorities
are operating in a different manner. She requested that the St. Louis Park Housing
Authority take a look at this issue.
Commissioner Mavity moved for approval of the minutes of October 9, 2002, as
amended. Commissioner Courtney seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a
vote of 3-0 with Commissioners Courtney, Mavity and Moore voting in favor.
3. Hearings: None
4. Reports and Committees: None
5. Unfinished Business: None
2
6. New Business
A. Housing Authority Structure and Powers
Commissioner Courtney distributed an information sheet she prepared entitled,
"HRAs vs. EDAs", and summarized her belief that the issues were about power
and authority of the Housing Authority versus housing and its relationship within
the City. Additionally, the issue also related to the Housing Authority's
relationship with the City Council, and how that relationship has resulted in the
apparent authority and autonomy the Commission has, and how this might be
perceived as different from what other housing and redevelopment authorities in
Minnesota may have.
Commissioner Moore answered that her main concern is that initiatives for
housing presently come from the City Council and not the Housing Authority.
The Housing Authority's main thrust should be housing, and Ms. Schnitker should
bring housing initiatives to the Commissioners for discussion. Currently, someone
approaches the City Council to discuss these initiatives, the City Council takes
action, and the Housing Authority monitors them.
Commissioner Courtney explained that from a statutory standpoint, South St. Paul
has redevelopment powers in addition to housing powers. Within St. Louis Park,
those powers were divided between the Housing Authority and the Economic
Development Authority, leaving the EDA with the redevelopment powers. Under
the State statutes and ordinances and resolutions the City has adopted, the
Housing Authority has the same powers for housing that the South St. Paul
agency has.
Mr. Harmening stated that in 1988 the City Council and the HRA had a difference
of opinion over some projects that were being considered by the HRA. The City
Council removed redevelopment powers from the HRA and created the Economic
Development Authority to handle economic development and redevelopment.
Mr. Harmening stated the action taken at the time included adopting several
resolutions modifying the HRA to a HA, creating the EDA, and adopting an
ordinance to formalize that. In the resolutions and ordinances the Council
adopted, it specifically identified the kinds of things the Housing
Authority is empowered to do under the HRA Statute. Those activities related to
low and moderate-income housing initiatives. It also clarified that the Housing
Authority had levy authority subject to Council approval, which is a statutory
requirement. When Mr. Harmening came to the City in 1995, his experience was
that the HA focused entirely on Section 8 and public housing programs. Through
the creation of programs like Home Renewal and various other initiatives, the HA
and staff requested that Council provide the HA more authority to oversee
initiatives that weren't low-income related, and Council agreed to that. The HA
receives monies from HUD, and has direct authority and control over those
monies, and all of the reserves. All other funds are controlled by the City
3
Council. The Development Fund and all Tax Increment Funds are controlled by
the City Council.
Mr. Harmening cited the Cedar Trails Condo Association Housing Improvement
Area as an example of the City Council utilizing statutes to create a housing
improvement area. The City Council also used its resources to lend money to the
Cedar Trails Condo Association.
Commissioner Courtney stated her background was from the bonding side of
housing deals. The City has very specific general obligation powers that most
cities do not possess. There are other types of housing bond deals that could start
at the Housing Authority.
Commissioner Mavity said this discussion was timely since the Housing Summit
is approaching. The Housing Authority needs to understand what their role is, and
there must be clarification on how housing is integrated into larger planning
processes.
Commissioner Gavzy stated that there were concerns expressed by this Board in
recent months concerning the Board having the same representation at the
Housing Summit as the School Board and Planning Commission, although
housing is of peripheral interest to those agencies. Commissioner Gavzy asked if
the Housing Authority is an entity involved only in a low and moderate-income
housing?
Mr. Harmening answered that legal powers relate primarily to low and moderate-
income housing. The Housing Authority can accept other initiatives if they are
given to them, but low and moderate-income housing is under their authority. Mr.
Harmening noted that the City Council also has adopted limits on the number of
Section 8 units allowed in St. Louis Park.
Mr. Harmening stated he feels the City Council is pleased with the performance
of the Housing Authority. Commissioner Courtney agreed there is a good
relationship between this Board and the City Council.
Commissioner Gavzy stated it is his sense that the Board would like to have an
oversight role for low and moderate-income housing in St. Louis Park as a whole,
rather than only the programs under its direct control.
Commissioner Moore added that the Board should be notified of any development
in St. Louis Park before they are assigned to monitor it. The Board is learning
about projects after the fact, and does not have the opportunity to influence the
process.
Commissioner Gavzy stated there will be market-rate housing development in St.
Louis Park in the future. City government will have a say as to where and how it
happens, and the HA Board has the interest and expertise to get involved.
4
Mr. Harmening asked if Board involvement should be from a policy perspective
or implementation. Commissioner Mavity responded that HA involvement
should be in the planning stages. Commissioner Gavzy added that the Housing
Summit would be a means of initiating discussions.
Mr. Harmening explained that the Housing Board has been asked to participate in
the kick-off meeting that will be held with the School Board, Planning
Commission, City Council, and business representative. The Housing Summit is
structured in this way because the City Council wants to make it clear that they
will be the final decision makers on housing policy in St. Louis Park, but they are
very interested in the Housing Authority's input. From a housing policy
perspective, the Housing Authority Board definitely has opportunities. Where the
Board's role lies within the implementation perspective will require more
discussion.
Commissioner Courtney suggested that at the Housing Summit the Board's
message should be that they want a greater voice, they want to hear about things
sooner, and they want the opportunity to provide input. Commissioner Gavzy
noted that all five members of the Housing Authority Board have different
backgrounds, and it is difficult for one member to represent all five members.
Commissioner Gavzy discussed the Elmwood Study, stating there would be a
community meeting at 6:00 p.m. November 14, 2002, in the Council Chambers.
Mr. Harmening stated the City was proposing a mixture of medium to high-
density housing in certain portions of the project. Mr. Harmening indicated
Elmwood was one of the more complicated, large land use analyses that the City
has undertaken. Further general discussion took place concerning the Elmwood
Study and light rail service.
Mr. Harmening asked if the Board would like these types of initiatives explained
in further detail. Commissioner Gavzy answered that the Board would like Mr.
Harmening to occasionally attend future meetings and provide further
information.
Commissioner Mavity commented on an issue she faces when attempting to
locate sites for supportive and homeless housing. When neighborhoods discuss
land use, whether for single or multiple-family, and those talks turn to market-
rate or affordable housing, they often turn into a discussion about who will live
there.
Ms. Schnitker explained she spoke with the ten communities listed on the matrix,
and that all were very different structurally, as were the housing initiatives they
undertook. Ms. Schnitker added that St. Louis Park is doing a lot more than most
of the communities that she talked to. Many of the communities are not doing
any low or moderate-income housing. For Section 8, some of the communities
operate through the Metropolitan Council. There was further discussion
regarding the results of her telephone survey.
5
Commissioner Mavity expressed her appreciation for all the background work on
housing authority structures. Commissioner Moore stated that the reason she
raised the original issue was to evaluate the Board's position to see if they can be
more proactive, know more about what is going on, and voice an opinion.
Commissioner Mavity added that one of the areas in which the Board could
improve is by linking into existing development projects, particularly those that
contain a housing component.
Commissioner Moore left the meeting at 6:10 p.m.
Commissioner Gavzy suggested that the Board discuss holding another retreat
some time in the near future. Mr. Harmening added that from an organizational
perspective, the last retreat led to significant change.
B. Update and Discussion Related to National NAHRO Conference
Commissioner Gavzy provided the Board with a summary of his attendance at the
National NAHRO Conference in Seattle, WA. Commissioner Gavzy expressed
his desire to discuss with staff various ratio analyses and calculations that can
very quickly show an accurate picture of the Housing Authority financial status.
Commissioner Gavzy was also interested in a commissioner code of conduct.
Further general discussion of the conference took place, with Commissioner
Gavzy strongly recommending that at least one Commissioner be sent to the state
as well as the national conference next year.
C. Approval of Purchase of Home Renewal Property – 1850 Nevada Avenue South
Ms. Larsen provided a copy of the real estate Purchase Agreement, drafted by
Campbell Knutson, and stated that the negotiated price is still $150,000. The
owner is still interested in selling to the City and closing on the property could
take place prior to December 31, 2002.
Commissioner Courtney asked a question on a provision in paragraph 8a, stating,
"The seller shall remove all debris, trash, etc." Ms. Larsen answered that the
owner agreed to remove all the accumulated debris but did not agree to clean it.
Commissioner Courtney moved approval of the Purchase Agreement.
Commissioner Mavity seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of
3-0 with Commissioners Courtney, Gavzy and Mavity voting in favor.
D. Capital Fund – Architectural Services Contract Approval
Ms. Anderson briefly described the Architectural Services Contract for 2003 with
Studio 5, in the amount of $12,960, plus $3,000 for reimburseables, for a potential
total of $15,960, and recommended that the Board authorize execution of the
contract. There was a brief general discussion regarding the contract.
6
Commissioner Courtney moved approval of the Architectural Services Contract.
Commissioner Mavity seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of
3-0 with Commissioners Courtney, Gavzy and Mavity voting in favor.
E. Approval of Amendment to Section 8 Operating Budget
Ms. Schnitker summarized the Revised Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher
Budget, requesting that the Board approve submission of a revised operating
budget for the Section 8 Voucher Program this year. The initial budget was based
on 265 vouchers. Due to an increase in the amount of fair-market rents and
payment standards, there were a number of applicants to whom vouchers had
been issued that suddenly went under contract. St. Louis Park is still at
approximately 297 vouchers. HUD has advised they will cover additional
utilization costs, and an increase of $646,000 is being requested. Efforts to reduce
voucher utilizations will be continued.
There was general discussion about the Section 8 program and operating budget.
Commissioner Mavity moved approval of the Amendment to the Section 8
Operating Budget. Commissioner Courtney seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 3-0 with Commissioners Courtney, Gavzy and Mavity voting
in favor.
7. A. Claims List No. 11-2002
Commissioner Mavity moved to ratify Claims List No. 11-2002. Commissioner
Courtney seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 3-0, with
Commissioners Courtney, Gavzy and Mavity voting in favor.
8. Other – Hollman Invitation
Ms. Schnitker informed the Commissioners of a luncheon to be held on Friday,
November 18, 2002, 11:30 AM to 2:00 PM at the Hyatt Regency Hotel to celebrate ten
years of successful operation of Hollman units.
9. Adjournment
Commissioner Mavity moved for adjournment. Commissioner Courtney seconded the
motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 3-0 with Commissioners Courtney, Gavzy
and Mavity voting in favor. The meeting was adjourned at 6:50 PM.
Respectfully Submitted,
Shone Row, Secretary
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 1 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 1 of 12
MINUTES SEPTEMBER 26, 2002
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals Committee conducted a regular meeting on
Thursday, September 26, 2002, at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard,
St. Louis Park, Minnesota.
Members Present: Chair James Gainsley
Commissioner Ryan Burt
Commissioner Tom Powers
Commissioner Paul Roberts
Members Absent: Vice Chair Susan Bloyer
Staff Present: Julie Grove, Associate Planner
Janet Jeremiah, Planning & Zoning Supervisor
Tara Olson, Community Development Secretary
1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL
Acting Chair Gainsley called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. APPROVE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMITTEE MINUTES
Board of Zoning Appeals meeting minutes dated August 22, 2002 were not yet available.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
A. Case No. 02-25-VAR - The request of Jeffrey Hickstein for variances from the
requirements of Section 36-163(f)(4) and 36-163(f)(5) of the Ordinance Code relating to
zoning to permit an attached garage in a restricted square due to a rear lot line being
common to a side lot line of an adjacent property, and to reduce the required rear yard
depth. The applicant seeks an 8.8 foot rear yard setback and a 23.2 foot setback for a side
yard abutting a public street, instead of the required 25 foot rear setback and 30 foot
dimension for the restricted square on the property located in the “R-1” Single Family
Residential District at 2856 France Avenue South. (Continued from May 23, 2002, June 27,
2002)
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 2 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 2 of 12
Ms. Jeremiah stated that staff has received a letter from Mr. Hickstein requesting a continuation
of the public hearing until April 2003.
Chair Gainsley asked the Commissioners if the letter requesting continuance has been reviewed.
Commissioner Burt and Commissioner Roberts stated they have read the letter and agree to
continue per Mr. Hickstein letter requesting a continuance of the public hearing until April 2003.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Burt, Powers and Roberts. Voting No: None.
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMITTEE BUSINESS
B. Case No. 02-49-VAR - The request of Meghan McGrann for variances from the
requirements of Table 36-115C of the Ordinance Code to allow an impervious surface ratio
of 88% instead of the maximum 70% for an Intensity Class 4, Section 36-364(f)(6) Table
36-364B to allow 13 plant units in a Bufferyard C abutting residential instead of the
required 57 plant units and Section 36-404(6)(a) to allow a building permit for an addition
to a building with non-conforming rear yard setback to allow a partial two-story addition
for a retail store for the property located in the “C-1” Neighborhood Commercial District
at 4615 Excelsior Boulevard.
Ms. Jeremiah presented the report and concluded that all seven findings have been met with
conditions. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the variances to allow an impervious
surface ratio of 88% instead of the maximum 70%, 33 plant units in a Bufferyard C instead of the
required 57, and an addition to a building with an existing rear yard setback of 12.08 feet subject
to the following conditions:
1) The building addition shall be constructed on the north end of the existing building as shown
on plans submitted with the variance request on August 27, 2002 and as revised by any Building
Code requirements.
2) The new landscaped areas along the south property line as shown on plans received August
27, 2002 shall be planted with eleven Techny ArborVitae or similar evergreen approved by the
Zoning Administrator at minimum sizes to meet the 33 plant unit requirement.
3) The site development shall meet all other Code requirements, including but not limited to
parking lot design, architectural ordinance, lighting ordinance, and noise ordinance, including
limits on construction hours.
4) Any damage to the streetscape in the Excelsior Boulevard easement/right-of-way caused by
the proposed construction shall be repaired to match existing.
Commissioner Powers stated to staff that in the report, staff had stated that the citizens do have
concerns of this property becoming an intensive use. Also, staff mentioned that the Board of
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 3 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 3 of 12
Zoning Appeals could apply additional conditions onto this property so intensive use doesn’t
become an issue. Commissioner Powers asked staff for recommendations on additional
conditions to apply on this property to help protect the citizens and the property.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the Commission can tie the variance to the submitted plans so that the
seconded story addition has to be towards Excelsior Boulevard and they must implement the
mitigation along the south property line which would help if a similar retailer came in. They
would have to use the building basically as proposed. In addition, this Intensity Class IV is the
highest you can have in this zoning district without requiring a conditional use permit. Anything
more intense would require a public hearing. At that time we would notify neighbors within 350
feet and if policies are similar, we would hold neighborhood meetings in advance and make sure
that the words gets out as much as possible. Also, parking does limit any kind of change of
occupancy that might even be considered. Any time there is a change in tenant and/or owner the
city requires a Registration of Land-Use and staff will review the application to make sure the
tenant is not doing any building improvements and to verify their use is allowable in the zoning
district and meets parking, etc.
Chair Gainsley asked staff what type of properties are located behind the building and what is the
distance of the rear wall to adjoining buildings?
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the adjoining property is a single-family residence that has frontage onto
Vallacher Avenue, which is very close. The minimum setback from the commercial property
line is 25-feet and staff believes the homes meet it. There’s an additional 19-feet of residential
on the east side plus the 12-feet setback of the commercial building, so the separation is within
the 55-foot range between this building and the actually rear of the home. They do have some
deciduous trees with a nice canopy above the fence. One of staffs concerns is when they lose that
vegetation in the winter, there’s very little buffer above the fence level. That is why staff is
recommending some evergreen plantings.
Chair Gainsley asked staff if they felt 55-feet was a sufficient amount of room to screen the
property according to the Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Jeremiah stated yes; had staff counted landscaping on the residential property, the applicant
would have probably met the bufferyard requirement. However, staff doesn’t think that the
intent was to hold the residential to a certain amount of planting, the intent was clearly to plant as
much as possible onto the commercial property. Staff feels that the applicants have done as
much as possible and it will be adequate.
Chair Gainsley asked staff that if the applicants were to move out of this building and another
tenant moves, will we suddenly have semi trucks using the rear for hauling and unloading which
would cause noise and smoke generation?
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 4 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 4 of 12
Ms. Jeremiah stated that any type of loading dock for that type of use would require a screened
wall that would be built onto the building. For example, if there were a loading dock at this
property that trucks backed into they would actually have to construct a wing-wall on the back of
the building which is high enough to screen the trucks. Also there’s limited turning movements,
so she doubts its feasible.
Chair Gainsley asked if a Certificate of Occupancy would be required if another tenant were to
occupy this building.
Ms. Jeremiah stated he was correct, a Certificate of Occupancy or Registration of Land-Use is
required for new tenants.
Commissioner Powers asked staff if the applicant were not to receive this variance could they
demolish the existing building and building a much smaller structure and build a much higher
intensity? For example, a donut shop with a drive thru.
Ms. Jeremiah stated the higher intensity uses are generally in the conditional use permit category.
The C-1 District requires the permit for all drive thru uses and all uses that serve alcohol on site.
Commissioner Powers asked staff to verify that anyone could remove the existing building and
construct a higher intensity building if they chose to.
Ms. Jeremiah stated they could try and they could construct a taller building if they chose, but it
would be challenging to meet parking requirements.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
David Clark of WCL Associates, Inc. representative of Judith McGrann & Friends stated his
clients are currently located in Minneapolis and are interested in relocating to the City of St.
Louis Park. Also, an informal neighborhood meeting was conducted to ensure the neighborhood
residents were informed of the proposed plans and they were very excited but also concerned
about a future proposal of an intense business moving in. He stated that the scale of this building
is only 2,000 square feet of retail, which is small and ensured the neighbors that large semi trucks
would not be needed due to the small amount of sales that will be conducted. In addition, the
clients are willing to work with staff’s recommendation regarding landscaping at the rear of the
property.
David Redden, 4608 Vallacher Avenue stated he is the residential property located directly
behind McGrann & Friends and is very pleased to see this business moving near his home but
would be concerned if a higher intensity business were to move in.
Commission Powers asked Mr. Redden if he agrees with staff’s recommendations.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 5 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 5 of 12
Mr. Redden stated he agrees with the current plan that the McGranns are proposing.
Commission Powers stated to Mr. Redden that the variance does go with the land and wanted to
make sure he understood.
Mr. Redden stated he understands.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Burt stated that staff has done a great job on outlining a multiple request such as
this one and agrees with staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Roberts stated he is in favor with staffs recommendation.
Commissioner Powers stated that as long as staff is meeting all of ordinance concerns.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that staffs recommendation on page 7 of the staff report will be referenced
for conditions along with submitted building plans. The variance would be tied to the building
plans as far as the construction would take place except that any building code requirements
would be allowed as minor revisions. The conditions would also tie the variance to the increased
landscaping to the south and meeting all other code requirements as well as repairing any damage
to Excelsior Boulevard.
Motion by Commissioner Roberts, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that the variance be
granted to allow an impervious surface ratio of 88% instead of the maximum 70%, 33 plant units
in a Bufferyard C instead of the required 57, and an addition to a building with an existing rear
yard setback of 12.08 feet subject to the following conditions:
1) The building addition shall be constructed on the north end of the existing building as shown
on plans submitted with the variance request on August 27, 2002 and as revised by any Building
Code requirements.
2) The new landscaped areas along the south property line as shown on plans received August
27, 2002 shall be planted with eleven Techny ArborVitae or similar evergreen approved by the
Zoning Administrator at minimum sizes to meet the 33 plant unit requirement.
3) The site development shall meet all other Code requirements, including but not limited to
parking lot design, architectural ordinance, lighting ordinance, and noise ordinance, including
limits on construction hours.
4) Any damage to the streetscape in the Excelsior Boulevard easement/right-of-way caused by
the proposed construction shall be repaired to match existing.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Burt, Powers and Roberts. Voting No: None.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 6 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 6 of 12
C. Case No. 02-50-VAR - The request of Benjamin Rost for variances from the
requirements of Section 36-164(f)(5) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to allow a 3.4
foot side yard setback instead of the required 5 feet and a 4 foot side yard setback instead
of the required 5 feet 8 inches for a garage addition and living space more than 40 feet in
length for the property located in the “R-2” Single Family Residential District at 3206
Alabama Avenue South.
Ms. Grove presented the report and concluded that five out of the seven criterians have not been
satisfied. Therefore, staff recommends denial of request to permit a side yard setback of 3 feet 4
inches and 4 feet instead of the required 5 feet 8 inches for a garage and house addition that is
more than 40 feet in length on the property.
Chair Gainsley asked staff if the addition would encroach into the front yard setback?
Ms. Grove stated that the addition would meet the front yard setback.
Chair Gainsley asked staff if the proposed addition were narrower than could it be constructed
without a variance?
Ms. Grove stated yes, if the proposed garage were to become narrower than proposed a variance
would not be required.
Chair Gainsley asked staff how much narrower would the garage need to be, what would the
resulting width and length be, in order not to request a variance?
Ms. Grove stated that if the applicants were to construct 40-foot long garage their side yard
setback would be 5-feet, in order to make this setback the applicants would have to lose
approximately 2-feet of proposed garage width.
Commissioner Powers asked staff to explain building alternatives for the applicants.
Ms. Grove stated that the applicants are able to keep the existing attached one car garage and
build an addition of up to 40-feet in length which would allow them to meet the current setback
3.7 feet.
Chair Gainsley asked staff if over head garage doors are allowable on both ends of a garage?
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the city does not prohibit more than one over head garage door.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 7 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 7 of 12
Benjamin Rost, applicant of 3206 Alabama Avenue South stated he has been a resident in this
city for 1 ½ years and very much enjoys the city and its locality. His home based business will
require him to acquire a 7-foot wide and 20-foot long trailer, which is why he would like to
construct the addition with an extended depth. Also, his family has two vehicles and only a one-
car garage.
Mr. Rost stated that staff’s alternative plan, which suggests the construction of a detached two
car garage in the rear yard would be difficult due to the slope which may create grading problems
with the rear neighbor. In addition, he would like to create additional living space and this
alternative would not provide this. Another alternative plan suggested by staff was to add a
tandem two-car garage which would not allow him to park his trailer inside rather than outside in
the driveway.
Ms. Jeremiah stated to the Commissioners that she was not aware that Mr. Rost had a
commercial trailer along with a potential home occupation. Also, there are restrictions with
storing such trailers on residential properties unless it’s a commercial vehicle that basically
duplicates as your only personal vehicle. Also, home occupations are not suppose to involve an
accessory structure. You’re not supposed to utilize any part of an accessory structure. Therefore
the garage could not be used for the business.
Chair Gainsley stated to Mr. Rost that he would need to resolve the home occupation and the
parking of a business trailer with the city.
Mr. Rost stated he was unaware of the city’s regulations.
Chair Gainsley asked Mr. Rost if he is interested in continuing this public hearing when these
issues are resolved.
Mr. Rost asked the Commissioners if it is the depth of the garage or the width that is causing
concern.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
Chair Gainsley stated he felt there are several issues that need to be resolved prior to comment
unless staff feels comments should be made.
Ms. Jeremiah stated it is entirely up to the board if they would like to comment, but staff is
recommending denial. These new issues only makes staff feel more strongly that this isn’t the
right approach to accommodating residential needs. There are legal alternatives, and if the size
of the garage is based on the desire to use it for a home occupation, staff is going to have some
enforcement issues with this. Obviously, staff just feels strongly that these variances are
inappropriate.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 8 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 8 of 12
Mr. Rost asked Chair Gainsley to provide a continuance at the next upcoming meeting.
Ms. Jeremiah stated she would like to discuss a few issues with the applicant and at that time
determine a continuance date.
Chair Gainsley agreed with Ms. Jeremiah that once staff and the applicant have had a discussion
a continued meeting would take place.
Motion by Chair Gainsley, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that the variance be continued for
the Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of October 24, 2002.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Burt, Powers and Roberts. Voting No: None.
D. Case No. 02-51-VAR - The request of Richard Keillor for a variance from the
requirements of Section 36-164(f)(5) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to allow a 3
foot side yard setback instead of the required 5 feet, to allow for an attached two-car
garage for the property located in the “R-2” Single Family Residential District at 1642
Edgewood Avenue South.
Ms. Jeremiah presented the report and concluded that since all seven findings have been met,
staff recommends approval of a variance to allow a side yard setback of 3 feet instead of the
required 5 feet for an attached two-car garage on the south side of the property at 1642
Edgewood subject to a survey confirming the proposed setback and a building permit, which may
impose additional conditions.
Chair Gainsley asked staff to clarify that economic hardship in this case is significant.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that there is economic hardship but also physical hardship. The applicants
have a substantial change in grade in the rear yard.
Commissioner Powers asked staff if the physical limitations qualify for the conditions or would
additional conditions need to be added?
Ms. Jeremiah stated that staff can reference the attached two-car garage per these plans with the
approval of the side yard setback of 3-feet and it would not necessarily allow any addition
without the applicants coming back for a subsequent variance.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
Richard Keillor, applicant of 1642 Edgewood Avenue South stated that his rear yard has a very
steep slope and has been the neighborhood-sliding hill for years. In addition, for the past 32
years he’s been parking outside and would like to be able to park a vehicle inside.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 9 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 9 of 12
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Roberts stated he inspected the rear yard of this property and feels that building in
the rear yard would be hard and feels there is a hardship on this property.
Commissioner Burt stated he agrees with staff’s findings.
Commissioner Powers stated he is in favor of granting this variance due to the hardship and
would like to point out that this applicant has a true hardship and hopes to see such hardship in
the future approved instead of applicants without hardship.
Motion by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Burt, that the variance be granted
to allow a side yard setback of 3 feet instead of the required 5 feet for an attached two-car garage
on the south side of the property at 1642 Edgewood subject to a survey confirming the proposed
setback and a building permit, which may impose additional conditions.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Burt, Powers and Roberts. Voting No: None.
F. Case No. 02-52-VAR - The request of Abra Auto Body for variances from the
requirements of Section 36-362(f)(20) Table 36-362A of the Ordinance Code relating to
zoning to allow 399 square feet of sign area instead of the maximum allowable 200 square
feet and to allow 150 square feet of sign face area instead of the maximum allowable 100
square feet of sign face for the property located in the “I-G” General Industrial District at
2230 Trunk Highway 100.
Staff believes that five out of the seven findings have not been met and recommends that the
Board of Zoning Appeals deny the applicants’ request for a variance to permit 399 square footage
of signage instead of the maximum allowable 250 square feet.
Commissioner Powers asked staff what the existing square footage of the Midland Glass sign?
Ms. Grove responded that the existing sign is 75 square feet each side, which is 150 total square
feet. In addition, the existing wall signage is 100 square feet.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
Ron Fiscus of Planscape representative of Abra Auto Body & Glass stated his clients have
located a property which will satisfy their needs of parking and zoning classification but are
having difficulty advertising the business due to the topography. The property is located well
below the highway surface of Highway 100 and visibility is difficult. Also, a sign permit was
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 10 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 10 of 12
submitted and returned with staff approval on sign size so the sign company started fabricating
the sign for the contract purchase of $14,000. Shortly after the approval, staff informed his
clients that the proposed sign square footage was rescinded.
Mr. Fiscus presented to the Commissioners six additional site plans that showed the topography
of the property.
Chair Gainsley accepted the six additional site plans labeled as Exhibit A1– A6.
Chair Gainsley asked Mr. Fiscus how he’d feel if the Commission would allow a sign mounted
on the pylon 50 feet or greater but would not allow any signs on the building?
Mr. Fiscus stated that allowing a larger pylon sign would solve ½ a problem, which is the visual
access from Highway 100.
Chair Gainsley stated that he feels having a sign on the building would not help visually.
Mr. Fiscus stated that when he exited Highway 100 and entered onto Stephens Drive he had
difficulty locating the proposed site because there was no sign displayed.
Commissioner Powers asked staff to explain the history of the neighboring existing signs, and
would like to know if those neighboring signs are within code.
Ms. Jeremiah stated the neighboring properties, such as Luther Stevens are trying to address their
existing non-conforming sign issues as well. The city has two separate scenarios in city code:
one is that if their signs were non-conforming with the old ordinance which was adopted in 1992
they were supposed to be corrected by the end of 2000. Second is that, if the signs just became
non-conforming due to the newer ordinance, they have until 2005 to make corrections.
Commissioner Roberts stated to Mr. Fiscus that he doesn’t feel that having signage on the north
side of the building would be necessary.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley open the public hearing.
Rolly Benjamin, president of Abra Auto Body & Glass stated that the previous business of this
property was Midland Glass which didn’t see the need for visualization from Highway 100, but
Abra being a retail business needs exposure to the public and showing the location is beneficial
and feels the topography is a hardship.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 11 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 11 of 12
Chair Gainsley stated to the Commissioners that he feels the costs that have already been made
along with signed contracts should not be considered for this case and warrant this variance on
the 7 hardships being presented by staff.
Commissioner Powers stated that the ordinance is to reduce signage clutter and since majority of
the neighboring signs are non-conforming, which will soon be conforming by 2005 and since
these issues are being addressed by the city and the intent of the ordinance is to reduce sign
clutter he would like to recommend denial.
Commissioner Burt stated that granting this variance would be directly contrary to the ordinance
which is to get rid of the non-conforming signs and would agree with Commissioner Powers to
recommend denial.
Chair Gainsley stated he would be in favor of granting a variance for the pylon sign but not for
the signage on the building.
Commissioner Roberts stated that this is the second sign variance for this property, Win-Stevens
Jeep wanted a higher sign due to Highway 100.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that she does understand that the physical configurations of the lot and the
height of the property in relations to Highway 100 is difficult, but the ordinance addressed that by
giving an automatic height variance.
Chair Gainsley re-opened the public hearing.
Mr. Fiscus stated that Abra Auto Body & Glass are in favor of allowing additional square footage
to the free standing pylon sign along with allowing signage on the south side of the building and
would delete the request of the signage on the north side of the building.
Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Powers stated he is fearful of granting this variance because this will have
neighboring properties requesting a variance when the intent of the ordinance is to bring signs
within conformance.
Chair Gainsley stated that there are not very many properties that are 25-30 feet below a major
highway.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that staff is comfortable with the proposal that limits the variance for the
total area of signage on the site to allow the pylon sign at 150 square feet per sign face and 50
square feet of wall sign on the south side. The applicant made a good point that the property is
unique with regard to the topography and access, which creates a hardship in providing adequate
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 12 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 12 of 12
from both the highway and total access. Staff was mainly concern with the excessive signage
viewed from the north side of the property and does not find a need for that.
Commissioner Burt asked staff if proposed sign will be higher than the existing sign.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the sign would be the same height as the existing.
Commissioner Roberts stated that this property is unique.
Motion by Commissioner Roberts, seconded by Chair Gainsley, that the variance be granted to
allow a total of 350 square feet of free standing pylon signage include 150 square feet sign face
on a pylon sign which is two-sided and allow up to 50 square feet of wall sign on the south side
of the building.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Burt, and Roberts. Voting No: Powers.
G. Case No. 02-53-VAR - The request of Peter Bernhard and Rebecca Bender for a
variance from the requirements of Section 36-74(f)(1) of the Ordinance Code relating to
zoning to allow the construction of a 4-foot high fence with finished side of the fence facing
inward instead of the required finished side of the fence facing outward for the property
located in the “R-1” Single Family Residential District at 8610 W. 29th Street.
Staff believes that only five of the required seven findings have not been met and two are subject
to conditions. Therefore, staff recommends that the Board of Zoning Appeals deny the
applicant’s request for a variance to permit the finished side of a fence to face inward in the “R-
1” Single Family Residence District at 8610 West 29th Street.
With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
With no one wishing to speak, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
Chair Gainsley feels the applicant doesn’t have a hardship.
Commissioner Roberts agrees with Chair Gainsley.
Commissioner Burt agrees with Chair Gainsley.
Motion by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Burt, that the variance be denied.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Burt, Powers and Roberts. Voting No: None.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of September 26, 2002
Page 13 of 13
Board of Zoning Appeals/September 26, 2002
Page 13 of 12
With no more questions, Acting Chair Bloyer closed the public hearing.
5. Old Business:
None
6. New Business:
None
7. Communications:
None
8. Miscellaneous:
None
9. Adjournment:
Commissioner Roberts moved and Commissioner Powers seconded the motion for adjournment.
The regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals adjourned at 9:33 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Tara Olson
Community Development Secretary
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4i - Telecom Minutes of Oct. 17
Page 1 of 5
OFFICIAL MINUTES
ST. LOUIS PARK TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
MEETING OF OCTOBER 17, 2002 at 7:00 p.m.
ST. LOUIS PARK CITY HALL, WESTWOOD ROOM
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rick Dworsky, Dale Hartman, Ken Huiras, Bob Jacobson,
Mary Jean Overend, and Rolf Peterson
MEMBERS ABSENT: Bruce Browning
STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator and John McHugh,
Community TV Coordinator
OTHERS PRESENT: Arlen Mattern, Time Warner Cable Public Affairs
Administrator; Lance Leupold, Time Warner Cable
Director of Public Affairs; and Linda Samson, Recording
Secretary
1. Call to Order
Chair Hartman called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. Roll Call
Present at roll call were Commissioners Rick Dworsky, Dale Hartman, Ken Huiras, Bob
Jacobson, Mary Jean Overend, and Rolf Peterson; City Staff Reg Dunlap and John McHugh;
and Recording Secretary Linda Samson.
3. Approval of Minutes for August 8, 2002
Corrections:
From Commissioner Huiras: Page 4, Paragraph 3, Line 14, delete not and replace with
including.
It was moved by Commissioner Huiras, seconded by Commissioner Jacobson, to approve the
minutes as amended.
The motion passed 6-0.
4. Adoption of Agenda
Commissioner Huiras would like to add a discussion regarding Review School Board Report
to Item 6, Old Business, as Item 6C.
Civic TV Coordinator Reg Dunlap suggested moving Item 5B, Staff Draft Grant Proposal, to
be the last item of New Business as Item 5E.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4i - Telecom Minutes of Oct. 17
Page 2 of 5
It was moved by Commissioner Huiras, seconded by Commissioner Overend, to approve the
agenda as amended.
The motion passed 6-0.
5. New Business
5A Time Warner customer service update, including bonding of contract installers,
identification of leased access channels and leased access rates and guidelines.
Deb Squire was unable to attend tonight’s meeting. She had been scheduled to discuss
customer service.
Commissioner Huiras asked if Ms. Squire receives copies of the complaints, and Arlen
Mattern, Time Warner Cable Public Affairs Administrator responded yes.
Commissioner Jacobson asked if an apartment building is counted as one unit, i.e., one
household or if every apartment in the building is counted as one unit or one household.
Mr. Dunlap said he would check.
A sample Channel Lease Agreement was distributed to the Commissioners.
Mr. Mattern said channels 75 and 116 are leased access channels. Mr. McHugh asked if
that meant MTV2 was preempted to allow leased access programming, and Mr. Mattern
said he would have to check on that and report back at the next Commission meeting.
The discussion turned to the bonding of contract installers. Mr. Mattern said he has
provided samples, in the handouts distributed at tonight’s meeting, of what contractors
receive prior to the work they perform. The samples were titled: cost of insurance and
cost of liability, insurance and liability insurance, and indemnity. The contractors are
provided this information so that they know what type of insurance they need in order to
operate in St. Louis Park.
5B Time Warner Cable Restructuring
Mr. Dunlap reported that the City has received a Federal Communications Commission
Form 394 from Time Warner Cable (“TWC”) about AOL TWC restructuring. The City
Council will hold a public hearing on November 4, 2002 regarding the restructuring. Mr.
Dunlap stated that the Commissions would receive the City Attorney’s analysis of Form
394 and how the TWC restructuring could affect the City’s franchise. TWC is creating a
new holding company, and there will be an initial public offering (“IPO”).
Commissioner Jacobson said it should be known that customer service will not be
diminished, and normal operations will continue.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4i - Telecom Minutes of Oct. 17
Page 3 of 5
Lance Leupold, Time Warner Cable Director of Public Affairs, commented that the
restructuring is entirely within Time Warner Cable. Mr. Leupold said there has been
discussion of an IPO, TWC will still be the owner, and TWC will be managed by the
same people. Mr. Leupold said the restructuring would allow TWC to have more control
over their companies. He added that TWC hopes the change will be transparent.
John McHugh, Community TV Coordinator, said there would be staff reports later in
October regarding the renewal process.
5C FCC Forms 1205 and 1240: Timeline Requirements to Contest Basic Rate,
Hire Consultant to Review
Mr. Dunlap reported that St. Louis Park is certified to regulate basic cable, including
basic cable rates and the equipment used to receive cable signals, i.e., the converter
boxes. Converter boxes will be eligible for a rate increase from about $5.50 to about
$7.00.
Mr. Dunlap said he thinks this item should be deferred to the next meeting in order for
greater details to be presented to the Commission.
5D Bylaws Reviewed
During her review of the bylaws, Commissioner Overend said she did not see anything
regarding a Commissioner’s length of service in the by-laws, and she noted a secret ballot
was not conducted at the last election of officers. It was noted that election of officers
was done by acclamation. If there had been an objection (see Article 4, Section 3), a
secret ballot would have been taken.
Commissioner Huiras sees no problem with a chair serving two consecutive one-year
terms (see Article 4, Section 3).
Commissioner Huiras would like to know if it should be stated that dates shall be
established at the final meeting of the year for the upcoming year (Article VI). Mr.
Dunlap will consult with the City Attorney to determine if it must be specified, and he
will check on how to proceed with the change.
Commissioner Huiras noted to change Citizens Cable to Telecommunications
Commission, and in the first paragraph change Citizens Cable to Telecommunications
Commission.
For Article IV, Section 3, Commissioner Dworsky suggested changing election shall be
held to election may be held.
Commissioner Dworsky suggested adding to the by-laws that meetings shall be published
in advance.
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4i - Telecom Minutes of Oct. 17
Page 4 of 5
Commissioner Huiras requested the proposed recommendations to the bylaws be made
and published, and the Commissioners will make a motion at the next meeting.
5E Staff Grant Proposal
Mr. Dunlap suggested deferring this item to a meeting in 2003. Mr. Dunlap distributed a
draft of a proposed outline, which the Commissioners had requested from a previous
meeting.
6. Old Business
6A Update: Auditing Time Warner Cable Franchise Fees
Mr. Dunlap reported he received a call from Scott Lewis, and Mr. Lewis is nearly
finished with his report. It has been determined that there are 10 invalid addresses of the
1,000 addresses that were not found on the Time Warner homes passed list. Mr. Dunlap
will have more information at the next meeting.
6B Update: Channel 6 Deletion and Security Camera Issue at Menorah Plaza
Mr. McHugh distributed a handout with e-mail communications between Lance Leupold
and himself regarding the channel 6 issue. Mr. McHugh said Karen O’Toole met with
TWC regarding rates, and Ms. O’Toole now has a new contract with TWC. Mr. McHugh
stated the ongoing issue is the deletion of regional channel 6 at MDUs, which is
prohibited according to State statutes.
Mr. Leupold said Mr. McHugh thinks there is a franchise agreement violation, however,
TWC thinks they are not in violation of the franchise agreement or state law. Mr.
Leupold said channel 6 is provided on the cable system, and is sent to every home and
building in the City. Mr. Leupold reported that TWC will not state, demand, encourage
or discourage what channel an MDU must use for capacity for security camera access.
Mr. Leupold is of the understanding that Menorah Plaza is overriding the TWC signal for
channel 6. Mr. Leupold said TWC wants to remain neutral in regard to which channel an
MDU uses for its security cameras.
Commissioner Dworsky said he would like to have a copy of the relevant State statute.
Mr. Dunlap said he would provide copies of the statute to the Commissioners.
Commissioner Dworsky said he would like the City Attorney’s interpretation of the
statute. As a next step, Mr. Leupold suggested perhaps the TWC attorney and the City
Attorney could have a dialogue.
6C. Review School Board Report
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 4i - Telecom Minutes of Oct. 17
Page 5 of 5
Commissioner Huiras asked Mr. Dunlap to thank Charlie and Tom for their report, and he
hopes the reports continue to come.
Commissioner Peterson remarked that he met with them about the new equipment for
School Board coverage, and that he was impressed.
Staff will find out what will be produced at the junior high school, and report to the
Commissioners.
Mr. Dunlap said grant funds could be addressed at the next meeting.
7. Reports
Mr. Dunlap reported on the recent MACTA conference and briefly reviewed a summary
of the legislative issues that were discussed at the conference.
Mr. McHugh distributed a survey form from the Twin West Chamber of Commerce
regarding if telecommunications needs are being met.
Commissioner Jacobson talked about digital light projection, and he displayed a digital
light projection product from Texas Instruments.
Commissioner Huiras congratulated Reg Dunlap for being recognized as St. Louis Park
employee of the year. Mr. Dunlap is the recipient of the City’s Spirit of St. Louis Park
Award.
8. Communications from the Chair: None
9. Communications from City Staff: None
10. Adjournment
It was moved by Commissioner Huiras, seconded by Commissioner Jacobson, to adjourn
the meeting at 9:16 p.m.
The motion passed 6-0.
Minutes prepared by: Respectfully submitted by:
Linda Samson Reg Dunlap
Recording Secretary Civic TV Coordinator
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 8a - Vision SLP Outcomes & Targets
Page 1 of 2
8a. Vision St. Louis Park Outcomes and Indicators Related Targets
Resolution granting support of the Vision St. Louis Park 2005 and 2010 Targets
Related to Outcomes and Indicators.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the resolution
Background:
Note: Vision St. Louis Park Outcomes Committee members Roger Israel and Mark Schwartz are
planning to attend this meeting and be available to address Council questions.
At the November 25, 2002 joint special meeting of the St. Louis Park City Council and St. Louis
Park School Board, Council members received a presentation from Mark Schwartz of the Vision
St. Louis Park Outcomes Committee. The presentation reviewed committee work over the past four
years to design a survey instrument, collect survey and recorded historical data, and identify targets
for outcomes and leading indicators that will help measure progress related to Vision St. Louis
Park. The outcomes and indicators, and related 2005 and 2010 targets, are included in the attached
report.
At the November 25 meeting, Council indicated that it wished to consider approving a resolution of
support for the Vision St. Louis Park Outcomes and Indicators related targets at its December 16,
2002 meeting. The purpose of this report is to request approval of such a resolution. The Outcomes
Committee and staff appreciate the valuable feedback and questions from Council, believe that the
targets for outcomes and indicators reflect realistic goals, and respectfully request that a resolution
of support be approved. Part of the Council feedback had to do with effective communication to the
public regarding these targets and next phases related to Vision St. Louis Park. In fact, some funds
for such communications were budgeted in 2003. For the Council’s information, the St. Louis Park
School Board will be considering a similar resolution of support in January, and the St. Louis Park
Business Council acted to approve the targets at its December 5, 2002 meeting. Furthermore, the
Business Council has formed a committee to draft ideas for additional participation of the business
community that would further realization of Vision St. Louis Park.
Next steps in this process include: continued periodic monitoring of indicators and related targets,
recommending modifications to reflect emerging trends, and implementing methods for future data
collection that have a minimal impact on staff resources. In addition, focus group work will
continue with respect to diversity outcomes, information from the attached report will be
communicated back to the community, and the next visioning cycle will be initiated in 2003.
Materials submitted at previous meetings are available upon request.
Attachments: Resolution
Outcomes, Indicators, and Targets
Prepared by: Martha McDonell, Community Outreach Coordinator
Clint Pires, Deputy City Manager
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 8a - Vision SLP Outcomes & Targets
Page 2 of 2
RESOLUTION NO. 02-136
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE VISION ST. LOUIS PARK
TARGETS RELATED TO OUTCOMES AND INDICATORS
WHERAS, the St. Louis Park City Council has been presented with the proposed outcomes and
indicators at the October 26, 1998 Council Study Session and discussion followed at the December
14, 1998 Council Study Session; and
WHERAS, resolutions of support for outcomes and indicators were granted by the St. Louis Park
School Board and the St. Louis Park Business Council in 1998, and the St. Louis Park City Council
in 1999; and
WHERAS, the St. Louis Park City Council and St. Louis Park School Board have been presented
with the proposed targets related to outcomes and indicators at a joint November 25, 2002 City
Council / School Board meeting, and the to the St. Louis Park Business Council on November 7,
2002; and
WHERAS, endorsement of proposed 2005 and 2010 targets has been granted by the St. Louis Park
Business Council at its December 5, 2002 meeting, and the St. Louis School Board is
contemplating similar endorsement in January 2003; and
WHERAS, City Council support of 2005 and 2010 targets related to the indicators is needed at this
time in order for the next steps of Vision St. Louis Park to continue, including on-going monitoring
and communications; and
WHERAS, all parties involved in the support of Vision St. Louis Park understand that the
outcomes, indicators, and targets document is process-oriented material and it may be changed as
the need arises,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park to grant support
of the 2005 and 2010 targets related to Vision St. Louis Park outcomes and indicators.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 16,
2002
City Manager Mayor
Attest
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 8b - 2003 Budget Adoption
Page 1 of 5
8b. Adopt 2003 Budget, 2002 Revised Budget, 2003 Property Tax Levy, and HRA
Levy
This is the final step in approving the 2003 budget, 2002 revised budget, 2003 property
tax levy, and 2003 HRA levy.
Recommended
Action:
Adopt the 2003 budget, 2002 revised budget, approve 2002 property
tax levy collectible in 2003, and approve HRA levy.
Background:
The 2003 budget and 2001 revised budget document was presented to the City Council in August
of this year. In September, the City Council approved the preliminary tax levy, budget, and
HRA levy for 2003. A Public Hearing was held on December 2, 2002 as part of the regular City
Council meeting.
2003 Budget General Fund Budget:
Total revenues and expenditures increased by $898,177 from the adopted 2002 budget. The
increases are due to the following;
Property Tax Levy 220,774$ General Government 267,930$
Intergovernmental Revenue 504,326 Public Safety 389,749
Licesnse and Permits 177,500 Public Works 327,921
Charges for Services (10,332) Contingency (87,423)
Miscellaneoud Rev. and Transfers 5,909
Total Revenue Increase 898,177$ Total Expenditure Increase 898,177$
Revenues Expenditures
Detail of revenue and expenditure increases:
• 3% compensation increase for union and non-union employees
• $40 per month increase in the City contribution to health care benefits for each benefit
earnings employee
• Addition of two (2) information technology staff (13% of total cost paid for by General Fund
dollars
• $200,000 allocated to Fire Department to purchase equipment with Grant dollars from State
(increase to both revenue and expenditure)
2003 Property Tax Levy:
The property tax levy payable for 2003 includes an overall increase of 1.9%. The City of St.
Louis Park is electing to levy the maximum amount under levy limitations. Property taxes are
used to partially support the operations of the General Fund, Park and Recreation Fund and the
Park Improvement Fund. In addition to operations, a portion of the levy is used for the
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 8b - 2003 Budget Adoption
Page 2 of 5
retirement of general obligation debt. The bonded debt levies are set by the bond order, which is
specific to each debt issue.
HRA Levy:
This is the second year the City is proposing to issue a Housing and Redevelopment (HRA) levy.
The reason for proposing an HRA levy is because of legislative changes in the tax increment
statutes. The legislative changes have severely hampered the ability of the City to do future
redevelopment projects. The HRA levy will generate $499,585 of revenue. These dollars will
be used for infrastructure improvements in redevelopment areas.
The City has always had the authority to issue this type of levy. The levy itself is based on a
percentage of taxable market value within the community. The revenue generated from this levy
is found in the Development Fund budget located in the EDA tab in your budget document.
Recommendation:
Adopt the 2003 budget, 2002 revised budget, approve 2002 property tax levy collectible in 2003,
and approve HRA levy.
Attachments:
Resolution approving the 2002 tax levy, collectible in 2003, adopting the 2003 budget, and
revisions to the 2002 budget
Resolution approving the 2003 HRA Levy
Prepared By: Jean D. McGann, Director of Finance
Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 8b - 2003 Budget Adoption
Page 3 of 5
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2002 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 2003,
ADOPTING BUDGET FOR 2003, AND REVISED BUDGET FOR 2002
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by Charter and State law to approve a
resolution setting forth an annual tax levy to the Hennepin County Auditor; and
WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes currently in force require approval of a property tax levy and a
budget on or before December 25th of each year; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received the budget document;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park
that the 2002 revised budget is approved and the 2003 budget for all Governmental Funds,
(including Economic Development Authority Funds), Enterprise Funds and Internal Service
Funds shall be as follows:
AVAILABLE RESOURCES:REQUIREMENTS:
Revenues:Appropriations:
General Property Taxes 19,220,120$ Personal Services 20,020,519$
Licenses and Permits 2,231,550 Supplies, Services and Other Charge 21,672,270
Integovernmental 4,459,784 Capital Outlay 3,258,181
Charges for Services 2,401,577 Transfers Out 5,413,564
Fines, Forfeits and Penalties 295,000
Enterprise 9,147,660
Miscellaneous 2,435,486
Investment Earnings 2,454,700
Transfers In 5,890,425
Total Revenue 48,536,302$ Total Appropriations 50,364,534$
Fund Balance/Reserves - Janua 94,592,335 Fund Balance/Reservices - Dec 31 92,764,103
Total Available 143,128,637$ Total Available 143,128,637$
and as supported by the 2003 budget document; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, a Public Hearing on this budget was held on December 2,
2002; and
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 8b - 2003 Budget Adoption
Page 4 of 5
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied in 2002, collectible in 2003 upon
the taxable property in said City of St. Louis Park for the following purposes:
General Fund $11,234,236
Parks and Recreation Fund 2,789,991
Parks Improvement Fund 182,602
G.O. Debt Service 329,400
Total $ 14,536,229
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota
and to the Local Government Aids/Analysis Division, Department of Revenue, State of
Minnesota as required by law.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 16, 2002
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
St. Louis Park City Council Agenda
Item: 121602 - 8b - 2003 Budget Adoption
Page 5 of 5
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE HRA LEVY FOR 2003
WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA
Act”), the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority (the "Authority"); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the EDA Act, the City Council granted to the Authority all of
the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the
Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and
WHEREAS, Section 469.033, subdivision 6 of the Act authorizes the Authority to levy a
tax upon all taxable property within the City to be expended for the purposes authorized by the
HRA Act; and
WHEREAS, such levy may be in an amount not to exceed 0.0144 percent of taxable
market value of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has filed its budget for the special benefit levy in accordance
with the budget procedures of the City; and
WHEREAS, based upon such budgets the Authority will levy all or such portion of the
authorized levy as it deems necessary and proper;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the St. Louis Park City Council:
1. That approval is hereby given for the Authority to levy, for taxes payable in 2003,
such tax upon the taxable property of the City as the Authority may determine, subject to the
limitations contained in the HRA Act.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 16, 2002
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk