The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2001/05/07 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular 1 REVISED AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING April 16, 2001 7:30 p.m. 6:15 p.m. – Board and Commission Interviews 6:50 p.m. – Board of Equalization 7:15 p.m. - Economic Development Authority Consent Item # 7 was mistakenly incorporated into the agenda and now has been removed. Item 2a , the proclamation for the Nurses Association, is for the 3rd district rather than the 7th . Copies of this revised agenda will also be available on Monday evening. 1. Call to Order a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll Call 2. Presentations a. 3RD District Nurses Proclamation b. Thank you to Police Civil Service Commission 3. Approval of Minutes a. City Council Minutes of April 16, 2001 b. Study Session Minutes of April 9, 2001 c. Study Session Minutes of April 23, 2001 Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented 4. Approval of Agenda and Consent Items 2 NOTE: Consent items are 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. a. Approval of Agenda Action: Motion to approve (Alternatively, motion to add or remove items from the agenda, motion to move items from consent to regular agenda for discussion). b. Approval of Consent Items 1. Motion to accept the following reports for filing: a. Human Rights Commission Minutes of March 21, 2001 b. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of February 22, 2001 c. Planning Commission Minutes of April 18, 2001 d. Planning Commission Minutes of April 4, 2001 e. Vendor Claims 2. Motion to designate Kevitt Excavating, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $345,245.00 for Park Commons demolition/site restoration – City Project No. 01-15 3. Motion to designate Midwest Asphalt Corporation the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $386,057.60 for W. 16th Street/Zarthan Avenue – grading, base, storm sewer, curb and gutter, and bituminous paving – City Project Nos. 00-15, 00-16, & 01-12 4. Motion to designate Allied Blacktop the lowest responsible bidder for the construction of bituminous sealcoating and to authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $68,260.65. 5. Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing installation of permit parking in front of 3624 Rhode Island Avenue South - Traffic Study No. 556 6. Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing the restriction of parking along the West side of Louisiana Avenue from a point 360 feet North of W. 28th Street to a point 280 feet South of W. 28th Street - Traffic Study No. 557 7. This item has been removed from the agenda Motion to adopt the attached Resolution to enter into an Agreement with Hennepin County for the installation of a traffic signal system at the intersection of Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) and Natchez Avenue 8. Motion to approve extension of Frauenshuh’s Final PUD and Final Plat consideration until August 31, 2001 – Case No. 99-19-PUD Action: Motion to approve Consent Items 3 5. Public Hearings 5a. Public Hearing to consider a wine and beer license for Thando, Inc., DBA Thando Restaurant at 3005 Utah Ave S, St. Louis Park Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve the license. 5b. Public Hearing to Consider Sale of City Property located south of the Jewish Community Center at 4326 Cedar Lake Road This report considers action by the City Council to adopt first reading of an ordinance which amends Ordinance No. 2154-00 which authorized the sale of certain City-owned property located at 4326 Cedar Lake Road. The proposed ordinance amends the sale price of the property from $399,444.57 to $303,750. Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to adopt first reading of an ordinance which amends Ordinance No. 2154-00 relating to the sale price of the City’s property to the Jewish Community Center. 5c. Public Hearing – Sholom Community Alliance Private Activity Revenue Bonds Public Hearing to consider issuing Private Activity Revenue Bonds for Sholom Community Alliance to finance construction of an assisted-living housing development for seniors. Recommended Action: Mayor to open the public hearing. 6. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public 7. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 7a. Request by Project for Pride in Living (PPL) and Perspectives, Inc. for a major amendment to the Final Planned Unit Development for certain Louisiana Court apartments to change the number of units, expand the PUD area to include two additional existing buildings, and modify the site plan Case No. 01-15-PUD 2704-2768 Louisiana Court and 2740-2750 Louisiana Avenue Recommended Action: Motion to approve resolution for a major amendment to the Final PUD for Louisiana Court apartments, subject to conditions as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission 4 7b. Zoning Ordinance amendment of Section 14: 4-11 Restrictions for Tree Removal and Standards for Replacement and Section 14: 3-1 Definitions Case number: 01-16-ZA Recommended Action: Motion to approve First Reading of proposed zoning ordinance amendments and set Second Reading for May 21, 2001. Motion directing staff to prepare a resolution for consideration on May 21, 2001 establishing a fee of $90 per caliper inch for cash-in-lieu of trees. 7c. Request by Ugorets Properties LLC. for Final Plat for Ugorets Addition. Case No. 01-05-S 2230 State Hwy 100 South Recommended Action: Motion adopt a resolution approving final plat, subject to conditions in the resolution as recommended by the Planning Commission and staff 7d. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 16: Establishing a Food Vending Machine License and Various Temporary Use Permits Proposed ordinance establishes a Vending Machine License category to Business Licenses and establishes Temporary Use Permits for various events occurring on city property, construction debris containers and vehicle parking for persons with disabilities and for persons living near the High School Recomme nded Action: Motion to adopt first reading of an ordinance that establishes a Food Vending Machine License and various Temporary Use Permits and set second reading for May 21, 2001. 8. Boards and Committees 9. Communications 10. Adjournment 5 Item # 3a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA April 16, 2001 1. Call to Order and Roll Call Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. The following Councilmembers were present at roll call: Jim Brimeyer, Chris Nelson, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Robert Young, Ron Latz, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Also present were the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Scott); Planning & Zoning Supervisor (Ms. Jeremiah); Zoning Administrator (Mr. Moore); Deputy City Clerk (Ms. Stroth). 2. Presentations a. Caring Youth Day Proclamation Mayor Jacobs presented a proclamation declaring April 19, 2001 as Caring Youth Day in recognition of youth in the community who have demonstrated through a variety of activities that they care about others. The Youth Development Committee will be hosting the community-wide Caring Youth Celebration event scheduled April 19th. 3. Approval of Minutes a. City Council Minutes of April 2, 2001 The minutes were approved as presented with the following changes: Item 7c, Paragraph 5, change “Holding pond that has been there for 40 years” to “Holding water problem that has been there for 40 years”. Correct Director of Park & Recreation to read Cindy Walsh. b. Study Session Minutes of March 26, 2001 The minutes were approved as presented. 4. Approval of Agenda and Consent Items NOTE: Consent items are 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. 6 4a. Agenda It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Santa , to approve the agenda. The motion passed 7-0 4b. Consent Agenda It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve the following Consent Agenda Items. The motion passed 7-0. 1. Approve the procedure for application to City for Private Activity Revenue Bond Financing. 2. Adopt Resolution No. 01-031 approving the 2001 neighborhood revitalization grant program applications and authorizing the Mayor and City Manager to execute grant agreements with the neighborhoods. 3. Authorize execution of a contract with Norit Americas, Inc. for the purchase of Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) in the amount of $56,900 for Water Treatment Plant No. 1, (WTP #1) located at 2935 Jersey Avenue South and Water Treatment Plant No. 4 (WTP #4) located at 4601 W. 41st Street 4. 2001 Parks and Recreation Department Capital Improvement Projects. a. Authorize the Mayor and City Manger to enter into an agreement with St. Croix Recreation, Miracle Recreation of Minnesota, Flanagan Sales, Inc. and Earl F. Anderson for purchase and installation of play equipment at Oak Hill, Justad, Blackstone and Rainbow Parks with total expenditure for all equipment not to exceed $150, 000 out of the Parks and Recreation Fund and Park Improvement Fund. b. Authorize Bituminous Roadways, Inc. as the lowest price quote for trail paving at Blackstone Park with expenditures not to exceed $10,930 from the Park Improvement Fund. c. Authorize the expenditure of $42, 000 out of the Park Improvement Fund, tree preservation and planting allocation, to be used for purchase of 224 trees to be planted on City boulevards. 5. Adopt Resolution No. 01-032 amending final plat resolution and extending plat- filing deadline to October 3, 2001 for Kieffer’s Addition 6. Accept the following reports for filing: a. Housing Authority Minutes of March 14, 2001 b. Planning Commission Minutes of March 21, 2001 c. Vendor Claims 7 7. Approve the Renewal of the Property and Liability Insurance Program as submitted by the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for the period 4/1/01 through 4/1/02. Insurance Program through the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust for 2001/2002 8. Notify the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT) that the City Council does not waive the municipal tort liability limits for the annual insurance renewal. 5. Public Hearings - None 6. Requests and Communications from the Public - None 7. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 7a. Resolution Authorizing the issuance and Sale of $7,650,000 Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2001A. Resolution No. 01-035 City Manager Meyer presented a staff report. He stated in 1997 the city issued general obligation tax increment bonds used specifically for Excelsior Boulevard and Park Common Redevelopment Project. This resolution is proposing to provide for permanent financing of what were variable rate bonds. Bob Ehlers, Ehlers and Associates, presented a financial analysis of the issuance based on the current interest rates and bond bid amounts. He stated the 3 bids received ranged from 6.029 to 6.252 which was approximately $84,000 difference. Mr. Ehlers indicated now was a good time to fix the rate. Councilmember Nelson asked if 3 bidders was low or high for this kind of an issue. Mr. Ehlers responded 3 bidders for a taxable issue is very good. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer to approve Resolution No. 01-035 authorizing the issuance and sale of Taxable General Obligation Tax Increment Refunding Bonds, Series 2001A. The motion passed 7-0. 7b. Resolution Authorizing the Issuance and Sale of $3,265,000 General Obligation Storm Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 2001B. Resolution No. 01-033 City Manager Meyer presented a staff report. The proceeds of the bonds will be used to complete the storm water utility improvements within the City. Bob Ehlers, Ehlers and Associated, presented financial analysis of the issuance based on bid bond amounts. 8 It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Sanger to approve Resolution No. 01-033 authorizing the issuance and sale of General Obligation Storm Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 2001B. The motion passed 7-0. 7c. Conditional Use Permit to permit the removal of more than 400 cubic yards of material to permit the construction of two single-family homes and a structural storm water holding pond for the properties located at 2839 & 2843 Toledo Avenue. Case No. 01-04-CUP Resolution No. 01-034 Scott Moore, Zoning Administrator, presented a staff report and reviewed the development agreement approved by the City Attorney. Councilmember Sanger distributed current photos of the storm water on the property. She questioned what the capacity and comparison would be when this is all constructed. Carleton Moore stated the water will flow to the top of the tank which has catch basins that will drain into the tank below. He stated there should not be standing water. Pete Willenbring, WSB and Associates, Inc. explained the tank will be large, put the pump is small. Councilmember Sanger questioned how maintenance will be monitored. Mr. Willenbring stated the private tank and private pumping system will need to be maintained and could be addressed with a maintenance agreement. City Manager Meyer asked if the pump wasn’t maintained and the tank did fill up and water continued to drain to that area, where the overflow water would go. Mr. Willenbring stated the house east of the tank has the lowest building opening, but if that area were to flood in the future, it is likely this design will reduce the probability. He also stated there is more storage under this plan than under the current conditions. Councilmember Brimeyer asked when the event ends, what triggers the pump. Mr. Willenbring stated there will be floats to trigger the pump. Mr. Willenbring stated this will be a relatively attractive dry backyard area. Councilmember Sanger questioned the city attorney regarding the protections being put into the development agreement that will protect the house to the east and other downstream properties. Tom Scott, City Attorney, reviewed the following development agreement conditions: i. The applicant and future lot owners will maintain general liability insurance which will include coverage for potential water damage to third parties. 9 ii. Revised cross easements covering the two lots. iii. The applicant and any subsequent lot owners will indemnify and hold the City harmless for any claims by third parties relating to the installation, maintenance, and operation of the facility. iv. The applicant and any subsequent lot owners have a duty to properly maintain the facility. v. The City shall have the right in its sole discretion to take whatever steps are necessary to maintain the facility if the lot owners fail to do so. The City would bill the lot owners for the cost, reasonable City supervision and administrative expenses and interest on the unpaid balance at the highest interest rate permitted b law. If unpaid, the amount would be assessed equally against the two lots, and be payable in full with the next year’s property taxes. vi. Construction truck routes would be specified. vii. Adequate financial guarantees would be provided to cover street cleanup and the cost of reasonable restoration of the property if the applicant does not complete the project. Mr. Scott indicated the main protection is the liability coverage. He stated the City has control and a provision could be incorporated to require a Third Party Maintenance Agreement. Mayor Jacobs suggested using an alarm system. Councilmember Latz stated he preferred this alarm go to a third party maintenance option. Mr. Willenbring suggested an design option of putting in drain tile from the bottom. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Young, to approve Resolution No. 01-034 granting the Conditional Use Permit for the removal of more than 400 cubic yards of fill subject to the conditions in the resolution and authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Development Agreement with the following amendments: • Construction truck routes be specified and hours of hauling limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday - Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekends and holidays. Councilmember Nelson asked if there would be a condition for a third party maintenance agreement. Councilmember Santa asked for clarification of the motion. Motion was restated and moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Young, to approve Resolution No. 01-034 granting the Conditional use Permit for the removal of more than 400 cubic yards of fill subject to the amended conditions in the resolution and to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Development Agreement with the following amendments: • Construction truck routes be specified and hours of hauling limited to 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday - Friday and 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. weekends and holidays. 10 • The maintenance agreement shall require regular maintenance by a third party and means for the third party to receive immediate notification in the event of a system failure. The motion passed 7-0. 8. Boards and Committees 9. Communications - From the City Manager – None From the Mayor – Mayor Jacobs invited everyone to the Youth Summit scheduled for Monday, April 30 at the St. Louis Park Jr. High from 5:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. 10. Adjournment Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 8:20 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 11 Item 3b UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION April 9, 2001 The meeting convened at 8:00 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Jim Brimeyer, Ron Latz, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, and Mayor Jacobs. Staff present: Deputy City Manager (Mr. Pires), Police Chief (Mr. Luse), Police Lieutenant (Mr. Ortner), Community Outreach Coordinator (Ms. McDonell), Director of Community Development (Mr. Harmening), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Kleve), and Administration Secretary (Ms. Olson). 1. Neighborhood Revitalization Grant Applications Sharon Abelson, Brian Fiderlein, and Bill Gleason from the Neighborhood Grant Review Committee were present. Mayor Jacobs welcomed the members of the committee. Mr. Fiderlein explained the three criteria used when reviewing the neighborhood grants, which were: funding should not exceed category limits, priority should be given to funding neighborhood activities, and new neighborhoods should receive priority for capital improvement funds. Councilmember Brimeyer indicated that he would not favor an increase in the total funds available for next year and did not think the committee should consider changing the guidelines to award grants based on neighborhood size. He felt that the neighborhoods should not be using their awarded grant money to fund capital projects (such as parks) because that should fall under the City’s responsibility. Councilmember Brimeyer also felt inclined to fully fund activity based projects in an effort to bring the neighborhoods together. He was concerned with the end objectives of some projects and definition of others, such as the Birchwood Sense of Place outreach program. Councilmember Sanger and Councilmember Brimeyer thanked staff and the review committee for the hard work and a job well done. Councilmember Sanger was inclined to increase the total amount of funds available for next year and thought that perhaps the city should match funds for capital projects. Councilmember Latz indicated that he would consider increasing funds, though he had concerns regarding the budget. He was also concerned with equity between the neighborhoods in relation to available funds. 12 Councilmember Latz asked about funds unexpended from previous years and wondered if the committee had considered setting aside any funds for mid-year projects, perhaps for new neighborhoods. Ms. McDonell explained that she has monitored the funds awarded in previous years. The review committee made sure the leftover funds were applied to each grant request this year. Ms. McDonell informed the Council that there is $2,000 remaining in the 2001 budget that could be used to fund mid-year projects. Mayor Jacobs stated that he was not in favor of adjusting funding based on neighborhood size as some neighborhoods are more organized and may plan more activities. Councilmember Santa felt that capital projects are activities that can bring neighborhoods together. She is also open to increasing funds for the next year. Councilmember Sanger reported that, upon prior communication, Councilmembers Nelson and Young had positive comments although Councilmember Nelson felt that grant funds should not be used for postage. Mr. Gleason did agree and said the committee had discussed that issue. Councilmember Santa felt that it was too much to ask a neighborhood resident to deliver the newsletter in foul weather. Mr. Pires did state that he has received positive input from disabled members of various neighborhoods that see postage support as an opportunity for them to more fully participate and aid in neighborhood activities. Further discussion took place regarding apartment storage and bulk mail. Mr. Dennis Ormseth was present at the meeting as the Birchwood spokesperson. He explained what their neighborhood group would like to accomplish with their outreach program, such as new recruitment for the group and designing neighborhood outcomes, and why they needed funding for it. Mr. Gleason stated that perhaps all neighborhoods should be included in the program. Councilmember Brimeyer felt that an idea such as this should be tested in a small group originally. Councilmember Sanger agreed and suggested the review committee take another look at this issue. Mr. Fiderlein was in favor of an idea such as this on a city wide level. Councilmembers Brimeyer and Sanger felt that one neighborhood model should be done originally. Councilmember Santa suggested that Ms. McDonell research some other options similar to that suggested by the Birchwood neighborhood. Ms. McDonell reminded Council of the timeline in which other grants needed to be processed. Council agreed that staff should move forward with the other grants, as well as Birchwood’s other requests except for the outreach program, which needs further discussion and research. Ms. McDonell indicated that she would conduct some research, meet with Mr. Ormseth, and return to Council with a proposal that takes into account Council input from tonight’s meeting. 2. Park Nicollet Contract Amendment Mr. Kleve explained the Hazardous Substance Tax Increment (HSTI) subdistrict that had been created within the Excelsior Blvd TIF district in the early 1990’s. He showed a diagram on the above and below line tax increment in the Excelsior Blvd. TIF district. Due to special 13 legislation, the City can collect the above the line tax increment to commit to the Park Commons East project. Staff would like to amend the contract with Park Nicollet so Park Nicollet can receive the below line increment and the City can utilize the above the line increment until 2009. Park Nicollet is willing to amend the contract and would like to revise its construction schedule. Councilmember Latz inquired on the environmental clean up costs already incurred by Park Nicollet. Mr. Kleve clarified the amount and explained how the City will pay back the money. Councilmember Sanger was also concerned about the impact on the larger TIF district. Mr. Kleve replied that it would not impact the current bonds. Councilmember Sanger was very concerned about the proposed delay in the construction schedule and inquired how the change in the construction schedule relates to the contract amendment. Mr. Kleve explained that the revision of the construction schedule is part of the compromise to ensure that the overall project is not affected. Mr. Bubul indicated that an immediate impact would be evident if this amendment does not occur. Councilmember Latz explained the effect the removal of funds would have on all TIF district projects. Mr. Kleve stated that by not allowing the change in the construction schedule, it would put the City in a negative situation. Mr. Bubul indicated that due to soil problems, Park Nicollet staff cannot meet the construction deadlines. However, they are rethinking the options and are still committed to the project. Mayor Jacobs wanted to ensure appropriate funding for Park Commons and supports the construction schedule revision. Councilmember Latz indicated that he did not see a negative side to this amendment. Councilmember Sanger inquired about other alternatives. Based on staff input on timing needs regarding a decision, Council agreed not to rush the issue, instructing staff not to place the item on the agenda for the next meeting. Staff will provide Council with information on other alternatives on a basis that is timely for the needs of all parties. 3. Citizen Input Mechanism on Police Policy and Staffing Matters Dorothea Moga and Brian Fiderlein, members of the Charter Commission, were present at the meeting. Mr. Pires informed Council that staff was hoping to get feedback on an alternative (now that the Police Civil Service Commission has been abolished) for citizens to provide input on a variety of policy and staffing matters in the Police Department. He hoped Council discussion will help set the parameters for the committee’s activities. Mr. Luse stated that the Police Department already has measures in place and currently works with the neighborhoods and the community. He would like to see a diverse committee chosen among the residents, and would like to see those chosen to include geographical representation of the community. He did not see the need to meet on a regular basis, but to meet as needed. Councilmember Latz was inclined to have quarterly meetings. He felt it was important to have a balance of police department staff and committee members, and thought it will provide a good way to find issues of concern. Councilmember Sanger agreed. 14 Councilmember Santa inquired how members would be chosen. She felt that each neighborhood has its own issues, even those in the same ward and, therefore, did not support having representatives specifically from each ward. Mayor Jacobs felt the committee should be an extension of the community oriented policing goal. Councilmember Brimeyer did not want to move too quickly; and wanted to ensure the committee is designed with the right principles in mind. He felt they need to focus on the end result and how to incorporate the community. Lieutenant Ortner would like to see the committee have a greater role of vision for the department and community and felt that role needs to be defined. Councilmember Brimeyer felt that Council should not be the ones to decide that role. Councilmember Latz agreed they need input from other sources before Council establishes any committee. Councilmember Santa pointed out that some citizens do not know how to access the Police Department or are afraid to do so and she felt this should be taken into consideration. Councilmember Brimeyer stated that they will set a new paradigm. He did not want the committee to focus on the hiring process, and to do something different and more meaningful than in other communities. Mr. Pires felt that the Charter Commission testimony should be considered, which would indicate that the focus be on broad policy, community oriented policing, and neighborhood- police relationships. The Council agreed. Mayor Jacobs stated that emphasis should be placed on community outreach and building trust. Councilmember Sanger inquired about the Fire Civil Service Commission bill at the legislature. Mr. Pires stated that the bill is currently not progressing, and probably will not receive the support in the Senate that it has received in the House. Thus, passage of any legislation is highly doubtful this session. The question was raised as to whether any advisory committee should consider having a citizen committee address both police and fire issues. Mayor Jacobs sees the two departments as two distinct departments. Ms. Moga suggested that staff may be able to help address and gather input from the community and citizen groups. Councilmember Brimeyer felt the committee should initially begin with a small number of members. Council thanked the commission members and staff. Mr. Pires indicated that he would summarize Council direction and provide that information to all interested parties invited to this meeting. 15 4. Park Master Plan Councilmember Sanger expressed several concerns regarding the Park Master Plan. She felt that input for the plan was needed from other groups, as the focus thus far seemed to involve the organized athletic associations. Mayor Jacobs agreed and would like to discuss it at another meeting in the future. Other issues of concern were the storm water projects and notification of work/meetings, and the length of time to complete the Master Plan. Mr. Pires explained that there were two phases to the process, and that staff would return to Council with additional information on plan phases regarding equipment and general master planning, timing, and input from other groups. 5. Communications Councilmember Sanger inquired about the PG & E investments and filing of Chapter 11. Specific concern was raised over the ability of PG & E to recall investment funds recently returned to City. Mr. Pires replied that City staff would conduct follow-up research and update Council. 6. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:07 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 16 Item 3c UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION April 23, 2001 The meeting convened at 7:45 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Jim Brimeyer, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Robert Young and Mayor Jacobs. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer), Interim Finance Director (Mr. Brooks), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Ms. Jeremiah), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), and City Clerk (Ms. Reichert). 1. No Smoking in Restaurants Mayor Jacobs stated that he would like Council to consider the idea of prohibiting smoking in restaurants. Councilmember Sanger indicated that she would also like to look at the issue. Councilmember Santa stated that she has spoken to several residents and most did not care about smoking in restaurants. In fact, some very strongly felt that it would be an infringement on their rights to prohibit smoking in restaurants. Councilmember Santa said that she personally feels ventilation is an issue, not only for smoke but also for food odors, allergies, etc. Councilmember Brimeyer felt that the physical aspect of the issue should be researched, such as air handling and a separation of the smoking and no-smoking areas. Councilmember Young agreed that research is needed. Mr. Meyer encouraged the Council to consider several issues: how the state building code affects the issue, the experience of other cities, and the reaction of the business community. After discussion it was agreed that the City should pursue input from the St. Louis Park Business council on the matter. Council asked that staff research the issue and prepare materials. They believed that thirty to forty-five days would be sufficient to conduct the research. 2. Issues Related to Issuance of Revenue Bonds to Sholom Community Alliance John Brooks, Interim Finance Director gave a brief presentation to the Council regarding issuance of revenue bonds for the acquisition, construction, and equipping of a seventy-six unit assisted living rental housing development proposed to be constructed by the Sholom Community Alliance. The City’s Bond Counsel, Mr. John Utley, an attorney with Kennedy and Graven, was present at the meeting to answer questions from the Council. The Council asked several questions to clarify issues relating to the bond sale. Staff reported that the recently adopted bond application provides that favorable consideration be given to the 17 bonds that carry a security rating equal to or better than that of the City. Mr. Meyer stated that the ‘most favorable’ language in the policy does not bind the City in any way. Councilmember Sanger asked what criteria the City would use if the requirement were waived. Staff suggested that Council consider the stability of the applicant, the reputation of their financial advisor and legal counsel, and the value of the project to the community. Councilmember Young inquired about the relationship of the parent company to Sholom Community Alliance, specifically the mention of Minneapolis in the title. Representatives of Sholom Community Alliance stated that the name is a working title only and that it can be changed to St. Louis Park if necessary. 3. Administrative Fines as a Condition of Approval Ms. Jeremiah reported that staff would like Council to consider setting a policy to administer a fine when developers fail to comply with the conditions of approval in their CUP, PUD, etc. The current options available are not always effective in stopping the problem and may take months to complete. Staff proposes that an administrative fine be included in the conditions of approval and be levied against the developer for any violation of those conditions. Council discussed the amount of the fine, whether is would be per violation or per day. They discussed the method and occurrence of dealing with violations, as well as the history of cases that have gone to court. Attorney Tom Scott gave examples of various situations and how the ordinance could be applied in each. He assured the council that the ordinance could be used in conjunction with other mechanisms and could be tailored to a certain degree to each case. The City would also retain the option to waive or negotiate the amount of any fine imposed. 4. Elmwood Area Study Staff reported that the timing of the study is an issue of concern due to the grant cycle coming up. Councilmember Sanger was concerned about the outcomes of the railroad study currently underway and how that could impact the type of development that could occur on the site. She suggested waiting until that study was complete before moving forward. Councilmember Brimeyer felt that we should definitely move forward with the Elmwood study immediately and that we should also prepare contingency plans for each alternative that may come out of the railroad study. By doing so, we would not lose valuable time and could move forward quickly should the need arise. Ms. Erickson brought up the issue of purchasing the Soomek property and reported that staff has considered the possibility. Council directed staff to move forward with the grant applications and hiring a consultant to conduct the Elmwood study. 18 5. Community Education Resolution Council directed staff to place the resolution on the agenda for the next meeting. 6. Communications Mayor Jacobs passed out a brochure for the Youth Summit, which will take place at the end of the month. Mr. Meyer updated Council on the current legislative issues. Council directed staff to schedule interviews for board and commission applicants prior to the May 7th Council meeting. Council directed staff to schedule the next Board of Equalization meeting for May 7th. 7. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 19 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item #5a Meeting of May 7, 2001 5a. Public Hearing to consider a wine and beer license for Thando, Inc., DBA Thando Restaurant at 3005 Utah Ave S, St. Louis Park Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve the license. Background: In August of 2000, the City received a request from Thando, Inc. for a wine and beer license at their restaurant located at 3005 Utah Ave S near the intersection of Texas Ave S and Minnetonka Ave. At the time of the request the restaurant did not meet zoning regulation requirements. Since that time revisions have been made to the zoning chapter of the code to allow this use. The revisions to the code allow restaurants and other uses with beer and wine licenses to be treated similarly to those uses that have no liquor license. Application: The Police Department has conducted a full investigation of the Thando Corporation and its officers, Mr. Thomas Richard Pham, President and Richard Wilfred Johnson, Vice-President and have found nothing in the course of their investigation that would warrant denial of the license. The application and Police Report are on file in the Office of the City Clerk should Councilmembers wish to review the information prior to the public hearing. Recommendation: The applicant has met all requirements for issuance of the license and staff is recommending approval. Prepared by: Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 20 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item #5b Meeting of May 7, 2001 5b. Public Hearing to Consider Sale of City Property located south of the Jewish Community Center at 4326 Cedar Lake Road This report considers action by the City Council to adopt first reading of an ordinance which amends Ordinance No. 2154-00 which authorized the sale of certain City-owned property located at 4326 Cedar Lake Road. The proposed ordinance amends the sale price of the property from $399,444.57 to $303,750. Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to adopt first reading of an ordinance which amends Ordinance No. 2154-00 relating to the sale price of the City’s property to the Jewish Community Center. Background: In February of 2000, the City of St. Louis Park entered into a purchase agreement for the sale of 6.24 acres of property to the JCC. The JCC is interested in acquiring this property to assist in an expansion to its campus. The terms of the purchase agreement are as follows: • Sale price of $399,444.57 based on the sale of approximately 6.24 acres at $1.47 per square foot. • Closing within 18 months. • Buyer satisfied with soil and environmental investigation. • Buyer obtaining necessary financing. • Buyer obtaining necessary land use approvals from the City for its planned campus expansion. • The City also has a contingency which states that a sale by the City to the buyer is contingent upon the City approving the JCC campus expansion. • JCC provides an access license to the City over the JCC existing property and the property it is acquiring relating to the possible construction and maintenance of a future storm water pond in the area. • Purchase agreement identifies various easements which the JCC would provide to the City as a part of the sale. • The purchase agreement contains other usual and customary language. The JCC has undertaken soil tests on the City’s property. Based on these tests, the JCC sent a letter to the City in January (see attached) along with a report from a soil consultant asking for a reduction in the purchase price due to the poor soil conditions encountered. Due to the JCC’s opinion that the soil conditions were quite poor, the JCC indicated that they felt the property was worth approximately $.25 to $.50 per square foot for a total of $67,932 to $135,865. 21 City staff and a soils consultant reviewed the JCC’s consultant report (see attached letter). The findings of the City’s soil consultant were shared with the appraiser who originally appraised the property for the City. Based upon this analysis the City’s outside appraiser indicated that some adjustment in the purchase price was warranted. As you will see in the attached letter from Bakken Liedl dated February 20, 2001, it was their opinion that the parcel proposed to be sold under the terms of the purchase agreement had a value of $270,000 or approximately $.99 per square foot as of February 2, 1999. However, the letter from Bakken Liedl also indicated that based upon general real estate trends, the property had likely appreciated by 10-15% since the original valuation date. Based upon this estimate, staff increased the $270,000 appraised amount by 12.5% which resulted in an adjusted purchase price of $303,750. Staff presented this information to the JCC and, after some negotiation, the JCC agreed with this price. City Charter requires the City Council to authorize the sale of land via the adoption of an ordinance. Since the original ordinance contained the $399,444 original purchase price, the City is required to adopt a new ordinance to reflect the proposed new purchase price. Assuming the City Council approves first reading of the proposed ordinance, staff will bring the second reading of the ordinance to the City Council on May 21, along with the actual amendment to the purchase agreement. Attachments • Letter from JCC dated 1/8/01 • Letter from ENSR dated 2/12/01 • Letter from Bakken Liedl dated 2/20/01 • Proposed Ordinance Prepared by: Tom Harmening, Community Development Director Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 1987:N 22 ORDINANCE NO. _________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2154-00 RELATING TO THE SALE OF CITY PROPERTY TO THE JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. On February 7, 2000 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2154-00 which authorized the sale of 6.24 acres of property by the City to the Jewish Community Center of Greater Minneapolis for a total sale price of $399,444.57. SECTION 2. Ordinance 2154-00 is amended to authorize the sale of 6.24 acres of property by the City to the Jewish Community Center of Greater Minneapolis for a total sale price of $303,750.00. The property is located on South Cedar Lake Road and its crossing with the Burlington Northern Railroad and is legally described as follows: Commencing at the Northeast corner of the South One Half of the Southeast One Quarter of Section 30, Township 29, Range 24; thence South 00 degrees 16 minutes 42 seconds East assumed bearing along the east line of said South One Half of the Southeast One Quarter a distance of 459.71 feet to a point 57.16 feet northerly of the Burlington Northern Railroad tracks centerline as now laid out; thence South 74 degrees 04 minutes 36 seconds East 57.16 feet northerly and parallel to said centerline of tracks a distance of 254.46 feet to the point of beginning; thence continuing South 74 degrees 04 minutes 36 seconds East a distance of 1365.79 feet; thence northwesterly along a non-tangential curve concave to the southwest having a radius of 327.96 feet, a central angle of 53 degrees 43 minutes 35 seconds, an arc length of 307.53 feet, a chord distance of 296.38 feet and a chord bearing of North 54 degrees 52 minutes 52 seconds East; thence North 82 degrees 45 minutes 05 seconds East non-tangential to said curve a distance of 268.34 feet; thence North 74 degrees 04 minutes 36 seconds East a distance of 1286.87 feet; thence South 15 degrees 55 minutes 24 seconds East a distance of 190.00 feet to the point of beginning. The sale shall occur in accordance with the terms of a Purchase Agreement executed by Buyer dated February 8, 2000, and an Amendment to Real Estate Purchase Agreement dated _______________, both on file with the City Clerk. 23 SECTION 3. This ordinance shall be effective fifteen (15) days after its passage and publication. Adopted by the City Council May 21, 2001 Reviewed for Administration City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney 99-32-RE-amend/N/res/ord 24 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item #5c Meeting of May 7, 2001 5c. Public Hearing – Sholom Community Alliance Private Activity Revenue Bonds Public Hearing to consider issuing Private Activity Revenue Bonds for Sholom Community Alliance to finance construction of an assisted-living housing development for seniors. Recommended Action: Mayor to open the public hearing. Background: The City has been asked to consider the issuance of revenue bonds under Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C for a program consisting of the acquisition, construction, and equipping of a seventy-six-unit assisted-living rental housing development for seniors at 3610 Phillips Parkway. The Project will be owned by Sholom Community Alliance, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation, or Sholom Community Alliance St. Louis Park Assisted Living Project, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation. The aggregate face amount of revenue bonds proposed to be issued to finance the Project is presently estimated not to exceed $19,000,000. The revenue bonds will be issued by the City and will be limited obligations of the City payable solely from the revenues pledged to the payment thereof. The revenue bonds will not be general or moral obligations of the City and will not be secured by or payable from any assets, revenues, or other property of the City (except the interests of the City in the Project) and will not be secured by or payable from any revenues derived from any application of the taxing powers of the City. The application material and financial statements were provided to the City Council at the April 23, 2001 study session. Final approval of the Private Activity Revenue Bond Issue will be requested at the May 21, 2000 City Council meeting. Prepared by: John Brooks, Interim Finance Director Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 25 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item #7a Meeting of May 7, 2001 7a. Request by Project for Pride in Living (PPL) and Perspectives, Inc. for a major amendment to the Final Planned Unit Development for certain Louisiana Court apartments to change the number of units, expand the PUD area to include two additional existing buildings, and modify the site plan Case No. 01-15-PUD 2704-2768 Louisiana Court and 2740-2750 Louisiana Avenue Recommended Action: Motion to approve resolution for a major amendment to the Final PUD for Louisiana Court apartments, subject to conditions as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission Zoning: RC, Multi-Family Residential Comprehensive Plan Designation: RH, High Density Residential Up to 50 units per acre W 28th St Loui siana AvIP RC RC R2 R2 Subject 26 Site Data: PUD Size: 6.834 Acres Proposed No. Of Units 185 Proposed Density 27 Units/Acre Density Allowed By Zoning 50 Units/Acre Parking Required 259 Spaces Ordinance requirement 2/unit 370 Less Allowed Reductions 111 Parking Provided (Includes proof of parking) 268 Spaces Background: The City Council approved a final PUD for Project for Pride in Living, PPL, on May 15, 2000, following the recommendation of the Planning Commission. PPL is now requesting a major amendment to the final PUD to increase the number of apartment units in the existing project area, and to expand the project area of the PUD to include two additional buildings to be purchased and operated by Perspectives, Inc. This proposed amendment expands the project area to include all of the 16 buildings within the Louisiana Court apartment complex. In addition, PPL proposes to add two units to an existing building by reconfiguring the interior space. No building expansion is proposed. The original approved PUD included ordinance modifications and variances for the Louisiana Court project. The approved modifications included: • setback reductions to allow parking and access drives to be located as close at 4.15 feet from a building, • overall parking reductions based upon access to transit, • allowing on-street parking on Louisiana Court to count towards the total parking requirement, • building setback reductions along Louisiana Court. This applicant is proposing the same parking reductions for the expanded area as were approved in the original final PUD. The City Council has approved a restriping of Louisiana Avenue that will remove parking and the ability to construct a bus stop in the former parking lane on the west side of Louisiana Avenue just north of 28th Street. The approved change will shift the southbound through traffic lane to the west into the former parking lane next to the curb. This change was approved to address congestion and safety in this street segment. In order to accommodate a bus stop to serve the Louisiana Court project and others in the area, a pull out lane must be constructed for the bus. A bus stop cannot be accommodated in the southbound through traffic lane because there would be no safe means for traffic to pass the stopped bus. Currently, Louisiana Avenue carries over 20,000 vehicles a day and 120 crashes have been reported over the five-year period between 1995 and 1999 in the segment between Minnetonka Blvd. and the BNSF railroad. Forty-seven of these crashes involved personal injury. 27 The Planning Commission held a public hearing for the proposed major amendment to the PUD on April 4, 2001. PPL indicated their concern with showing the transit improvements on the project site plan, due to the terms of their tax credit agreement. They also indicated concern about paying for changes that would have to be made to the drawings and for processing the required easement. The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions, but deleted several conditions of approval related to the pull-out lane recommended by staff. However, the Planning Commission did not realize at the time that the parking reductions requested for this project are based upon access to transit. Therefore, failure to provide a transit stop would require parking variances. Staff has met with PPL and believe it has worked out an agreement whereby PPL will provide a separate document showing the transit and related improvements. The document will become an official exhibit to avoid the need for a parking variance. The City will pay for the cost of the bus pullout and realigned sidewalk as well as the changes to the plan. The conditions removed by the Planning Commission have been modified and reinstated. Issues: • What plan changes are proposed to the approved PUD plans? • Are the PUD plan amendments consistent with zoning ordinance requirements including the PUD ordinance? • How can a transit stop be accommodated? • Are the conditions met for final PUD major amendment? Issues Analysis: What plan changes are proposed to the approved PUD plans? Expanded Project Area. The applicant is proposing to expand the project area to include all properties located within the Louisiana Court area. This includes the addition of 2 buildings (2759 and 2765 Louisiana Court) that are in the process of being purchased by Perspectives, Inc. Perspectives will own 5 of the 16 buildings within the PUD. Perspectives is proposing to renovate the buildings and to reduce the number of units from 12 to 10 in each of the two buildings. The applicant is seeking the same 30% parking reduction within the expanded area as were approved in the original final PUD. Approved parking reductions included 10% for being on a transit route, 5% for bicycle parking and 15% as allowed by PUD. The parking reductions were allowed based upon its transit and pedestrian orientation. Reduction in Units. PPL’s original PUD was approved for 163 units. PPL has found a way to increase the number of units by two and still provide the proposed number of 3-bedroom apartments. Part of the proposed amendment is to allow an increase of 2 units to the original PUD. The proposed amendment to the PUD would allow 185 units. Are the PUD plan amendments consistent with zoning ordinance requirements, including the PUD ordinance? 28 Architectural standards: The buildings located within the proposed expansion area have similar exterior materials. They are composed primarily of stucco and brick, and meet the City’s exterior materials and architectural standards requirements. Landscape Plans: Proposed landscaping meets the Ordinance requirements on all sides of the project. PUD Requirements: Higher standard of building and site design: Staff believes that a higher standard of building and site design is achieved through open space and landscaping in excess of code requirements; superior improvements to pedestrian connections; and exterior materials which exceed code requirements. While the existing architectural design and layout of the apartment buildings is not ideal or superior, staff believes the targeted building improvements and substantial greening of the project area still result in a greatly improved overall appearance. Staff is also proposing that the site plans be changed to reflect a transit stop, transit shelter and improved landscaping around the transit stop (see below). These improvements are not shown on the attached plans, but can be required as a condition of approval. Proposed ordinance modifications: Staff believes that the proposed ordinance modification to the parking requirement for the expanded area is appropriate provided convenient access to transit is provided. How can a transit stop be accommodated? The City Council has approved a plan to improve traffic flow and safety on Louisiana Avenue. This plan includes a restriping of the street, removing on-street parking on the west side of the street, and shifting the southbound through lane next to the curb. Parking is being retained on the east side of the street. Public Works has stated that due to the high volume of traffic on Louisiana Avenue (20,488 in 1999) this approved plan eliminates the ability to safely provide transit service to the project unless a pull out lane is constructed. The Louisiana Court project was funded and parking reductions granted on the basis of it being transit oriented. Public works has drawn a plan for the pullout lane that can be accommodated almost entirely within the public right-of-way. However, in order for it to be constructed, the City would require an easement from the project property owner for a public sidewalk. The attached plans do not reflect a transit stop, transit shelter, or any provisions for transit. It is staff’s understanding that PPL will agree to provide a separate plan that will reflect its transit orientation, including a bus pull out and transit shelter. The proposed resolution includes a provision that requires a separate plan reflecting these changes to become part of the official exhibits. The reconstruction of the sidewalk, bus pull out lane, and transit shelter all may require easements from PPL. It is staff’s understanding that the applicant will agree to provide these easements in exchange for the City constructing the stated improvements. 29 Are the conditions met for PUD major amendment? The applicant has submitted site plans showing an expanded PUD area, is requesting parking modifications, and has stated that the two additional buildings will be remodeled to increase bedroom size and reduce the number of units. No plans have been submitted that reflect building elevations for the expanded area. As noted, the site plans also do not reflect a transit stop, the justification for the requested parking modifications. Staff has included as a condition in the resolution both a requirement for building elevation drawings and a separate plan showing the transit improvements and associated plan changes. These documents would be approved administratively and would become part of the official exhibits. 30 Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the PUD major amendment subject to the following conditions: A. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official Exhibits which shall include: • A plan approved by staff showing a transit stop at the corner of Louisiana Avenue and West 28th Street with a bus pull out lane, realigned sidewalk, realigned landscaping, and a bus shelter. • A plan approved by staff detailing proposed changes to building facades at 2759 and 2765 Louisiana Court, if any. B. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the approved resolution and development agreement subject to further approved changes. C. The total number of units within the PUD shall be limited to 185. D. Prior to issuance of any building permit, which may impose additional requirements, for 2741 or 2759 Louisiana Court the property owners shall sign the assent form and official exhibits: E. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for 2741 or 2759 Louisiana: 1. The property owner shall provide to the City easements necessary to accommodate the bus pull out lane and realigned sidewalk, which shall be constructed by the City. 2. The property owners shall provide the necessary easement for the bus shelter. F. PUD major amendment approval and development is contingent upon the developer meeting all conditions of final PUD resolution and development agreement. G. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements for the expanded PUD area, the developer shall comply with the following: 1. Meet any Fire Department emergency access requirements for during construction. 2. Building materials samples to be submitted to and approved by City for the expanded PUD area. 3. The property owner of the expanded PUD area shall sign the assent form and official exhibits. H. A PUD modification is approved based upon the findings included in the staff report to reduce parking to 268 total parking stalls including 51 on-street parking on Louisiana Court and 10 proof of parking. I. A modified development agreement shall be executed between the developer and the City if determined necessary by the City Attorney. J. If parking should become a problem in the future, as determined by the Zoning Administrator, the Zoning Administrator may require proof of parking to be converted to parking spaces. Attachments: • Development plans • Proposed Resolution Prepared by: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 31 RESOLUTION NO. 01-038 Amends and Restates Resolution 00-065 A RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION NO. 00-065 ADOPTED ON MAY 15, 2000 APPROVING A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 14:6-7 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED RC MULTI- FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 2704-2768 LOUISIANA COURT AND 2740-2750 LOUISIANA AVENUE WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Preliminary PUD on April 17, 2000, Resolution No. 00-042; and WHEREAS, an application for an amendment to the approved Preliminary PUD for a detached office building and approval of a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received from the applicant on April 21, 2000, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the amendment to the approved Preliminary PUD and the Final PUD at the meeting of May 3, 2000, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment to the approved Preliminary PUD and the Final PUD on a 5-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments in the record of decision, and adopted Resolution No. 00-065 on May 15, 2000, and WHEREAS, an application for a major amendment to the Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) to expand the PUD area, increase the number of units, and modify the site plan was received from the applicant on March 7, 2001, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and reviewed the amendment to the Final PUD at the meeting of April 4, 2001, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the amendment to the Final PUD with conditions on a 6-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments in the record of decision. BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 32 1. Project for Pride in Living, Inc. and Perspectives, Inc. have made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 14:6-7 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the RC, Multi-Family Residential District located at 2704-2768 Louisiana Court and 2740 and 2750 Louisiana Avenue for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Lots 1-14, Block 1, Louisiana Court (Torrens and Abstract) 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 00-18-PUD and Case No. 01-15-PUD) and the effect of the proposed PUD on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that the PUD will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also determined that the proposed PUD is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 14:6-7.2(E). 4. The contents of Case File 00-18-PUD and Case File 01-15-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution No. 00-065 filed as Document No. ____ is hereby restated and amended by this resolution which continues and amends a Final Planned Unit Development to the subject property for the purpose of expanding the PUD area to include Lot 11, Block 1 Louisiana Court and to increase the number of dwelling units to 185 within the RC Multi-Family Residential Zoning District at the location described above based on the following conditions: The amendment to the approved Preliminary PUD and the Final PUD at the location described are approved based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: K. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official Exhibits. Exhibits A Site Plan, B Landscape Plan (Plan 1 of 3), and C Civil Plans (Plans 1 and 3 of 3) are replaced by Official Exhibits for Major PUD Amendment adopted May 7, 2001). L. Final PUD approval and development is contingent upon the developer meeting all conditions of final PUD approval and sale of 2704-2742 and 2754 Louisiana Court and 2740- 2750 Louisiana Avenue to Project for Pride in Living. M. Prior to any site work, the developer shall meet the following requirements: 1. Obtain administrative lot split to relocate lot lines so that building expansion at 2717 Louisiana Court and office building at 2727 Louisiana Court do not encroach on lot lines. Building setbacks shall be sufficient to meet Building Code requirements. 2. A copy of the Watershed District permit shall be forwarded to the City. 3. Any other necessary permits from other agencies shall be obtained. 4. Sign assent form and official exhibits. 33 D. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements, the developer shall comply with the following: 4. Meet any Fire Department emergency access requirements for during construction. 5. Building materials samples to be submitted to and approved by City. E. The following ordinance modifications and variances are approved based upon the findings included in the staff report and variance resolution subject to final PUD approval: 1. 236 parking stalls including 51 on-street parking on Louisiana Court. This condition was modified by Condition H8 on May 7, 2001. 2. Reduced front building setbacks of 20 feet for apartment buildings and 8 feet for office building as noted on approved site plan. 3. Reduced rear yard building setbacks to as little as 19.5 feet as noted on approved site plan. 4. Reduced front yard parking setbacks to as little as 15.5 feet as shown on approved site plan. 5. Reduced building to curb setback of as little as 4.15 feet as shown on approved site plan. 6. Reduced distance between buildings to 19.7 feet for apartment buildings and 5 feet for office building as shown on approved site plan. 7. Reduced drive aisle width for double parking rows to 59.5 feet. 8. Reduced drive aisle width for single parking rows to 18.23 feet, with the condition that paved turnaround areas be installed at the ends of the two parking lots in the northwest corner of the site. F. A development agreement shall be executed between the developer and the City and/or financial securities be provided to the City which covers at a minimum, sidewalk construction and maintenance, repair and cleaning of public streets, and plan changes that may be administratively approved. The development agreement shall also cite the approved ordinance modifications and variances. G. If parking should become a problem in the future, as determined by the Zoning Administrator, the Zoning Administrator may require proof of parking to be converted to parking spaces. H. The Planned Unit Development shall be amended on May 7, 2001, to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: 1. Conditions A and E are modified as noted above. 2. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official Exhibits which shall include the modified site plan, landscape plan and civil plans and: i. A plan approved by staff showing a transit stop at the corner of Louisiana Avenue and West 28th Street with a bus pull out lane, realigned sidewalk, realigned landscaping, and a bus shelter. ii. A plan approved by staff detailing proposed changes to the two building facades at 2759 Louisiana Court, if any. Such documents incorporated by reference herein. 3. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the approved resolution and development agreement subject to further approved changes. 4. The total number of units within the PUD shall be limited to 185. 5. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits for 2741 or 2759 Louisiana: 34 i. The property owner shall provide to the City easements necessary to accommodate the bus pull out lane and realigned sidewalk, which shall be constructed by the City. ii. The property owners shall provide the necessary easement for the bus shelter. 6. PUD major amendment approval and development is contingent upon the developer meeting all conditions of final PUD resolution and development agreement. 7. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements for the expanded PUD area, the developer shall provide building materials samples to be submitted to and approved by City for the expanded PUD area. 8. A PUD modification is approved based upon the findings included in the staff report to reduce parking to 268 total parking stalls including 51 on-street parking on Louisiana Court and 10 proof of parking. This modifies Condition E1. 9. A modified development agreement shall be executed between the developer and the City if determined necessary by the City Attorney. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicants (or applicants and owners if applicant is different from owner) prior to issuance of building permits for 2741 or 2759 Louisiana Court. The building permit may impose additional requirements. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 7, 2001 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 35 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item #7b Meeting of May 7, 2001 7b. Zoning Ordinance amendment of Section 14: 4-11 Restrictions for Tree Removal and Standards for Replacement and Section 14: 3-1 Definitions Case number: 01-16-ZA Recommended Action: Motion to approve First Reading of proposed zoning ordinance amendments and set Second Reading for May 21, 2001. Motion directing staff to prepare a resolution for consideration on May 21, 2001 establishing a fee of $90 per caliper inch for cash-in-lieu of trees. Background: The Zoning Code includes a section called “Restrictions for Tree Removal and Standards for Replacement.” The primary purpose of the Code is to provide incentives for private property developers to protect trees by giving credit for trees left on site. If a substantial number of trees are left on site, the replacement ratio for those that are lost due to construction is very low. However, if most of the trees are lost due to construction, the replacement ratio is very high. In this manner, the City attempts to protect as many trees as possible and replace them when a significant number must be lost to development. Reasons outlined in the ordinance for protecting and replacing trees include: the environmental, health, aesthetic, economic and energy efficiency benefits of having a substantial number of trees in the community. Due to the need for soil corrections and regrading, it is not always possible to protect trees. In these cases such as the Mill City redevelopment and CSM/Rottlund projects, the replacement ratios have been high, and it has not been possible to plant all the required replacement trees on site. The Code allows replacement trees to be planted on public property and the Park and Recreation Department has been responsible for planting those trees. Rather than have developers deliver trees, the Park and Rec. Department prefers to have money to purchase trees, so that they can control the timing and selection of the trees. The Code and fee resolution does not currently address this policy. Staff has also found some other areas of the tree replacement policy that may warrant changes. These include specifics on the size and types of significant trees as well as allowing other required tree plantings to count toward tree replacement requirements. After meeting with the City Council at a Study Session on February 26, 2001, it was also suggested that the formula used to determine tree replacement should be slightly adjusted. This is reflected in the current proposal. The Council also asked whether the program to provide discount trees to homeowners is still in effect. Jim Vaughan, City Forester, has indicated that discount trees are still offered to 36 homeowners who lose trees due to disease. Jim also administers a program to inoculate trees against Dutch Elm disease. On April 18, 2001, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance amendments. The Planning Commission discussed the ordinance at length and addressed a question from a citizen (see attached unofficial Planning Commission excerpt). The Planning Commission then recommended approval of the proposed ordinance amendment and adoption of a resolution that would establish a $90 per caliper inch fee for cash in-lieu of replacement trees on a vote of 3-0 with one member abstaining. Issues: • Codifying Cash-in-lieu • Change Category of Birch Trees • Increase Category A Significant Tree Size from 8” DBH to 10” DBH • Include Bufferyard and Other Required Plantings • Change the Formula Used to Determine Replacement • Cumulative Effects of the Proposed Changes Issues Analysis: • Codifying Cash-in-lieu For the last 2-3 years the City has been accepting cash-in-lieu of trees when replacement couldn’t be accommodated on-site. This money has been put into a fund that has been administered by Park and Rec. and can only be used for new tree planting. Staff believes it is desirable to amend the code to officially include the cash-in-lieu option. Increase cost per caliper inch to $90 Currently the City has been charging $60 per caliper inch as a cash-in-lieu fee. After a meeting with representatives from Community Development, Park and Rec., and Forestry, staff is suggesting that the City charge $90 per caliper inch to better reflect the true costs of planting trees. The Planning Commission has concurred with this recommendation. As a comparison, Plymouth and Eden Prairie currently charge $100 per caliper inch. Amend Costs to Reflect the Market Staff and the Planning Commission suggest that the cash-in-lieu fee be added to the fee resolution that is reviewed and amended bi-annually. • Change category of Birch Trees The tree replacement ordinance provides standards for replacing “significant trees.” Currently there are two categories of significant trees as defined in Section 14: 3-1 Definitions: Category A 37 which includes Siberian Elm, all Populus species (Aspen, Cottonwood), all Salix species (Willow), all Betula species (Birch), Boxelder, Silver Maple and Black Locust. Category B includes all other tree species. A significant tree is defined as any Category A tree having a Diameter Breast Height (DBH) of 8 inches or more that is alive and healthy or a Category B tree having a DBH of 4 inches or more if deciduous or 6 feet tall if coniferous. Category B trees are generally slower growing and longer lived than Category A trees. Category B trees are therefore considered more desirable to protect and replace at smaller sizes. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that Betula species (Birch) be removed from Category A and be considered a Category B significant tree. Betula grows slowly and is rare in St. Louis Park. Staff and the Planning Commission therefore believe Birch should be considered a more desirable species. • Increase Category A Significant Tree Size from 8” DBH to 10” DBH Staff and the Planning Commission recommend changing the Category A significant tree size from 8” to 10” since these trees grow very fast and naturally replace themselves quicker than Category B trees. • Include Bufferyard and Other Required Plantings There are other tree planting requirements besides tree replacement. Developers must install plantings in parking lots and bufferyards to mitigate impacts of their projects on other properties. Currently the code does not allow developers to count trees used to satisfy these other planting requirements as part of their tree replacement requirements. After consulting with the City Council at the February 26, 2001 Study Session, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that trees included in these other required plantings should be allowed to count towards their tree replacement. • Change the Formula Used to Determine Replacement Per the direction of the City Council at the February 26, 2001 Study Session, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending a change to the tree replacement formula. The current formula, when the percentage of trees removed to the percentage of trees replaced is graphed out, gradually curves up from 0 to 120% (meaning that if you remove 100% of the caliper inches onsite, your replacement would be 120% of the total removed.) The council directed staff to keep this 120% figure but lower the rest of the curve. The proposed formula would begin after 20% of the trees onsite are removed and then curve up to 120% if all the trees are removed. The graph below will help illustrate this: 38 • Cumulative Effects of the Proposed Changes The attached table shows how the cumulative changes would have affected three recent projects. You will note that despite the proposed changes to ease the replacement requirements, the cash- in-lieu requirement would actually increase for two of the three projects, due to increasing the fee from $60 to $90 per caliper inch. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the attached ordinance amendment and an amendment to the general fee resolution that would add a $90 per caliper inch fee for cash–in-lieu of trees. If the Council approves First Reading of the ordinance amendment, Second Reading could be held on May 21, 2001. The fee resolution could also be considered on May 21st. Attachments:  Proposed Ordinance Amendments  Table comparing the current ordinance with the proposed changes for three subject properties Prepared by: Peter Vickerman, Community Development Intern Reviewed by: Janet Jeremiah, Planning and Zoning Supervisor 952-924-2573; E-Mail: jjeremiah@stlouispark.org Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 39 ORDINANCE NO.______ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTIONS 14:3-1, 14:4-11.3(B) THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 01-16-ZA) Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 14:3-1 and 14:4-11(B)(2)(3) are hereby amended to read as follows: Section 14:3-1 Significant Tree: Significant trees shall fall under two categories. Category A shall include the following species: Siberian Elm (Ulmus pumila) All Populus species (Aspen, Cottonwood) All Salix species (Willow) All Betula species (Birch) Boxelder (Acer negundo) Silver Maple (Acer sacharinum) Black Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) Category B shall include all other tree species. A significant tree is any Category A tree having a Diameter Breast Height (DBH) of eight (8) ten (10) inches or more that is alive and healthy or a Category B tree having a DBH of four (4) inches or more if deciduous or six (6) feet in height if an evergreen. (Amended by Ord. No. 2096-97 7-7-97) Section 14:4-11.3B(2)(3) 2. The owner or developer shall replace the loss or reasonably anticipated loss due to destruction, grading or building of all live significant trees. The amount of trees to be provided in replacement shall be determined by the following formula: ((A/B) x C) x A = D ((A/B)-.20) x C x A = D 40 A = Total diameter inches of significant trees lost as a result of land alteration or removal. B = Total diameter inches of significant trees situated on the land. C = Tree replacement constant (1.2) (1.5) D = Replacement Trees (Number of caliper inches). 3. Location of replacement trees. Replacement trees shall be planted on: a. restoration areas including steep slopes b. common areas c. bufferyards between different land uses or activities d. Project entrance areas e. Any other part of the parcel except that dedicated or conveyed to the City, unless the City consents in writing. f. If there is insufficient area within the project to plant the required replacement trees, these may be planted within any park, open space, or boulevard within the City as determined by the City provided the City consents in writing. The City may also elect to receive cash-in-lieu of trees based on a fee per caliper inch determined by the City Council. The trees required to be replaced by this Section shall be in addition to any other trees required to be planted by any other provision of the Ordinance. (Amended by Ord. No. 2096-97 7-7-97) Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case File 01-16-ZA are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec.4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Adopted by the City Council May 21, 2001 Reviewed for Administration City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney 41 Effects of Full Implementation of Suggested Changes Current Numbers Project Removed Total Replacement Onsite Offsite Fee CSM/Rottlund 1,894 1,928 2,190 894 1,296 $ 77,760 Mill City 1,499 1,499 1,799 623 1,176 $ 70,548 Excelsior Townhomes 539 1,988 175 55 120 $ 7,200 TOTAL 3,932 5,415 4,164 1,572 2,592 $ 155,508 Adjusted Numbers Project Removed 1 Total 1 Replacement Onsite2 Offsite Fee 3 CSM/Rottlund 1,795 1,829 2,114 1,110 1,004 $ 90,401 Mill City 967 967 1,160 699 461 $ 41,526 Excelsior Townhomes 506 1,915 160 70 90 $ 8,140 TOTAL 3,268 4,711 3,435 1,879 1,556 $ 140,067 1 Affected by increased Category A significant tree from 8” to 10” 2 Affected by allowing bufferyards and other required plantings to count toward tree replacement 3 Affected by changing fee per caliper inch from $60 to $90 42 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item # 7c Meeting of May 7, 2001 7c. Request by Ugorets Properties LLC. for Final Plat for Ugorets Addition. Case No. 01-05-S 2230 State Hwy 100 South Recommended Action: Motion adopt a resolution approving final plat, subject to conditions in the resolution as recommended by the Planning Commission and staff Zoning Designation: I-G, General Industrial Comprehensive Plan Designation: I - Industrial Background: Ugorets Properties has purchased a strip of land approximately 234 feet wide and 14.9 feet deep along their northern property line from the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. The purpose of the purchase is to enable a building addition on the north side of the existing building. Subject TH 100 43 In order to accommodate a building addition, platting is necessary to remove the property line between the existing parcel and recently acquired adjacent railroad parcel. The Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary Plat with a variance to eliminate the requirement for a sidewalk along West 23rd Street on March 21, 2001. The City Council adopted a resolution approving the Preliminary Plat and the variance on April 2, 2001, adding an additional condition to the resolution requiring an assurance that the regional trail will not be damaged by drainage from the applicants building or property. The Planning Commission reviewed the Final Plat on April 18, 2001 and unanimously recommended approval with conditions, including the condition added by Council and a condition that an easement document be received for the trail prior to City Council approval. Staff is proposing to extend the time frame of the easement condition to the signing of the final plat. A copy of the resolution of approval is attached. A development agreement will be drafted and executed prior to signing the final plat. An issue related to this plat has arisen relative to an existing overhead transmission line. Staff received a phone call from Xcel stating that they had a lease agreement with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe to locate power transmission lines within the railroad right of way. They reported that the property was sold to the applicant without notification to them and the applicant purchased property along with their lease. Xcel has stated that the proposed building addition will interfere with the location of the transmission lines. This is discussed below. Other issues related to this plat were discussed during the preliminary plat public hearings and have been incorporated into the conditions for approval. Issues: • Is the final plat acceptable? • What obligation does the City have to resolve the Xcel transmission line issue? Issues Analysis: • Is the final plat acceptable? The final plat of Ugorets Addition proposes to plat as a single lot an existing 1.168-acre parcel of land with an adjacent strip of land 14.9 feet deep by 234 feet wide purchased by Ugorets Properties LLC from the adjacent Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad. The applicant has submitted the final plat drawing. Other easement documents as well as a development agreement are listed as conditions of Planning Commission approval. The standard ten-foot perimeter easements are proposed around the perimeter of the property in those areas not occupied by the existing building or proposed building addition. The building addition was granted a variance from the required setback from the railroad property by the Board of Zoning Appeals. • What obligation does the City have to resolve the Xcel transmission line issue? 44 The City is required to send copies of preliminary plats to all utility companies. Xcel was sent a copy of the preliminary plat in February and they responded by phone that they had no issues related to this plat. The City Council approval of the preliminary plat has given the property owner certain vested rights to final plat approval. Xcel has stated that building codes would prohibit any building additions until the transmission line issue is resolved. The Building Official has indicated that the Code does not address the issue. The City Attorney agrees that the issue relative to the transmission line is between the railroad, the applicant and Xcel. Since the City has given preliminary plat approval, it cannot withhold final plat approval unless it finds that certain extraordinary conditions exist. The applicant has stated that he will revise his building plans to satisfy the requirements of Xcel. This may result in the applicant not utilizing the variance approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals. If the variance is not used, it will expire in December 2001. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the final plat with the following conditions: 1. Before the City signs a final plat, the developer shall comply with the following requirements: a. Submit a fully executed trail easement document b. Submit to the City a copy of owner’s policy of title insurance that insures the City’s interest in the plat, in an amount to be determined by the City, unless waived by the City Attorney. c. A development agreement shall be executed between the developer and the City that covers at a minimum: • Tree replacement • Repair and cleaning of public streets • Repair of the trail if damaged during building construction or as a result of building proximity (e.g., stormwater runoff from the building or site.) • Building design and site grading approval process. d. Submit financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit to cover trail repair/reconstruction/maintenance and repair/cleaning of public streets. 2. Within 60 days of final plat approval by the City Council, the subdivider shall record the final plat with the County Recorder. The subdivider shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the City Clerk with a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence of the recording. The subdivider shall also provide a copy of the final plat on disc in an electronic data format. 3. Prior to or simultaneously with recording of the final plat, the trail easement shall be recorded. 45 4. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements, the developer shall furnish the City with evidence of recording of the final plat and trail easement. Attachments: Final Plat Draft Resolution Prepared by: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 46 RESOLUTION NO. 01-039 RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR FINAL PLAT OF UGORETS ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Ugorets Properties, owner and subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as Ugorets Addition has submitted an application for approval of final plat of said subdivision in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder. 2. The proposed final plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park. 3. The proposed plat is situated upon the following described lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit: See Attached Legal Description Conclusion 1. The proposed final plat of Ugorets Addition is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: a. Before the City signs a final plat, the developer shall comply with the following requirements: i) Submit a fully executed trail easement document ii) Submit to the City a copy of owner’s policy of title insurance that insures the City’s interest in the plat, in an amount to be determined by the City, unless waived by the City Attorney. ii) A development agreement shall be executed between the developer and the City that covers at a minimum: • Tree replacement • Repair and cleaning of public streets • Repair of the trail if damaged during building construction or as a result of building proximity (e.g., stormwater runoff from the building or site.) • Building design and site grading approval process. 47 iii) Submit financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit to cover trail repair/reconstruction/maintenance and repair/cleaning of public streets. b. Within 60 days of final plat approval by the City Council, the subdivider shall record the final plat with the County Recorder. The subdivider shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the City Clerk with a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence of the recording. The subdivider shall also provide a copy of the final plat on disc in an electronic data format. c. Prior to or simultaneously with recording of the final plat, the trail easement shall be recorded. d. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements, the developer shall furnish the City with evidence of recording of the final plat and trail easement. provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk as provided for in Sections 14-303(3)(d) and (e) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein. 3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth in Paragraph No. 1 above and Section 14-303(3)(e) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code have been fulfilled. 4. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section 14-303(3)(e), shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 7, 2001 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 48 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item # 7d Meeting of May 7, 2001 7d. First Reading of an Ordinance Amending City Code Chapter 16: Establishing a Food Vending Machine License and Various Temporary Use Permits Proposed ordinance establishes a Vending Machine License category to Business Licenses and establishes Temporary Use Permits for various events occurring on city property, construction debris containers and vehicle parking for persons with disabilities and for persons living near the High School Recommended Action: Motion to adopt first reading of an ordinance that establishes a Food Vending Machine License and various Temporary Use Permits and set second reading for May 21, 2001. Background In December of 2000 Council adopted ordinance # 2181-00 revising the city’s licensing program. The adoption date was critical to coincide with annual license renewals. During the ordinance drafting process, staff had informed Council that some minor additions for licensing would be occurring during this year. Staff is now proposing modifications to the licensing ordinance to authorize issuance of permits for some temporary uses defined in the zoning ordinance which are currently unregulated, dumpsters on streets, and licenses for food vending machine inspection as required by the delegation agreement with the Department of Agriculture. Analysis of Amendments • Food Vending Machine License The City entered into a delegation agreement with the MN Dept. of Agriculture on February 5, 2001. One of the requirements is for the city to ensure compliance of certain types of food vending machines with the State Food Code. Periodic spot inspections will be performed. State statute allows the city to license the owners of vending machines and to charge a maximum of $15 per machine as an annual license fee. Since a few food service companies place many of these machines, the number of additional licenses should be manageable. • Change Article IV Language to Temporary Use “Permits” This change will help to distinguish between annual operating licenses for businesses and contractors and authorization to operate a temporary use for limited time activities. Language originally adopted with ordinance #2181 identified the section as Temporary Use “Licenses”. The word “license” has changed to “permit” in all of Article IV to achieve consistent language with the zoning chapter of the code. 49 • Special Event on City Property – Temporary Use Permit There are currently no authorizations for regulating a temporary use such as a parade, art fair or community festival which occurs on city property, on the public right of way or when street closure is requested *. These activities occur regularly and are often organized by volunteers that change from year to year. Organizers are sometimes unaware of permits and licenses that may be required for raffle, temporary liquor sales, concessions, petting zoos, use of park facilities, etc. The special event permit would provide for a review by staff of all planned activities so that we can be more proactive in providing appropriate city services and helping event organizers to plan their activities. Requests will be evaluated in terms of impacts to traffic and need for appropriate Inspections, Police and Fire Department Services. The permit process allows for recovery of city costs associated with the use where deemed appropriate. There are already effective systems in place for issuance of permits for block parties and use of park facilities. Those successful processes would remain unchanged. This process will be used for evaluating requests for use of the Town Green and rights of way in the Park Commons area and are consistent with zoning ordinance revisions adopted by the Council at the meeting of Monday, March 19, 2001 • Television or Movie Production on City Property – Temporary Use Permit Commercial film productions are becoming more common in St. Louis Park. When a production company wishes to shoot a commercial or film, they often request closure of city streets, barricades and police and emergency service assistance. Their activities sometimes require additional permits or licenses such as for noise, temporary food sales or explosives. Many cities have adopted ordinances regulating film production and have found it an effective mechanism for regulating activities which may be disruptive to traffic and neighborhoods. The permit process allows for recovery of actual city costs incurred with the event through the applicant submitting a cash deposit held in escrow. • Other Temporary Use Permits Proposed Two other permits are also included in the ordinance revisions: construction debris containers (dumpsters) and special parking permits for persons with disabilities and for persons residing near the SLP Senior High School. These permits have been issued by the city for many years. This action would provide authorization for the existing programs and place them in a logical section of the code. * Permits for temporary construction structures, street openings and closures and other use of right of way for construction purposes are regulated through the building and construction permit processes and therefore not addressed. 50 Fees The following fees are proposed for the additional license and permits required in this ordinance. They would be adopted by resolution following the second reading of the ordinance on April 16th: Type Fee Business License Class V-Food Vending Machine (each) $15.00 Temporary Use Permits Television or Movie Production Application $50.00 Fee (non-refundable) Construction Debris Container (dumpster) $15.00 No fee is proposed for the Special Event Permit, as the application process is merely a mechanism for identifying associated licenses and required city services which may warrant payment of a fee. Attachments: Summary of Temporary Use Permits Ordinance Prepared By: Cindy Reichert, City Clerk Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 51 SUMMARY OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED TEMPORARY USE PERMITS Article IV of Licensing Chapter 16 is proposed to be renamed Temporary Use Permits. Uses associated with construction permits are addressed at the time a building permit is issued and have therefore not been included in this section. Use Authorization Temporary Food Service 1976 Code & updated w/Ord. 2181-00 (Dec 2000) Temporary Outdoor Retail Sales 1976 Code & updated w/Ord. 2181-00 (Dec 2000) Circuses, Carnivals, Amusement Rides and Petting Zoo 1976 Code & updated w/Ord. 2181-00 (Dec 2000) Peddlers, Solicitors and Transient Merchants 1976 Code & updated w/Ord. 2181-00 (Dec 2000) Special Event on City Property Proposed – Festival, fair, art fair, parade, community gathering, or promotional event held on city property or on closed right of way in the city. Block parties currently require permit from the city, but no authorization exists in the code. Television or Movie Production on City Property Proposed - All activity related to motion picture or television production on city property or public right of way. Motion picture or television production includes setup, staging, filming, videotaping or tearing down materials or equipment, relating to the production of visual materials to be used in connection with a commercial undertaking, including motion pictures, film shorts, music or entertainment videos, television presentations, advertising, or commercial materials of any kind of motion picture or television production. Construction Debris Container (dumpsters) Permit currently required when placed on city Right of Way, but not authorized by Ordinance. Exempting Disabled Residents and Senior High Area Residents from “no parking” restrictions on streets adjacent to their homes Permit allowing parking currently required but not authorized by Ordinance. 52 ORDINANCE NO. _______-01 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING PORTIONS OF CHAPTERS 16 CONCERNING LICENSING OF BUSINESSES AND ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE CITY THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 16-102 is hereby amended to read as follows: 16-102: Definitions. The following definitions when used in this Chapter shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this Section: AIR Any gaseous matter or particulate matter which, when present in the CONTAMINANT: outdoor atmosphere contributes to a condition of air pollution, including, but not limited to gases, vapors, mists, dust, soot, smoke, fumes, fly ash, cinders, and odors. AIR POLLUTION: The presence in the atmosphere of one or more air contaminant or combinations thereof which is or, may tend to be injurious to human health or welfare or injurious to human, plant, or animal life or property, or that interfere with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property or the conduct of business. AMUSEMENT A business at one location devoted primarily to the operation of ARCADE mechanical or electrical amusement devices and open for public use and participation. AMUSEMENT A mechanical or electrical machine which, upon the insertion of a DEVICE: coin, token or slug, operates or may be operated for use as a game, contest or amusement of any description, or which may be used for any such game, contest or amusement, and which contains no automatic pay-off device for the return of money, coins, checks, tokens, or merchandise, or which provides for no such devices, and shall include pin-ball machines, mechanical miniature pool tables, bowling machines, shuffleboards, electric rifle or gun ranges, miniature mechanical devices and games or amusements patterned after baseball, basketball, hockey, tennis, soccer, juke boxes and similar games, which may be used solely for amusement and not as gambling devices. ATMOSPHERE: The air that envelopes or surrounds the earth. BILLBOARD: A sign which is used for the primary purpose of selling space advertising a product, service, business, or event which is not offered for sale or rent or does not take place on the premises on which the sign is located. BOARDING A food and beverage service establishment where food or beverages, HOUSE: or both, are furnished to five or more regular boarders, whether with or without sleeping accommodations, for periods of one week or more. 53 CITY: The City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota. CITY PROPERTY: Any property owned by the city, including but not limited to municipal buildings, parks or city right of way. COMMERCIAL An amusement arcade, when the arcade is the principal operation of ENTERTAINMENT the business establishment, a roller skating rink, or a movie theater. ESTABLISHMENT: CONSTRUCTION Any roll-off four (4) sided steel container for temporary storage of DEBRIS construction and demolition materials. CONTAINER CONSTRUCTION Any waste building materials, packaging, and rubble resulting DEMOLITION from construction, repair and demolition of buildings. MATERIALS: COURTESY Any bench or seat located on any public sidewalk along a street or BENCH: thoroughfare or on any public right-of-way along a street or thoroughfare or on private property dedicated to public use or authorized for public use by owner. DOG KENNEL: Any place where four or more dogs over the age of 9 weeks are kept for a period longer than 24 hours or any business engaged in the breeding, health care, boarding or sale of dogs. EMISSION: Discharging, releasing, circulating, letting off, raising, liberating, freeing or sending forth into the atmosphere any air contaminant or combinations thereof. ENCLOSED An enclosed building or structure, or part thereof, used for parking, PARKING storage, or maintenance of motor vehicles. FACILITY: FOOD OR Any building, room, stand, enclosure, vehicle, space, area or other BEVERAGE place wherein food or beverages are manufactured, prepared, ESTABLISHMENT: stored, distributed, served, sold or offered for sale to the public at retail, regardless of whether there is a charge for the article, or otherwise provides foods or beverages, or both, for human consumption. FOOD Food vending machines as defined in the Minnesota Statutes VENDING Annotated Agriculture Chapter 28A.09. MACHINE: 54 GARBAGE: Animal and vegetable wastes resulting from the handling, preparation, cooking, and consumption of food. HEALTH The duly appointed health officials of the City of St. Louis Park. AUTHORITY: HEALTH If used at any place in this Chapter and in the requirements adopted DEPARTMENT, by reference shall mean the Health Authority of St. Louis Park. HEALTH OFFICER, STATE BOARD OF HEALTH, BOARD: HEALTH/SPORTS A business, the primary purpose of which is health and fitness, of ESTABLISHMENT: which massage therapy may be a subsidiary and for which the financial records of the establishment are at all times available to the City for inspection. HIGH IMPACT Any business with materials or entertainment provided to the SEXUALLY- public which are principally related to sexual stimulation or ORIENTED gratification other than a limited impact sexually-oriented business. BUSINESS: Examples of a high impact sexually-oriented business include the following: a. a business where sexually-oriented materials are sold, bartered, distributed, leased, furnished, exhibited or otherwise provided for use or entertainment on business premises; b. a business where specified sexual activities (as defined herein) are explicitly verbally described or shown; c. a business where specified anatomical areas (as defined herein) are explicitly verbally described or shown; d. a business providing sexually-oriented materials for off-site use or entertainment, which has a separate area but does not meet the size or other restrictions to qualify as a limited impact sexually-oriented business; and e. a business providing sexually-oriented materials for off-site use or entertainment where the sexually-oriented materials are dispersed within the business rather than isolated in a separate area. HOTEL OR MOTEL: A building, structure, enclosure, or any part thereof used as, maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public and furnishing accommodations for periods of less than one week. LIMITED IMPACT: A business where sexually-oriented materials are sold, bartered, SEXUALLY- distributed, leased, furnished or otherwise provided to the public ORIENTED and which meets the following restrictions: 55 BUSINESS: a. all sexually-oriented materials must be provided for use or entertainment off the business premises only; b. all sexually-oriented materials must be provided from a separate area to which person under the age of 18 are prohibited access; c. the separate area may not exceed a maximum of 20% of the retail floor area of the establishment, or 300 square feet, whichever is less; d. no person outside the separate area shall be able to perceive or observe and sexually-oriented materials at any time, including when someone is entering or exiting the separate area, shopping or purchasing sexually-oriented materials; e. a sign must be displayed on the entrance to the separate area which shall read: “No person under the age of 18 is allowed in this area.” The sign letters shall be a minimum of 2 inches high: and f. the entry into the separate area shall be visible to a employee of the business at all times. LODGING A building, structure, enclosure, or any part thereof used as, ESTABLISHMENT: maintained as, advertised as, or held out to be a place where sleeping accommodations are furnished to the public as regular roomers, for periods of one week or more, and having five or more beds to let to the public. MASSAGE: The rubbing, stroking, kneading, tapping or rolling of the body of another with the hands or objects for the exclusive purpose of physical fitness, health- care referral, relaxation, beautification and for no other purpose. MASSAGE A place providing to the public at large massage services, other THERAPY than a hospital, sanatorium, rest home, nursing home, boarding ESTABLISHMENT: home, or other institution licensed under the provisions of Minnesota Statutes §§ 144.50 - .69. The definition does not include the practice of medicine, surgery, osteopathy, chiropractic, physical therapy or podiatry; and persons duly licensed in this state to practice medicine, surgery, osteopathy, chiropractic, physical therapy or podiatry, licensed nurses and athletic directors and trainers. MULTI-LEVEL A building or structure, or part thereof, in which a structural level PARKING other than a slab on grade is used for parking, storage, or FACILITY: maintenance of motor vehicles. OFF-SITE Any limited impact sexually-oriented business or any high impact CONSUMPTION: sexually-oriented business where sexually-oriented materials are sold, bartered, distributed, leased, furnished or otherwise provided for use or entertainment off the business premises only. 56 ON-SITE Any high impact sexually-oriented business where sexually- CONSUMPTION: oriented materials or entertainment, which are principally related to sexual stimulation or gratification, are offered on the business premises. PAWNBROKER: A person who loans money on deposit or pledge of personal property or other valuable thing; who deals in the purchasing of personal property or other valuable thing on condition of selling that same back again at a stipulated price; or who loans money secured by chattel mortgage or on personal property, taking possession of the property or any part thereof so mortgaged. To the extent that a pawnbroker business includes buying personal property previously used, rented, or leased, the provisions of this Chapter shall be applicable. Any bank, savings and loan association, or credit union shall not be deemed a pawnbroker for purposes of this Chapter. PEDDLER: Any person with no fixed place of business who goes from house to house carrying or transporting goods, wares or merchandise and offering or exposing the same for sale, or making sales and deliveries to purchasers of the same. PERSON: An individual, proprietorship, partnership, corporation, association, or other legal entity. POOL: Any structure, chamber, or tank containing an artificial body of water for swimming, diving, relaxation, or recreational use including special purpose pools and wading pools. PRIVATE A pool connected with a single-family residence or owner- RESIDENTIAL occupied duplex, located on private property under the control of POOL: the homeowner, the use of which is limited to family members or the family's invited guests. A private residential pool is not a pool used as part of a business. PROCESS: Any action or operation: (a) which by physical action results in a change in location, form, or physical properties of a material; (b) which by chemical action results in a change in chemical composition, chemical properties, or physical properties of a material; or (c) which creates or establishes a condition or situation which produces air contaminants. PUBLIC SANITARY A pool, whirlpool, sauna (dry or steam), public bath or shower, FACILITY: tanning beds, or similar facility. PUBLIC Any pool, other than a private residential pool, intended to be used 57 SWIMMING POOL: collectively by numbers of persons for swimming and bathing, operated by any person as defined herein, whether that person be the owner, lessee, operator, licensee, or concessionaire, regardless of whether a fee is charged for such use. A public pool includes, but is not limited to, pools operated by a person in a park, school, licensed child care facility, group home, motel, camp, resort, apartment building, club, condominium, hotel, manufactured home park, or political subdivision. REFUSE: All wastes (except body wastes), including but not limited to rubbish, tin cans, papers, Christmas trees, cardboard, grass clippings, ashes, glass jar and bottles, and wood normally resulting from the operation of a household or business establishments, but not including garbage, sod, dirt, rocks, cement, trees, leaves, hedge or tree trimmings, or anything one person could not lift easily. RESIDENTIAL Any sale conducted at a residential premises where the property GARAGE/YARD sold consists only of items owned by the owner or renter of the SALE: premises at which the sale takes place or by friends of such owner or renter, and where the sale is conducted by the owner of the premises or friends, not by an agent or any other person to whom a commission or fee is paid. RIGHT OF WAY: The property owned by the City for the construction and maintenance of the roadway and the improvements of the roadside. ROLLER Any room, place, or space open to public patronage where SKATING RINK: facilities are available for roller skating, wherein the public may participate, and at which admission may be had by the public by payment directly or indirectly of an admission fee or price, including a fee for membership in a club, the price of food, or payment for any other form of amusement offered in or from licensed premises. SAFETY MANUAL: Shall mean the current edition of the Temporary Traffic Control Zone Layouts Field Manual being part of the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MnMUTCD). SAUNA: Any public facility used for the purpose of bathing, reducing or relaxing, utilizing steam or heat as a cleaning, reducing or relaxing agent. SELF-SERVICE Self-service merchandising shall mean open displays of tobacco, MERCHANDISING: tobacco products, or tobacco related devices where any person shall have access to the product without the assistance or intervention of an employee of the premise maintaining the merchandising. Self-service merchandising shall not include vending machines. SEXUALLY- Any limited impact sexually-oriented business or any high impact ORIENTED sexually-oriented business. BUSINESS: 58 SEXUALLY- Visual, printed or aural materials and other objects or devices ORIENTED which: MATERIALS: a. contain, depict or describe specified sexual activities or specified anatomical areas; b. are marked for use in conjunction with, or are primarily used only with or during the specified sexual activities described in the following subsections of the definition of “specialized sexual activities”: subsections b, c, f or as part of the binding, fettering, or other physical restraint described in subsection e. SOLICITOR: Any person who goes from house to house soliciting or taking or attempting to take orders for the purchase of any goods, wares, or merchandise, including magazines, books, periodicals or personal property of any nature whatsoever for delivery in the future, or orders for the performance of maintenance or repair services in or about the home or place of business, such as furnace cleaning, roof repair or blacktopping. It also means any person who canvasses, solicits or calls from house to house for contributions or support for any charitable, religious, civic, educational, philanthropic, social service, welfare, or eleemosynary organization. SOLID WASTE: Garbage, refuse, sludge from a water supply treatment plant or air contaminant treatment facility, and other discarded waste materials and sludges, in solid, semisolid, liquid, or contained gaseous form, resulting from industrial, commercial, mining, and agricultural operations, and from community activities, but does not include hazardous waste; animal waste used as fertilizer; earthen fill, boulders, rock; sewage sludge; solid or dissolved material in domestic sewage or other common pollutants in water resources, such as silt, dissolved or suspended solids in industrial waste water effluents or discharges which are point sources subject to permits under Section 402 of the federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, dissolved materials in irrigation return flows; or source, special nuclear, or by-product material as defined by The Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. SOLID WASTE Any person who shall offer to, or engage in the collection of COLLECTOR: solid waste from any public or private institution, commercial establishment, or residential dwelling located within the City of St. Louis Park. SPECIFIED Means: ANATOMICAL AREAS: a. less than completely and opaquely covered human genitals, pubic area, buttock, anus or female breast below a point immediately above the tope of the aerola; and 59 b. human male genitals in a state of sexual arousal, whether or not completely or opaquely covered. SPECIFIED Means: SEXUAL ACTIVITIES: a. actual or simulated sexual intercourse of any kind involving two humans, or one human and an animal or object; b. actual or simulated masturbation; c. actual or simulated sadism or masochism; d. actual or simulated sexual stimulation of any kind; e. situations involving a person who is nude, clad in undergarments, or in a revealing costumes, and who is engaged in activities involving binding, fettering or other physical restraint of that or another person; and f. sexually-oriented touching of an animal by a human. SPECIAL A pool intended to accommodate a use other than normal PURPOSE POOL: swimming, diving, or wading. A special purpose pool includes, but is not limited to, spa pools, pools used for water therapy, dedicated plunge pools, flume water slides, and wave pools. TANNING A location, place, area, structure, or business or a part thereof FACILITY: which provides consumers access to tanning equipment. Tanning facility includes, but is not limited to, tanning salons, health clubs, apartments, or condominiums regardless of whether a fee is charged for access to the tanning equipment. TEMPORARY The outdoor sale of goods or merchandise to the general public for OUTDOOR RETAIL personal or household consumption at a single location for less SALES: than 180 days, excluding residential garage/yard sales. TOBACCO OR Any substance or item containing tobacco leaf, including but not TOBACCO limited to, cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco or chewing tobacco and PRODUCT: other forms of tobacco leaf prepared in such a manner as to be suitable for chewing, sniffing, or smoking. TOBACCO Any tobacco product as well as any pipe, rolling papers, or other RELATED devices used in a manner which enables the chewing, sniffing, or DEVICES: smoking of tobacco or tobacco products. 60 TOBACCO Tobacco Vending machine shall mean any type of device which VENDING dispenses tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco related devices upon MACHINE: the insertion of money, tokens, or other form of payment directly into the machine. TRANSIENT: Any person who engages in, does, or transacts any temporary and transient business in this state, either in one locality, or in traveling from place to place in this state, selling goods, wares, and merchandise; and who, for the purpose of carrying on such business, hire, lease, occupy, or use a building, structure, vacant lot, or railroad car for the exhibition and sale of such goods, wares, and merchandise. The term "transient merchant" does not include a seller or exhibitor in a firearms collector show involving two or more sellers or exhibitors. WADING POOLS: Any pool used or designed to be used exclusively for wading or bathing and having a maximum depth of 24 inches. SECTION 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Section 16-304 is hereby amended to read as follows: 16-304: Food and Beverage Establishments. A. License Required: 1. It is unlawful for any person to operate a food or beverage establishment or food vending machine without obtaining a license from the City. 2. One license may be issued to a single applicant for multiple food establishments within a single building or establishment when the owner of all food establishments is the same. 3. Each food vending machine must have a valid city-issued license decal affixed in a visible location. B. Classification of Food and Beverage Establishments and Food Vending Machines. The City will classify each food and beverage establishment based on the use occurring, in accordance with the food code, into one of the following categories before a license is issued: Class H Plus - Multiple use license permitting 3 or more uses of any risk class to operate. Class H – High risk use license permitting: up to 2 high risk uses or a single high risk use with a single low or medium risk use. Class M – Medium risk use license permitting a single medium risk use. Class L – Low risk use license permitting a single low risk use. 61 Class V – Food vending machines. C. Regulations and Standards. All food and beverage establishments and food vending machines licensed under this Section shall comply with the City's Food Code under Section 11-1201 of the City Code SECTION 3. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 16-401 through 16-405 of Article IV is hereby amended to read as follows: Replace “License” with “Permit” throughout. SECTION 4. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code is hereby amended to add: 16-406: Special Event on City Property A. Purpose and Intent. This article is intended to provide for the issuance of permits for any festival, fair, art fair, parade, community gathering, or promotional event held on city property or on any right of way in the city. B. Permit Required No person shall hold or operate a special event as described above on any public street, road, alley, right-of-way, public facility or public place owned by the city, or over which the city has the right of control for a special event as described above, without having first obtained a permit for such use from the city. C. Exceptions 1. Activities conducted by or held by the city are exempt from all provisions of this section. 2. Community gathering applications for block parties are exempt from the seven (7) day advance application submittal requirement. D. Application. 1. Applications for a permit under this division shall be made to the city in accordance with section 16-106. 2. Applications must be submitted at least seven (7) working days prior to the scheduled special event and or use of the right of way. 3. All permitees shall agree by obtaining a permit to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the city from any and all losses, costs, damages and expenses on account of activity of the permitee on the public property which is the subject of the permit. 4. A permit issued under this division may require the permitee to reimburse the city for costs incurred in the use of city equipment or any assignment of municipal employees, including police and fire personnel, to duty in connection with the activities which are the subject of the permit. The issuing authority shall provide the permit applicant with a list of anticipated costs after conducting the review provided for. 62 E. Regulations Adopted. 1. A permit will not be issued by the city, if it is determined that the activity would result in undue traffic congestion, be unduly disruptive to the normal activities of citizens, create an unreasonable risk to persons or property, or otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals or welfare. 2. The city may require that the actual conduct of a particular activity or any portion thereof only be accomplished with the direct approval and/or supervision of the police department and/or fire officials, or any other technical advisors deemed necessary to protect persons or property as it relates to the activity for which the permit has been issued. 3. The public property to which the permit relates shall at all times be made accessible to fire, police and other emergency personnel. The permit in no way shall limit the authority of fire, police, or emergency personnel to protect the public health, safety or welfare. 4. The permitee shall be responsible for restoring any area used pursuant to a permit issued under this division to an equal or better condition as was prior to use by the permitee. 5. The city may prepare an invoice to the permitee for services provided during the event. Permitee must submit payment for services in accordance with statute. 6. Receiving a special event permit does not waive any other license, permit or other requirements of this code. 16-407: Television or Movie Production on City Property A. Purpose and intent. This article is intended to provide for the issuance of permits for any and all activity related to television or movie production on city property or public right of way. For the purposes of this article, motion picture or television production includes but is not limited to, setup, staging, filming, videotaping or tearing down materials or equipment, relating to the production of visual materials to be used in connection with a commercial undertaking, including, but not limited to, motion pictures, film shorts, music or entertainment videos, television presentations, advertising, or commercial materials of any kind of motion picture or television production. B. Permit Required No person shall use any public street, road, alley, right-of-way, public facility or public place owned by the city, or over which the city has the right of control for motion picture or television production, without having first obtained a permit for such use from the city. C. Exceptions 1. The provisions of this section shall not apply to the filming or videotaping of persons, scenes, occurrences or events, which is done for news gathering purposes in the 63 general public interest, for use in criminal investigations by law enforcement agencies or for use in any judicial proceedings. 2. The provisions of this section do not apply to, nor are they intended to affect, any motion picture or television studio operating at an established or fixed place of business within the city. 3. Activities conducted or held by the city are exempt from the provisions of this section. D. Application. 1. Applications must be submitted to the City seven (7) business prior to the scheduled event. 2. A security deposit in the amount of the city estimate of services will be collected before a permit is issued and held in escrow until after the scheduled event is complete. The deposit shall be either cash or a cashiers check. 3. No permit shall be issued under this article until the applicant for the permit provides a certificate of insurance to the city, showing combined single limit coverage for bodily injury and property damage of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000.00), and basic workers’ compensation insurance, as provided in the laws of the state. This certificate of insurance shall name the city as additionally insured. If the city determines that the risks inherent in the proposed activity would not adequately be covered by the basic coverage stated herein, the city may require that a higher level of insurance coverage be obtained prior to issuance of the permit. 4. All permitees shall agree by obtaining a permit to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the city from any and all losses, costs, damages and expenses on account of activity of the permittee on the public property which is the submit of the permit. 5. The city shall review the application with the assistance of fire, police, risk management and traffic engineering officials, and such other members of the city staff as may be required by the nature of the activity proposed for the permit. 6. Any permit issued under this article shall require the permittee to reimburse the city for any costs incurred in the use of city equipment or any assignment of municipal employees, including police and fire personnel, to duty in connection with the activities which are the subject of the permit. The issuing authority shall provide the permit applicant with a list of anticipated costs after conducting the review before a permit is issued. E. Application Fee. A non-refundable permit application fee, as set by city council resolution, must be submitted at the time of application. F. Regulations Adopted. 64 1. The city may impose reasonable general conditions to govern the relationship of the city and the permittee in respect to the health, safety, and general public welfare as it relates to the activity for which the permit has been issued. The city may require that the actual conduct of a particular activity or any portion thereof only be accomplished with the direct approval and/or supervision of the police department and/or fire officials, or any other technical advisors deemed necessary to protect persons or property. 2. The public property to which the permit relates shall at all times be made accessible to fire, police and other emergency personnel. The permit in no way shall limit the authority of fire, police, or emergency personnel to protect the public health, safety or welfare. 3. The permittee shall be responsible for restoring any area used pursuant to a permit issued under this division to equal or better condition as was prior to use by permittee. 4. The information required by subsection (a) may be amended by the authorized agent of the permit holder, provided that such amendments be submitted in writing and receive the written approval of the city. 5. A permit will not be issued by the city, if it is determined that the activity would result in undue traffic congestion, be unduly disruptive to the normal activities of citizens, create an unreasonable risk to persons or property, or otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals or welfare. When the application for a permit is denied, the reason or reasons therefor shall be given. 16-408: Construction Debris Container (Dumpsters) A. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to establish minimum standards for construction debris containers (dumpster) for the storage of any construction or demolition debris and require permits for placement on city property. B. Permit Required. Any construction debris container placed on city property must have a permit. C. Application. 1. Application shall be made to the city on a form provided by the city. The city shall review the application with the assistance of fire, police, risk management and traffic engineering officials, and such other members of the city staff as may be required. 2. When the applicant has complied with the requirements of this article, a permit shall be issued by the city, unless it is determined that the activity would result in undue traffic congestion, be unduly disruptive to the normal activities of citizens, create an unreasonable risk to persons or property, or otherwise be detrimental to the public health, safety, morals or welfare. When the application for a permit is denied, the reason or reasons therefor shall be given. 65 D. Fees. The permit fee, as determined by resolution adopted by City Council, must be submitted by the applicant prior to issuance of a permit. E. Regulations Adopted. 1. The construction debris container shall be as follows: four (4) sided industry standard steel container; water tight; clearly labeled with the name and phone number of the container owner. The construction and demolition debris stored within the construction debris container shall not exceed three (3) feet in height from the top of the construction debris container; shall not be used for storage of any refuse other than construction or demolition debris. If to be located in the roadway, the construction debris container shall be placed on 2” x 12” timber pads to avoid having direct roller contract with the payment. 2. The construction debris container shall be located outside of the city right-of-way whenever possible. The construction debris container shall not be located in the city right-of-way without first obtaining a permit for the same from the city. The construction debris container shall not be located on an individual lot or parcel for more than six (6) months during any twelve month period; the construction debris container shall not be located on the city right-of-way for more than seven (7) days. 3. The construction debris container shall be placed in a location that will assure the least possible obstruction to pedestrian and vehicular traffic, as well as provide for the safety of the general public and residents living in the area. Any construction debris container located on city property or any vehicle driving surface must have reflective safety material on all corners. Other Safety related items may be required as a condition of the permit and may include flashers, delineation devices, signage, cones, etc. Should temporary traffic lane closures be required, the procedures for start term stationary closures, as stated in the safety manual, shall be followed. 16-409: Special Parking Permit for Persons with Disabilities and for Persons Residing in the Vicinity of the St. Louis Park Senior High School. A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide a permit exempting residents from “no parking” restrictions on streets immediately adjacent to the homes of disabled persons and persons residing in the vicinity of the St. Louis Park Senior High School. B. Application. The person requesting the permit shall make application to the city on a form provided by the city. The city shall review the application with the assistance of fire, police, risk management and traffic engineering officials, and such other members of the city staff as may be required. C. Regulations Adopted. When the applicant has complied with the regulations of this article, a permit shall be issued by the city, unless it is determined that parking in the no-parking zone would result in undue traffic congestion, be unduly disruptive to the normal activities of citizens, create an unreasonable risk to persons or property, or otherwise be detrimental to the 66 public health, safety, morals or welfare. When the application for a permit is denied, the reason or reasons therefor shall be given D. Exception. This permit does not exempt vehicles from the provisions of section 30- 153 regarding 12 hour parking restrictions. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect June 1, 2001. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council _________ City Manager Mayor Attest:: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney 67 CONSENT ITEM # 1A City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes - March 21, 2001 Second Floor Conference Room - City Hall ______________________________________________________________________________ Present Commission Members: Marc Berg, Cassandra Boddy, Jake Feldman, Herb Isbin, Kristi Rudelius-Palmer, Kristin Siegesmund, Chris Smith and Emily Wallace-Jackson Staff: Martha McDonell, staff liaison, Lynn Schwartz, recording secretary, and Jennifer Oftelie, intern Call to Order Vice Chair Kristin Siegesmund called the meeting to order at 7:06 p.m. February Minutes: Moved by Herb Isbin and seconded by Chris Smith to accept the February minutes with a minor correction. Motion passed unanimously. March Agenda: Moved by Cassandra Boddy and seconded by Marc Berg to approve the agenda with the addition of: 1) Human Rights essay contest winners and future guidelines and 2) commission action plan and project assignments. Motion passed unanimously. New Business Designate New Chairperson: Martha McDonell reported that Lynn Littlejohn has resigned from the commission so a new chairperson and vice-chair must be appointed. Herb Isbin nominated Kristen Siegesmund for chairperson; seconded by Chris Smith. Marc Berg offered to serve as vice-chairperson. Members agreed to accept Berg’s offer. Motion passed unanimously. Old Business Essay Contest: Jake Feldman, Cassandra Body, Marc Berg and Emily Siegesmund reported their recommendations for the winner of the Human Rights essay contest. After a discussion of the merits of the four entrant’s essays, members agreed to forward Shalisa Wilson’s essay, “The Forgotten Children,” to the state contest. Members then discussed what kind of prize offered an appropriate reward for the students’ efforts as well as an incentive for future essay writers. Suggestions included: a small cash award, a certificate and public recognition, or a book on a human rights topic. Kristi Rudelius-Palmer suggested that the teachers who participated should also be recognized or sent a letter of appreciation. Moved by Kristen Siegesmund and seconded by Chris Smith to give the winner a $25 award and the book, Human Rights Here and Now. All other entrants will receive a certificate of participation and a copy of Human Rights Here and Now. The participants will also be invited to the City Council for a brief recognition ceremony. Commissioners agreed to ask the City Council for a presentation ceremony at the Council’s April 16th meeting. Martha McDonell will contact Shalisa Wilson to notify her of the event and her award. 68 Annual Report: The commission would like to present its annual report and proposed work plan to the City Council at its April 23rd study session. 2001 Work Plan: Kristin Siegesmund led a discussion to clarify work projects and assignments. Community Events:  Children First Ice Cream Social: Betty Merritt, Emily Wallace-Jackson and Martha McDonell agreed to plan the commission’s booth. Herb Isbin will check the library for books that might be used for a display. (The Ice Cream Social is Sunday, May 20 from 1 to 5 p.m.)  Human Rights Award: Members agreed to refine the award criteria at the August meeting. The contest will begin this autumn, and the award winner will be selected in December.  Block Captain/Neighborhood Involvement: Members agreed to brainstorm ideas on how better to reach out to neighborhoods. Members discussed using mobile City Hall to visit neighborhood events. Kristi Rudelius-Palmer, Kristin Siegesmund, Jake Feldman and Cassandra Boddy agreed to work on this project.  Parktacular: Commissioners will work with Human Mosaic to help create a float or other item that could be used in the June 13th Parktacular parade. Members discussed asking the City Council for funding to help defray float expenses.  USA Make A Difference Day: This observance is set for the fourth Saturday of each October. Commissioners agreed to postpone discussion of this project to a future meeting. Educational Activities:  Promoting Tolerance: Commissioners discussed a project that might involve ethnic food or other activities to represent the community’s diversity in a fun program. Representation might be based on new census data. Members also discussed sponsoring a forum or town hall discussion series on a human rights topic or current event.  News Articles: Jake Feldman and Kristen Siegesmund offered to write articles (census data, for example) that would promote public awareness of diversity. School Support:  Essay Contest: Cassandra Boddy recommended that the commission work with the schools to get the essay topic into the basic school curriculum.  School District Strategic Plan: Members suggested providing diversity resources to ECFE and other preschool and parent education programs  Human Mosaic: If the commission sponsors a town hall, it could be done in conjunction with Human Mosaic’s Diversity Week (May 21 – 25). A commission-sponsored event could be held at the High School. Members also suggested helping Human Mosaic broaden some of its efforts—such as the videotape distribution—to make their work available to the larger community. Reports Commissioner Reports: Herb Isbin reported on the League of Minnesota Human Rights Commissions’ campaign for community leaders to sign a Personal Action Pledge. Signers promise to be a positive force in the community, examine biases, speak out against intolerance, 69 and celebrate diversity. Isbin felt the commission should support the statewide campaign. Commissioners agreed to raise the issue during their presentation to the City Council. If the council supports the concept, council members could sign the pledge at their April meeting when the essay contest members are honored. Isbin also urged members to attend presentations by the League of Minnesota Human Rights Commissions. In addition, Isbin said members who wish to receive the magazine, The Rights Stuff, should call the Minnesota Department of Human Rights at 651/296-9062. Emily Wallace-Jackson reported on her presentation to the School Board. The board indicated it would notify the commission when issues surrounding the Boy Scouts stance or ethnographic study arise. Jake Feldman shared his concern about a policy related to the Youth in Aids Project. Currently, information is shared only with male students; Feldman felt the same information should be shared with female students. Staff Report: Martha McDonell reported that the commission received an inquiry about the legality of a health club’s policy of excluding men. Chris Smith sent a letter replying that the Minnesota Human Rights Act provides an exclusion that allows restricting membership in athletic programs to one sex if the restrictions are necessary to preserve the unique character of the program and do not reduce athletic opportunities for the other sex. This exception has been interpreted to mean that health clubs may legally restrict membership to one sex . Members thanked Smith for responding to the inquiry. Set Agenda For Next Meeting Members agreed to move a discussion of essay contest guidelines to the April meeting. Adjournment Moved by Marc Berg and seconded by Chris Smith to adjourn. Motion passed unanimously. With no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:14 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lynn Schwartz, Recording Secretary 70 CONSENT ITEM # 1B PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION Minutes from Thursday, February 22, 2001 at 7 p.m. The Rec Center Banquet Room MEMBERS PRESENT: Jeff Davidman, Richard Johnson, Nancy Nelson, LayneOtteson, Tom Worthington MEMBERS ABSENT: Gretchen Halverson, David Peters, Ashley Tomoson STAFF PRESENT: Rick Birno, Jim Vaughan, Stacy Voelker, Cindy Walsh 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 8:10 p.m. 2. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA: Moved item 6c, Program Report by Jim Vaughan, to agenda item 4a and moved 5b prior to 5a. *3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF JANUARY 17, 2001: Nancy Nelson motioned to approve the minutes, Dick Johnson seconded. The motion passed 5-0. 4. NEW BUSINESS A. Memorials for Trees and Benches by Jim Vaughan: Jim Vaughan distributed and briefly discussed the procedure for tree memorials and park bench donations. The number of requests received are approximately three to five for tree memorials and two to four for bench donations. The Commission discussed the procedure and comments previously heard from the community. Commission suggested having one place in the City with a kiosk listing the memorial name, the park it’s located in, and the type of donation versus having monuments in the ground. The Commission voted to eliminate the ground monuments by the donated tree and agreed the bench plaque is not an issue at this time. Mr. Vaughan distributed The Friends of the Parks brochure for the Commission to review. B. 2001 Park Project Update: Cindy Walsh reviewed the Capital Improvement Projects scheduled for 2001 with the Commission. Ms. Walsh also briefed them on tree replacements; basketball court reconstruction at Wolfe park; new playground equipment in Justad, Rainbow, Blackstone and Oak Hill parks; tennis court resurfacing at Northside Park, Senior High and Aquila Park; new fencing at Paul Frank field; new floating boardwalk at Wesetwood Nature Center; trail overlay in Jersey Park; and the upgrade will begin in Oak Park Village. Ms. Walsh described the National Tennis Tournament which will be coming in August and advised which tennis courts they are using. Staff is working on concession packages or incentives for the event and advised the event is very good for the community. Ms. Walsh also informed the Commission of the 71 reconstruction at the Junior High/Lamplighter site with Stormwater Management supplying the funds. 5. OLD BUSINESS A. 2001 Work Plan Approval: Commission discussed the specific items on the work plan. Tom Worthington suggested increasing the City’s facilitation with Associations and adding, “Facilitate a Youth Sports Summit for St. Louis Park” to the work plan. The Commission also decided to remove “Fundraising Event for Scholarships” from the work plan. Mr. Birno and Ms. Walsh briefly explained the master park plan, which includes a master park inventory. The Commission agreed to keep this item on the annual work plan. Staff will bring the adjusted work plan to the next meeting for approval. B. Fundraising Event Schedule & Sub-Commitee: The Commission discussed removing a fund raising event for one year and reviewing if it will be done next year. The Commission feels community involvement is important and inquired if anyone is interested in taking charge of the event. Members of the Commission indicated they do not have time to commit to the event at this time. Nancy Nelson inquired if the City needs scholarship money and if there are other ways to obtain it. Mr. Birno advised the City does not need the money but perhaps there are other ways to earn money. The Commission discussed Youth Activities Grant money received in past years and Nancy Nelson volunteer to complete the application in which Mr. Birno suggested applying in the fall. Dick Johnson inquired if suspending the event would make the Commission look unorganized. Mr. Davidman advised he has spoken with Council members and feels they understand the Commission’s motive. Jeff Davidman motioned to remove the “Fundraising Event for Scholarships” from the annual work plan, and Tom Worthington seconded. The motion passed 5-0. 6. COMMUNICATIONS A. Chair: Mr. Davidman, Ms. Nelson and Mr. Birno attended the Boards and Commissions banquet which was a very nice event. Also, they were running a pole “how to residents feel about the City” in which the City scored high (92%) and Parks and Recreation scored 80% approval rating which was the highest among the departments. Ms. Walsh advised that staff does a large amount of public notification which help’s the resident’s feel like they are a part of the item. Mr. Johnson commended the Park Perspective. Mr. Johnson commented on the City’s effort for on-going workplace training which he feels attribute to the approval rating. Mr. Davidman inquired on the status of David Peters in which Stacy Voelker updated the Commission that Mr. Peters is unable to attend meetings in the future, but willing to assist the Commission. Ms. Voelker has asked for his resignation and will begin the process of replacing him when received. 72 B. Commissioners: Nancy Nelson advised of the youth summit meeting to be held at the Junior high. The Meeting is for the youth to advise what they want from the Community. Ms. Nelson volunteered to attend as a Commission representative. Layne Otteson was contacted by the School Board to present the highlights from 2000 and the 2001 work plan to the Board on the evening of Monday, January 26th. As Mr. Otteson is unable to attend, Stacy Voelker will contact Gretchen Halverson, a school representative, to see if she is able to attend. Dick Johnson feels the Task Force should have more input in the decision making process in the details of Town Green. Cindy Walsh advised the consultant works on the details as it has been found too hard for a larger group to come to a decision. Mr. Birno also advised of the timeline for the project. Mr. Worthington indicated he also feels frustrated with the process but understands the deadlines and procedures and that the role of the Task Force is to support the developer and staff. Layne Otteson advised the Commission that the developer at this point owns the project, not the City. Jeff Davidman feels the Task Force was created as a focus group. Mr. Johnson inquired on the funding for the new programs. Ms. Walsh indicated that the developer has advised that the City needs the money to program it. Mr. Worhington inquired on the status of Oak Hill Park and the phasing. Ms. Walsh advised staff would present phasing ideas to the City Council after the Town Green area is presented. C. Program Report - Jim Vaughan: Jim Vaughan introduced himself and described his position in the Department. Mr. Vaughan distributed and briefly explained a list of spring and summer projects which include tree trimming, tree injection for Dutch Elm Disease, and the tree replacement system. Mr. Vaughan also briefed the Commission on boulevard tree planting planned for this year. Mr. Vaughan expressed how good the winter skating season was this year due to the cold winter. Mr. Birno and Ms. Walsh explained the ice condition in Wolfe Park to the Commission. Mr. Vaughan informed the Commission what the “sentence to serve” workers do and he also explained the difference between them and Tree Trust. Mr. Vaughan also advised the Commission he works with the neighborhood revitalization grants for neighborhood parks and the adopt-a-park or adopt-a-garden program. D. Director’s Report: Ms. Walsh reminded the Commission of the Town Green and Commission meetings in March. 7. ADJOURNMENT: Layne Otteson motioned, Nancy Nelson seconded, to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 9:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Stacy M. Voelker Department Secretary 73 CONSENT ITEM # 1C OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 2001--6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Ken Gothberg, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian, Sally Velick MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Michael Garelick, Dennis Morris STAFF PRESENT: Janet Jeremiah, Janice Loftus, Peter Vickerman, Nancy Sells 1. Call to Order - Roll Call Chair Velick called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes of April 4, 2001 Mr. Gothberg moved approval of the minutes and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0 with Gothberg, Robertson, Timian and Velick voting in favor. 3. Hearings A. Case 01-16-ZA Amendments to Zoning Ordinance – Tree Replacement Amendments to Sections 14:3-1 and 14:4-11 relative to definition of significant tree, restrictions for tree removal and standards for replacement. Peter Vickerman, Community Development Intern, presented a staff report. Chair Velick said it appears that the proposed formula will result in fewer trees being replaced. Mr. Vickerman responded that is correct. Chair Velick asked why fewer trees replaced would be recommended. Mr. Vickerman said the current St. Louis Park formula is as strong a formula as exists in the Twin Cities area. Staff recognized a tension between the desire to have trees and the desire to have urban style development. The tension created situations where developers weren’t able to get all the trees on site, so it was desired to slightly reduce that formula. 74 Ms. Jeremiah added that one of the principal points of the formula is to provide a disincentive for removing all of the trees on the site, or from taking out a very large percentage of trees on site. The formula gives a break to developers removing a smaller percentage. She explained that developers can remove up to 20% of the trees on a site before replacement is required. However, developers will still need to replace 120% if they remove all of the trees. Mr. Robertson asked why the increase of 8 inches to 10 inches for Category A significant tree size is proposed. He added that tweaking that definition and lowering the curve appears to be doubly hard on tree preservation. Mr. Vickerman responded that 10 inches was proposed since those trees grow very fast. Mr. Robertson asked if any other communities use a 120% formula? Mr. Vickerman said that under Eden Prairie’s ordinance theoretically 133% could be replaced if 100% of the trees were removed. He said because of Eden Prairie’s significant tree size overall they would have a lower tree replacement. Based on the formula, Eden Prairie’s replacement looks higher but including all the other factors their replacement would be slightly lower. Mr. Timian asked if the ordinance is designed for redevelopment projects only. Mr. Vickerman answered that the ordinance is designed for redevelopment and new development, including additions. It does not apply to existing single family homes. Mr. Timian asked if some of the available redevelopment land is marginal land with stands of trees. Mr. Vickerman responded that the ordinance does show great concern for remaining trees as there are major penalities if all trees on a site are removed. Total number of trees on site are measured in caliper inches. Mr. Gothberg asked how well the cash-in-lieu of trees program has worked. Mr. Vickerman answered that he understands from discussions with Jim Vaughan, City Forester, and the Park and Rec Board, that trees have been planted in this program, including boulevard trees replacing Dutch Elm diseased trees. Ms. Jeremiah added that there is currently a surplus in that budget because a few large projects recently have contributed to that fund. She said the fund will be used quickly with tree planting programs that exist. Ms. Jeremiah said staff doesn’t see that the fund will satisfy all of the tree planting needs of the community for any foreseeable future. There will still need to be additional planting programs because there are typically losses due to disease and storm damage. 75 Chair Velick asked about tree loss at the CSM/Rottlund project at Zarthan and 394. She asked how the new formula would impact that development. Mr. Vickerman referred to a chart illustrating the current and proposed ordinance. He explained that under the proposed ordinance, the number of replacement trees for CSM would be slightly lower but the cash-in-lieu fee would be higher because of the $90.00 fee/caliper inch. Chair Velick commented that 86 trees would have been lost. Mr. Vickerman said it would be 86 caliper inches worth of trees. He stated that depending on the size of tree, between 9 and 10 trees would not be counted in the proposed ordinance. He explained that comes from the reduction in the formula but also in the significant tree size. Mr. Vickerman said the end result is a greater impact on tree planting in the future because of the fee increase. Mr. Timian asked if St. Louis Park’s urban forest is gaining or losing trees overall. Mr. Vickerman said the urban forest is losing trees overall. He said that Jim Vaughan, City Forester, has reported that most of the trees lost in the City were in single family residential neighborhoods. This ordinance doesn’t affect single family. Mr. Timian asked if replanting is occurring in neighborhoods with some of the cash-in- lieu dollars. Mr. Vickerman responded that trees are being planted in public ways, parks and along boulevards. Ms. Jeremiah said both in staff discussions and in the City Council study session, interest was indicated in developing incentives for single family homeowners to replace trees lost to disease. She said there is a program where trees can be obtained at a substantially reduced price through the City, but the program is not well utilized. Chair Velick opened the public hearing. Steven Stoick, 8812 West 36th Street, asked when the tree ordinance originated. Mr. Vickerman responded that the original tree ordinance came about in 1992 when the new Zoning Ordinance was adopted. Chair Velick closed the public hearing as there were no others wishing to speak. Mr. Robertson stated that the 20% loss is friendly to the small developer and maintaining the 120% replacement for total removal works very well. He said he supports the proposed ordinance. 76 Chair Velick said she would like to see effective marketing put in place for tree replacement programs for single family homeowners. She said she is concerned that the proposed ordinance might give the City fewer trees in the long run. Mr. Timian asked if an addition can be made to the proposed ordinance requiring that a portion of the cash-in-lieu dollars be used to market the community tree replacement program. Ms. Jeremiah stated that the City Attorney has been asked if there is flexibility in spending the funds for something other than tree planting. The City Attorney’s response was that there has to be a clear link between trees removed and trees planted. Ms. Jeremiah said she would revisit the question with regard to marketing another tree planting program. Ms. Jeremiah commented that the ordinance is complicated and she wanted to clarify that the measurement is in caliper inches and trees do grow. She explained that if there is a ten inch tree on a site, ten caliper inches are replaced not by planting one tree but by planting four new trees at two and one-half inches each. Ms. Jeremiah said although the ordinance is being tweaked, generally many more trees are being planted than are being removed. She explained that has led to the problem of getting them all on site. Many small trees are being planted which will grow and result in more large trees in the future. Mr. Gothberg moved to recommend approval of the proposed ordinance and an amendment to the general fee resolution that would add a $90 per caliper inch fee for cash-in-lieu of trees. The motion passed on a vote of 3-0-1 with Gothberg, Robertson and Timian voting in favor and Velick abstaining. 4. New Business A. Other New Business i. Public Art – Jack Becker Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation, said that the City is taking an opportunity to explore what public art might mean to St. Louis Park. She introduced Jack Becker, of Forecast Public Artworks, a consultant with the City. The City would like to obtain feedback from stakeholder groups regarding their views on public art. Ms. Walsh said that a public art forum and focus group will be held on May 20. Mr. Becker provided a background on Forecast Public Artworks. He explained that the City is in the investigative stages of public input regarding public art. He distributed a survey to commissioners. Mr. Becker stated that a report of findings will be developed in the next three months. 77 Mr. Gothberg commented that permanent public art should represent the values of a community. He said there is a lot of room for discussion and improvement of public art. Chair Velick said she would like to see public art as a welcome to City Hall. Mr. Robertson said public art is a wonderful thing to be exploring. He said that Park Commons provides an opportunity to push public art ahead. Mr. Becker said that Forecast is working with TOLD Development on the Town Green project. Chair Velick asked how other communities pay for public art. Mr. Becker said funding sources include State Arts Board programs, State capital budget allocations, private corporations, foundations, memorials, commissions, gifts, and donations. Chair Velick asked if staff wished to comment. Ms. Jeremiah said currently the only source of incentive for doing public art in St. Louis Park is in the mixed-use ordinance, which states that portions of the open space requirement can be substituted by providing public art. Discussions have been held regarding providing other incentives in the code. She said the study that Mr. Becker is undertaking will supplement staff with ideas on providing greater opportunities for public art. ii. Case No. 01-05-S – Request of Ugorets Properties for Ugorets Addition – Final Plat Ms. Jeremiah presented a staff report. She stated that the City Council added an additional condition to the preliminary plat resolution requiring an assurance that the regional trail will not be damaged by any activity such as drainage from the applicant’s building or property. Ms. Jeremiah said that Xcel has revised their original comments on the project. Xcel’s concern regards an overhead power transmission line that is currently in the railroad right-of-way. The City Attorney has advised staff that this issue is between the railroad, the applicant and Excel. Mr. Robertson moved approval of the final plat for Ugorets Addition, subject to conditions as recommended by staff, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0 with Gothberg, Robertson, Timian and Velick voting in favor. iii. Park Commons Update 78 Ms. Jeremiah reported that TOLD Development has encountered difficulties in purchasing the Bally’s property in a timely manner. Therefore, the preliminary PUD and plat which will be presented at the May 2 meeting will not include Bally’s parcel or a relocated Bally’s use. TOLD has determined that it is beneficial to have some for-sale townhomes along the park. Ms. Jeremiah said that options are being looked at for accommodating additional for-sale townhomes in the project because some were shown previously on the Bally’s parcel and it has always been deemed very important to have a minimum of about 35 townhomes in the project. TOLD has asked for some flexibility in future phases to be able to accommodate those additional townhomes if necessary in the block along the park at the east side of the Town Green. Ms. Jeremiah stated that TOLD has also initiated their own market study to determine if there may also be a demand for condominiums in the project as suggested by the City in the past. 6. Communications A. Resolution of Appreciation – Jan Loftus Chair Velick said the Planning Commission was pleased to be able to present the resolution to Ms. Loftus. B. Communication Regarding Staff Reports Ms. Jeremiah stated that she encouraged the Planning Commission to call staff if there are questions, issues and concerns about staff reports. Staff can then do more research and provide additional information at the meeting. Staff will also begin including their e-mail addresses on reports. There was a discussion about whether or not reports could be provided any earlier than the Friday preceding the meeting. Ms. Jeremiah explained that often revisions to plans are not received until a couple of days before report preparation. Formal reviews with utility agencies, the County, and other City departments often aren't complete until the Planning Commission deadline. She suggested that more informal updates could be provided on complicated projects, similar to the updates that have been provided on Park Commons. Mr. Timian suggested that e-mailing updates and communications might be an option. Ms. Jeremiah distributed the Community Development Department’s Annual Report for 2000. Ms. Jeremiah stated that Patrick Smith has been hired as Planner to replace Sacha Peterson. He will begin work on April 30. 79 Chair Velick requested that the Commission receive copies of the Spring issue of the Minikahda Vista neighborhood newsletter in their next meeting packet. 8. Adjournment Chair Velick adjourned the meeting at 7:04 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Nancy Sells Administrative Secretary 80 CONSENT ITEM # 1D OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 4, 2001 --6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael Garelick, Ken Gothberg, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian, Sally Velick MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Bissonnette STAFF PRESENT: Judie Erickson, Kathy Larsen, Nancy Sells 1. Call to Order - Roll Call Chair Velick called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Janice Loftus, Administrative Secretary, addressed the Commission. She said that her retirement will be effective at the end of April. She stated that Nancy Sells has been named as her replacement. Ms. Loftus expressed her appreciation to the Commission for the opportunity to work with them. Chair Velick and the commissioners thanked Ms. Loftus for her work with the Planning Commission. 2. Approval of Minutes of March 21, 2001 Mr. Morris moved approval of the minutes and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0 with Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Robertson, Timian and Velick voting in favor. 3. Hearings: A. Case No. 01-15-PUD – Request of Project for Pride in Living (PPL) and Perspectives, Inc. for a major amendment to the Final Planned Unit Development for certain Louisiana Court apartments to change the number of units, expand the PUD area to include two additional existing buildings, and modify the site plan. Ms. Erickson presented the staff report. Ms. Erickson stated that an issue arose while the project was being reviewed regarding a street project along Louisiana Ave. She said there are over 20,000 vehicle trips made per day on Louisiana Ave. and a high number of vehicle and pedestrian crashes. She said that the City Council worked with property owners in the area and approved a plan that 81 would help to make the street safer. She explained that part of the plan was to remove parking from the west side of the street and to move the travel lane into the previous parking lane in order to allow for left turn lanes at 27th and 28th Streets. Ms. Erickson stated that staff is proposing that the site plans be changed to include a bump-out and a transit stop along the edge of Louisiana Avenue just north of 28th Street W. Mr. Timian asked why that location was chosen for the transit stop. Ms. Erickson responded that staff looked at a number of locations and feels this is the best one. She displayed a drawing showing the section of land that the City would need to acquire easements from the developer in order to move a sidewalk. Staff proposes doing a pull out lane for a transit stop. She explained that in order to do that the sidewalk needs to be moved. Ms. Erickson added that currently most of the pull out lane can be accommodated on public right-of-way, but the sidewalk cannot be accommodated there. An easement from PPL would be required in order to accomplish this. She stated that there would have to be some changes in the landscape plan in order to accommodate the modified plan. Ms. Erickson said that the transit shelter is not shown on the landscape plan. She stated that part of a grant received from Livable Communities funding was to fund three transit shelters. The stops were to include a shelter in this general location (it was shown on PPL property in previous drawings). None of the current plans show shelters. Ms. Erickson said that staff is also concerned with the current sidewalk location. She explained that currently the sidewalk is located directly adjacent to the curb. With the shifting of the through lane, through traffic will be right next to the sidewalk. Staff is proposing that the City acquire a strip of land so that the sidewalk can be relocated back away from the curb to put in a boulevard with landscaping and trees. The sidewalk could be widened to six feet. Ms. Erickson explained that this would require an additional easement from PPL. She said this is part of a discussion but not in the conditions for approval of the PUD. Ms. Erickson said all of the other conditions are met. Staff recommends approval of the PUD amendment with all conditions outlined in the staff report. Ms. Erickson referred to the hand-out she distributed with modifications to the recommendations of approval. Mr. Gothberg said his concerns regard the bus pull out, particularly the through lane on Louisiana routed to the west side. He outlined several concerns regarding traffic movement and visibility problems at the post office intersection. Mr. Gothberg said his concern with the bus pull out is that it will increase rather than reduce accidents. Ms. Erickson said that if a bus pull out lane isn’t created, there can’t be a transit stop. She said the funding awarded by the Metropolitan Council for a Livable Communities project was based upon a transit oriented development. She added that traffic can’t be stopped in a through lane if a pull out lane is not created. Ms. Erickson said that signals at 27th and 28th Streets will be synchronized to create a more open flow of traffic. She 82 said that there will be a left turn lane northbound into 28th St. and a left turn lane southbound at 28th St. Ms. Erickson commented on the high volume traffic experienced at this location. She said there was adamant concern by residents on the east side of the street not to remove on-street parking. She remarked that if the new alignment does not work, the next step would be a four-lane conversion. Mr. Garelick commented on the traffic volume. He inquired about past studies regarding widening Lousiana from W. Franklin to 394. He asked if a four-lane conversion is realistic. Ms. Erickson responded that the City Council wanted to try the realignment with left turn lanes before creating a four lane. She said that the contract to restripe the street has been let. Mr. Garelick asked about the widening of Louisiana Ave. south of Minnetonka Blvd. Ms. Erickson responded that the City purchased most of the houses along Louisiana Ave. prior to that widening. Mr. Morris asked if Louisiana Ave. was a county or city street. Ms. Erickson responded that it is a city street. Mr. Morris asked what the width of the bus pull-out would be. Ms. Erickson responded that it would be between 10 and 12 feet. Mr. Morris asked if PPL would be compensated for the easement. Ms. Erickson responded that the details have not been worked out. She said that the City is intending to do the survey work and draw up all the documents. The City will pay the cost of construction and relocating sidewalk. Ms. Erickson stated that as part of the development, the City has sold over $4.5 million in bonds and there have been considerable grants through CDBG and other sources that have helped to make the development happen. In response to Mr. Morris’ question regarding bus shelter design, Ms. Erickson responded that it will be an MTC design. Mr. Morris said he thinks the project can be sidetracked by the traffic issue. He stated that he agrees with Mr. Gothberg’s depiction of traffic on Louisiana Ave. Mr. Morris said he wasn’t sure if it is within the Planning Commission’s purview to discuss the traffic situation on Louisiana Ave., but said he felt if the parking lane on the southbound 83 was going to be removed, there are many issues of driveway access and site lines that are critical. Ms. Erickson said there is a drawing available which illustrates the restriping. Mr. Morris suggested focusing on the major amendment to the PUD and the bus turn out lane and to discuss traffic situations later. Mr. Timian asked why the shelter couldn’t be moved to the area near the grove of trees indicated on the drawing. Ms. Erickson responded the location being proposed makes the shelter more accessible to residents. She said the area Mr. Timian referred to was too small. Ms. Erickson said with other locations there might be an issue with headlights. She said that PPL has concerns about the proximity of the bus to the buildings. The location being proposed affects three corner apartments. Ms. Erickson added that the northbound bus stop will be on southeast corner of the intersection, making the two stops fairly close together. Chair Velick opened the public hearing. Barbara McCormick, Project for Pride in Living, introduced herself. She stated that the issues have been very difficult for PPL. She said she wished to address the conditions and statements of fact from the staff report which she said do not entirely represent the discussions that have occurred. Ms. McCormick stated that the relevance of traffic discussion is confusing to PPL based on their proposed amendment to the PUD. Ms. McCormick said that there have been no new traffic counts since the creation of the PUD. She stated that clearly the traffic issue did not just arise. She said it is confusing to PPL why they are dealing with the issue at this point, after the plans have been finalized and financing has been committed to various activities in the project. Ms. McCormick remarked that if the issue is not really traffic but the bus pull-out, that issue did not just arise, but is a response to traffic issues that have involved decisions by the City such as doing away with parking on Louisiana Ave. and redirecting traffic into that former parking lane. She said that these actions are necessitating the actions that staff recommends imposing for the approval of the PUD. She stated that there isn’t anything in the PUD or in PPL’s activities that have generated the requirement. Ms. McCormick commented that the late communication about the traffic issues creates difficulty for PPL. She said that City staff have told them that contracts have been let so that PPL’s opinions about placement don’t matter. She stated that had PPL been advised of the City’s traffic management plan prior to the PUD application, costly redesign issues could have been avoided, as well as the amending of loan documents and filings. Ms. McCormick said the report suggests that the application for amendment is incomplete. She stated that despite various conversations, PPL’s first written information about the bus pull-out, transit shelter and sidewalk easement, arrived in her office on April 2 in the staff report. She went on to say that PPL still does not have 84 official word on the width of sidewalk to be installed, the exact dimensions of the bus pull-out or the legal description of the easement required. Ms. McCormick said the PUD amendment request was submitted with numerous staff contacts over several months, but PPL received no specific information about incorporating transit requirements until the staff report was received two days before the public hearing. She added the information in the report didn’t provide sufficient detail and specification to allow PPL to incorporate changes into the plans. Ms. McCormick noted that the report implies that PPL’s current plans are inconsistent with the Livable Communities transit oriented grant. She said that PPL drafted the Livable Communities application and proposed the bus shelter at the corner of Louisiana and 28th St. She stated that an easement for the shelter as presently configured, was anticipated from the early planning stages. Ms. McCormick said the grant funds were raised to pay for the bus shelter, but its incorporation into formal plans and commitments at this time poses a serious problem for PPL. She explained that Louisiana Court’s tax- exempt bonds require that tax-exempt funding pay for more than 50% of the total project costs. She said PPL has intentionally delayed the design and installation of the bus shelter until after completion of the basic project, so funds could be maximized for buildings and site improvements. Ms. McCormick stated this intent has been part of discussions with Community Development staff from the beginning planning stages of the project. She went on to say that because the bus pull-out, transit shelter and sidewalk were not raised to PPL in the initial PUD application, the funds available have been committed with the exception of dollars set aside specifically for the bus shelter. Ms. McCormick stated that requiring PPL to incorporate it now is going to upset the balance of fund ratios that PPL needs to maintain. She added that it will jeopardize their ability to meet mortgage obligations or to qualify for the tax-exempt bond funding. Ms. McCormick stated that the amount of money available to spend on the project is fixed because specific amounts are committed to specific purposes as part of meeting funding obligations. She said that complying with all of the conditions outlined in the staff report leaves PPL with the alternative of violating terms of tax-exempt bonding or amending the terms of their mortgage. Ms. McCormick commented on the reference in the report to PPL not believing a bus stopping in a through lane is a safety hazard. She said the reference is an incomplete description of the discussion with staff. She explained that PPL was trying to find an alternative way of solving the problem. As regards condition A. in the report, Ms. McCormick said to disrupt the timing of the basic project has serious repercussions to the overall project. She said that PPL requests that references to the shelter be deleted at this time, or that the City not use Livable Communities grant funds to pay for the shelter. She stated that PPL also requests that the City designs the bus pull-out with the corresponding landscaping at City expense and in a fashion that least disrupts the residential property. With respect to condition B., she said that PPL is pleased that the transit stop is located at the corner of Louisiana and 28th St. and PPL will cooperate with the bus pull-out and 85 sidewalk easement if it is possible. Ms. McCormick said PPL would like to forward invoices to the City for the redesign of PPL’s landscaping and legal work required to grant the easement to the City. Ms. McCormick asked that the transit stop accommodation be deferred until construction season 2002, or the agreement to use Livable Communities grant funds for the shelter be cancelled. Ms. McCormick said that regarding condition E.1., given the existing mortage documents controlling property obligations, she cannot sign easements without being in technical default on mortgages to the City of St. Louis Park, the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency, Family Housing Fund, Hennepin County, and the partnership agreement with the U.S. Affordable Housing CDC. She explained that written permission will be needed from each entity in order to meet the condition, and PPL cannot control whether all parties will cooperate. Ms. McCormick continued by saying that as PPL can’t make promises for other entities, that creates a condition that PPL may not be able to fulfill. She stated this seems not only unfair to PPL, but especially to Perspectives, the other property owner in the PUD. PPL is concerned about costs for filing mortgage amendments on several mortgage documents and believes they should be compensated for these costs. Ms. McCormick said that in condition E.2., PPL requests that reference to planning for and construction of the bus shelter be removed, or that the City find other funds besides Livable Communities grant funds to pay for it. Ms. McCormick concluded by saying that the process has been very difficult. She stated that PPL enjoys participating in constructive solutions and prefers to be in support of staff reports. She said it is PPL’s mission to promote activities that improve communities. Mr. Garelick said that he understands PPL’s funding concerns but asked if PPL understands the traffic and safety issues. Ms. McCormick responded that PPL does understand those issues, but is frustrated by the communication of the requirements and the resulting complications. Ms. Erickson said that by requiring the shelter location to be put on a plan doesn’t mean it has to be built right away, but it is a requirement showing how it will be accommodated. Ms. McCormick responded that PPL has been advised, regarding tax-exempt bonding requirements, that anything they put on plans whenever it gets funded and built is going to be deemed as a part of the project and for that reason they haven’t designed it into the project, although it is included in funding applications. She said PPL has been advised to complete the housing construction, do the audit on the housing project, and then proceed with other activities. Ms. Erickson stated that the City, as part of its review, needs to see how plans accommodate actual traffic. The City needs to know where the shelters should be, how it should be landscaped, what kind of easements need to be made. 86 Mr. Robertson asked if the overall configuration serves the units as best it can, putting aside timing issues. Ms. McCormick responded that having a bus stop at that corner, or in the near proximity, is very important. PPL wants to maintain good bus service at Louisiana Court. She said that had the impact of removing the parking been fully explained to PPL, they probably would have taken a different approach. Ms. McCormick said she understands the requirements but she isn’t sure what options PPL has. She stated that PPL’s intention is not to obstruct larger issues around public safety. She said the bus pull-out comes too close to the building. Ms. McCormick stated that she wonders if the problem couldn’t be solved in a completely different way by addressing the post office traffic issues. She concluded by saying that PPL is not happy with the location but will work with it the best way they can. In response to Mr. Timian’s question regarding rents of the affected corner units, Ms. McCormick responded that PPL has already committed to very low rents, but that they may have difficulty renting those three units. She has suggested triple glazing on corner windows and air conditioning at a cost of approximately $33,000 in modifications. Mr. Morris said that he agrees with PPL’s position. He noted that right-of-way acquisition is an area of his expertise. He acknowledged the complication of obtaining permission to grant an easement from all the funding sources. Mr. Morris stated that PPL is not a willing participant, there is no condemnation, and a party cannot be coerced or intimidated into giving right-of-way. He said he thought the only alternative is for the City to negotiate or to exercise condemnation. Mr. Morris said he rarely disagrees with staff reports, but in this case he doesn’t agree with connecting the acquisition of a bus pull-out lane to PPL’s major amendment. He suggested separating the issues. Mr. Gothberg stated that he agreed with Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris moved to recommend approval of the PUD major amendment exclusive of conditions A., B., and E. from the amended conditions. Mr. Garelick seconded the motion and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0 with Commissioners Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Robertson, Timian and Velick voting in favor. 4. New Business A. Other New Business Mr. Garelick asked if commissioners would be interested in preparing a resolution in support of having Cable TV televise Planning Commission meetings. Chair Velick stated that as a first step, a list of commissioners from the various commissions could be listed on Cable TV. Mr. Garelick said he made that request two months ago. 87 Mr. Gothberg said he thought it would be valuable for all commission meetings to be on Cable TV. Mr. Morris said he was not opposed. Ms. Erickson commented that questions about this regard whether or not it changes complexity, extra cost and budget concerns. Mr. Garelick made a motion proposing that future Planning Commission meetings be televised on local Cable TV subject to a financial feasibility study and City Council approval. Mr. Morris seconded the motion and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0-1 with Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Robertson and Timian voting in favor and Velick abstaining. Mr. Garelick reported that he has been named to represent St. Louis Park on the Hennepin County Board of Equalization. Chair Velick thanked Mr. Garelick for his report on St. Louis Park housing at the last meeting. Chair Velick commented on photos she distributed regarding City Place in West Palm Beach. She said that it has been very successful and is much like St. Louis Park’s proposed town center. Chair Velick initiated a discussion about a New York Times newspaper article regarding oversized homes. She reported on phone calls she has been receiving from residents about a very large remodeled home at 16th and Virginia. Chair Velick asked if staff can study move-up housing and the trend of large remodeled homes in first ring suburbs and provide input at the next meeting. Mr. Morris said he agrees a discussion could be held on the topic. He stated that revitalizing housing and increasing property value is a goal of the City. He said he believes zoning codes do limit the size but there may be disagreement on aesthetics and size. Chair Velick suggested that a study session on the topic would be helpful to the Planning Commission as commissioners do receive calls from the public on the issue. Mr. Gothberg said the Planning Commission needs to understand current zoning and setback issues. Mr. Robertson said codes always need to be reviewed to ensure they reflect current wants and needs. 88 Ms. Erickson said the question seems to be can an ordinance require that a home fit into the neighborhood, a difficult standard to apply. She added that a zoning code requires zoning to be applied equally to all places zoned the same. Ms. Erickson said that staff can provide parameters of what is allowed is residential zoning districts to the Planning Commission. Mr. Robertson said that as a means to control height, zoning can provide for height limitations in certain conditions that are relative to neighboring building heights. Mr. Gothberg made a motion that a resolution in recognition of Jan Loftus’ service to the Planning Commission is presented at a future meeting. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 with Commissioners Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Robertson, Timian and Velick voting in favor. Ms. Erickson said the resolution would be presented at the April 18 meeting. 6. Adjournment Chair Velick adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Administrative Secretary 89 CONSENT ITEM # 1E April 20, 2001 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 3CMA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 350.00 ACCOUNTING RESEARCH ASSOCIATIO SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 15.00 ACT ELECTRONICS INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 82.88 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 455.22 ALLIANCE MECHANICAL SERVICES I BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 222.00 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 171.00 ANDERSON, SCOTT MEETING EXPENSE 315.08 APACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA GENERAL SUPPLIES 247.13 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE ACCT GENERAL SUPPLIES 507.14 AUDIOVISUAL INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 167.75 AUTOMATED ENTRANCE PRODUCTS IN BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 5,287.00 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR CO BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,116.41 BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 375.00 BOYER TRUCK PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS 373.86 BREEZY POINT RESORT TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 287.55 BRENTS SIGNS GENERAL SUPPLIES 547.41 BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66) BUCKHOLTZ, LISA AQUATIC PARK SEASON TICKETS 6.00 BUDGET HELPER OTHER ADVERTISING 225.00 CAMILON, MANNY MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 215.59 CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES 970.01 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 469.38 CARTRIDGE CARE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 897.73 CENTER FOR ENERGY & ENVIRONMEN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 16,705.89 CHIEF SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 74.98 COLICH & ASSOCIATES LEGAL SERVICES 13,510.64 COLLISYS ELECTRIC CO BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 780.00 COLOR TILE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 8,455.13 COMM ACTION FOR SUBURBAN HENNE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,365.00 CONCEPT SEATING INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (180.00) DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 127.80 DAVIS, KATHLEEN AQUATIC PARK SEASON TICKETS 79.20 DELI DOUBLE CONCESSION SUPPLIES 225.66 DEPT OF PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 510.00 DIGITAL BIOMETRICS INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 485.00 DUNLAP, REG MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 30.71 EDTECH OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 2,681.83 ERV'S LAWN MOWER REPAIR NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 365.51 EXPLORER POST 505 GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,400.00 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.67) FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL SMALL TOOLS 658.17 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 109.95 G & K SERVICES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 40.73 GARDNER, TIMOTHY AND MARION CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 GARELICK STEEL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 66.34 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (27.83) GLENWOOD INGLEWOOD GENERAL SUPPLIES 81.48 GRAFIX SHOPPE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,780.00 90 GRAINGER INC, W W GENERAL SUPPLIES (43.79) HABERMAN, JULIE UNREALIZED REVENUE 338.87 HAIK, TOM CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 HALL-AQUITANIA, DON CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 HENDRICKSON, JAIME CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 HENN CO INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY COMPUTER SERVICES 483.45 HENNEPIN CO DEPT OF COMM CORRE SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 6,400.00 HILGERS, MATT CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 HIRSHFIELDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 44.50 HOME DEPOT/GECF GENERAL SUPPLIES 15.82 HOME HARDWARE SMALL TOOLS 2.43 HUIRAS, SHIRLEY EQUIPMENT PARTS 231.93 HUMPHREY, CAROLE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 145.00 I S D 283-COMMUNITY ED. OFFICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 45.00 IRON MOUNTAIN GENERAL SUPPLIES 29.00 J H LARSON COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 397.08 JOHNSON, MELISSA YOUTH ATHLETICS/LEAGUES-exempt 40.50 JONES, MARK UNREALIZED REVENUE 67.54 JOSEPH CATERING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 369.05 JRK INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,332.35 KARL, BETTY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2.98 KIENENBERGER, BRIDGET UNREALIZED REVENUE 70.45 KRIVOSHA, TERRI AQUATIC PARK SEASON TICKETS 12.00 LACAL EQUIPMENT INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 391.20 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 587.88 LUSE, JOHN TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 173.50 MACQUEEN EQUIP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 2,998.55 MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 948.75 MCCOY OIL COMPANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 236.43 MEDSOFT CORPORATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 290.50 MENARDS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 864.51 METRO SALES INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 368.00 METRO SYSTEMS NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 2,810.74 METRO VOLLEYBALL OFFICIALS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 328.00 METROCALL TELEPHONE 141.87 MIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO UNREALIZED REVENUE 765.34 MIDWEST GREASE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 295.00 MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC POSTAGE 15.85 MILLER, CAROL GENERAL SUPPLIES 240.00 MIND SHARP TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 129.00 MINNESOTA CONWAY GENERAL SUPPLIES 65.18 MINNESOTA PARK SUPERVISORS ASS TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 125.00 MINNESOTA SOCIETY OF CPA'S SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 115.00 MN DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 300.00 MN DRIVER & VEHICLE SVCS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CHARGE (46.00) MN INSTITUTE OF LEGAL EDUCATIO TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 225.00 MN OFFICE CITIZENSHIP/VOLUNTEE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 55.00 NAPA GENUINE PARTS CO/FINANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,241.84 NORTHLAND ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 2,117.41 NSP CO ELECTRIC SERVICE 20,704.26 NYSTROM PUBLISHING PRINTING & PUBLISHING 11,491.35 OFFICE DEPOT GENERAL SUPPLIES 301.44 91 OFFICE TEAM SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 241.25 OLSON, JEFFREY CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 OTTO PACKAGING MIDWEST LLC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES (72.00) PALMS BAKERY MEETING EXPENSE 46.70 POSTMASTER POSTAGE 2,935.88 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 56.88 PRESTIGE LINCOLN MERCURY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,090.56 PRINTERS SERVICE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 156.30 PRO PRODUCTS INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (92.32) RELIANT ENERGY HEATING GAS 17,434.26 REYNOLDS WELDING SUPPLY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 11.23 S & S WORLDWIDE GENERAL SUPPLIES 205.93 SA-AG INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 233.68 SALVERDA & ASSOCIATES, DONALD TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 76.52 SAMS CLUB #6318 GENERAL SUPPLIES 90.41 SCHARBER & SONS NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 1,910.61 SCHARBER & SONS INC EQUIPMENT PARTS (3.51) SENSIBLE LAND USE COALITION TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 30.00 SEPTON, CHRISTOPHER CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 SLP CRIME PREVENTION FUND UNREALIZED REV-SAFETY CAMP 0.00 SPS COMPANIES INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 242.55 ST. LOUIS PARK TRANSPORTATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 200.00 STAR TRIBUNE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 225.16 STAT MEDICAL GENERAL SUPPLIES 217.66 STATE OF MINNESOTA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 38.00 STEMMER, LUKE TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 71.94 SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 73.03 SUBURBAN TIRE CO EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 40.09 SWARD, MICHAEL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 TARGET/DAYTONS MEETING EXPENSE 16.41 TEKSYSTEMS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,362.50 THE ORGANIZED EXECUTIVE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 97.00 THYSSEN LAGERQUIST ELEVATOR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 109.00 TRACY/TRIPP FUELS MOTOR FUELS 15,414.51 TWIN CITY OPTICAL CO TREE MAINTENANCE (12.86) TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 4.96 U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 4,668.27 U S WEST INTERPRISE TELEPHONE 487.26 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 200.00 VALLEY DESIGN GENERAL SUPPLIES 777.48 VALLEY-RICH CO INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 5,377.58 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES (9.61) WALSER FORD EQUIPMENT PARTS 608.79 WASLASKI, SHANE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 WATERS, KAREN SPECIAL PROGRAMS 22.50 WELLSO FARGO BANK OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,779.82 WEST SUB. MEDIATION CENTER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,300.00 WHEELER HARDWARE BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 2,728.95 ZIEGLER INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 589.39 ZIP PRINTING UNREALIZED REVENUE 175.69 187,246.21 92 April 27, 2001 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT AAA-LICENSE DIVISION MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 2,009.12 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 141.10 ALBINSONS SMALL TOOLS 37.06 AMERIPRIDE LINEN AND APPAREL S CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 181.33 ANDERSEN INC, EARL F OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 71.96 ANTONSON, DALE TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 248.73 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE ACCT GENERAL SUPPLIES 581.10 BATTERIES PLUS GENERAL SUPPLIES 63.89 BENDING SPECIALISTS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,165.00 BLUE CIRCLE AGGREGATES INC. OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 720.00 BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66) BROWN TRAFFIC PRODUCTS INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 73.80 CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 166.25 CAREERTRACK TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 89.00 COFFEY, LAUREL YOUTH ATHLETICS/LEAGUES-exempt 45.00 COLLISYS ELECTRIC CO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,253.80 COMPUTER FORENSICS INC. OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 350.00 CONCEPT SEATING INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (180.00) CRAWFORD DOOR SALES CO INC. BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 67.10 CREEKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 CRILEY, KATHI L GENERAL SUPPLIES 95.17 CUB FOODS MEETING EXPENSE 391.26 DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,286.92 DELTA MEDICAL SUPPLY GROUP INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 195.30 ECOLAB GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,574.11 ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 16,474.05 ENSR CONSULTING & ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 26,242.26 ENVIROTECH SERVICES INC. OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 750.00 ERV'S LAWN MOWER REPAIR SMALL TOOLS 9.46 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.67) FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP POSTAGE 1,042.31 FERTIMIX INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 378.29 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (27.83) GORDON,JOHN & PATRICIA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 43.55 GRAINGER INC, W W EQUIPMENT PARTS (61.18) HASLERUD, CARRIE GENERAL SUPPLIES 118.73 HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 745.97 HOME DEPOT/GECF GENERAL SUPPLIES 17.96 HYDRO SUPPLY COMPANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,175.06 ICE SKATING INSTITUTE OF AMERI GENERAL SUPPLIES 244.25 ICI DULUX PAINT CENTERS GENERAL SUPPLIES 360.42 INFRASTRUCTURE TECHNOLOGIES IN EQUIPMENT PARTS 297.79 INTERNATIONAL SECURITY PRODUCT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 170.04 INTL ASSN ELECT INSP SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 60.00 IOS CAPITAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT 372.23 K C GROVES TREE EXPERTS CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 234.30 KANSAS STATE BANK OF MANHATTAN NOTES PAYABLE 642.43 KENNEDY & GRAVEN LEGAL SERVICES 4,529.72 KRECH, BARBARA MEETING EXPENSE 42.22 93 LAKESHORE LEARNING CENTER GENERAL SUPPLIES 111.51 LEAGUE MN CITIES INS TRUST OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 537.98 LEARNING INNOVATIONS INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,826.00 LISEC, TOM TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 100.00 LOGIS OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 40,262.27 LONG LAKE POWER EQUIPMENT SMALL TOOLS 99.52 LSV METALS INC. BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 632.10 M/A ASSOCIATES INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 672.98 MAAO MEMBERSHIP COORDINATOR TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 65.00 MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 1,740.00 MENARDS BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 618.71 MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 512.80 MIDWEST GREASE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 40.00 MIDWEST LUBE INC. EQUIPMENT PARTS 255.00 MIKE LARSON PLUMBING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 350.00 MINN CHAPTER OF NIGP SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 156.00 MINNEAPOLIS AQUATENNIAL UNREALIZED REVENUE 600.00 MN DRIVER & VEHICLE SVCS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CHARGE (46.00) MR PRINT OFFICE SUPPLIES 260.93 NORTHERN TOOL & EQUIPMENT SMALL TOOLS 9.35 NSP CO ELECTRIC SERVICE 19,835.36 O'NEIL, ERIC CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 226.69 OFFICE TEAM SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 762.35 OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 43.67 ONE CALL CONCEPTS INC RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 179.20 OSSEO SPORTS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 118.55 OTTO PACKAGING MIDWEST LLC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES (72.00) PARKER, LESLIE SKATING LESSONS-tax exempt 58.00 PRO PRODUCTS INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (92.32) QUANTERRA INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,740.00 R & R SPECIALTIES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 584.02 REYNOLDS WELDING SUPPLY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 56.64 ROG, MARGARET OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00 SCHARBER & SONS INC EQUIPMENT PARTS (3.51) SCHILTGEN, CAROLYN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 SECURITYLINK FROM AMERITECH OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 36.10 SIGN IMAGES BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 27.69 SILVERMAN, JULIE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 SIMPLOT PARTNERS GENERAL SUPPLIES 820.00 SLP CRIME PREVENTION FUND UNREALIZED REV-SAFETY CAMP 0.00 SOUTHWEST MUTUAL AID ASSN SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 125.00 ST CROIX RECREATION COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,172.60 ST LOUIS PARK LIONS CLUB GENERAL SUPPLIES 400.00 SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 73.03 SUN NEWSPAPERS LEGAL NOTICES 806.29 TERRY GROUP (THE) MEETING EXPENSE 1,537.20 THYSSEN LAGERQUIST ELEVATOR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 76.00 TIERNEY BROTHERS INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 120.00 TIME WARNER CABLE TELEPHONE 794.76 TWIN CITY OPTICAL CO TREE MAINTENANCE (12.86) U S WEST INTERPRISE TELEPHONE 777.08 94 UNIFORMS UNLIMITED GENERAL SUPPLIES 184.58 VALLEY-RICH CO INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 3,329.28 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES (9.61) VISU-SEWER CLEAN & SEAL INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 7,983.42 VOSS LIGHTING OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 356.45 WASTE MANAGEMENT-BLAINE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 136,982.93 303,902.44 May 4, 2001 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ADVANCED STATE SECURITY GENERAL SUPPLIES 77.00 ALLIANCE MECHANICAL SERVICES I BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 2,670.00 ANCHOR PAPER CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 561.95 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE ACCT GENERAL SUPPLIES 707.15 ARMADILLO TRUCKVAULT INC. MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT (150.00) ASCAP LICENSES/TAXES 450.00 AUTO GLASS SPECIALISTS INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 308.09 BAUER BUILT TIRE & BATTERY EQUIPMENT PARTS 362.03 BEACON BALLFIELDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,045.50 BENSON, BRADLEY TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 195.00 BERNDT ELECTRIC SERVICE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 71.25 BLAYLOCK PLUMBING CO CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 35.00 BOBS PERSONAL COFFEE SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 282.81 BOYER TRUCK PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS 192.79 BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66) BUSKEY, JENNIFER MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 75.55 CARLSON TRACTOR & EQUIP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS (59.08) CARTRIDGE CARE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 600.27 CERTIFIED POWER INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 25.20 CHARLEBOIS, LISA CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 COFFEE MILL INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 129.80 COLLISYS ELECTRIC CO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 426.00 COMPRESSAIR & EQUIPMENT CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 79.55 CONCEPT SEATING INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (180.00) COOPER, JACOB CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 CRESTVIEW NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIA GENERAL SUPPLIES 37.51 CROWN MARKING INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 88.00 DALCO EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,096.50 DIRECT SAFETY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 160.01 DUSTY'S BODY SHOP INC. EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 11,979.44 DVORAK, BRAD TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 23.16 EDELMANN & ASSOCIATES INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 12.78 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.67) FLANNIGAN, JANE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 310.00 FREEWAY RADIATOR SERVICE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 232.17 G & K SERVICES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 94.44 GALLAGHER & CO OF MN INC, A J PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9,785.00 GENUINE PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (27.83) GMAC MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 30,347.00 GOERDT, TINA CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 GOODYEAR BRAD RAGAN TIRE & SER TIRES 200.22 95 GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 1,288.50 GRAINGER INC, W W GENERAL SUPPLIES 3,720.96 GREENMAN TECHNOLOGIES OF MN IN CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 45.60 HANSON, MICHAEL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLEGE TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 2,970.00 HIRSHFIELDS BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 230.34 HOME DEPOT/GECF GENERAL SUPPLIES 349.68 HOME HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES 1.90 HUMAN RESOURCE EXECUTIVE AWARDS/INDEMNITIES 186.27 I A F C SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 160.00 ICMA TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 35.00 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 589.88 INTERSTATE BEARING COMPANY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 210.39 IOS CAPITAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT 516.53 J H LARSON COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 318.73 JERRY STAMM GENERAL SUPPLIES 47.34 JUSTUS LUMBER COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 111.60 KAR PRODUCTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 159.61 KENNEDY & GRAVEN DEPOSITS PAYABLE 43.50 KILLMER ELECTRIC CO OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 500.00 KLODT INCORPORATED GENERAL CUSTOMERS 168.16 LACAL EQUIPMENT INC EQUIPMENT PARTS (235.63) LATZ, RON TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 249.81 LEE COLLINS LIMITED OFFICE SUPPLIES 88.89 LEGEND TECHNICAL SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9,341.00 LITTLE FALLS MACHINE INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 600.78 LSV METALS INC. BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 551.23 LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC MOTOR FUELS 9,678.58 MACQUEEN EQUIP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 690.58 MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 1,192.13 MCCOLLISTER & CO LUBRICANTS/ADDITIVES 594.75 MENARDS BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 67.02 METRO FIRE INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 199.30 METROCALL TELEPHONE 7.23 METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 12,701.77 MIDWEST LUBE INC. EQUIPMENT PARTS 114.00 MINN DEPT LABOR & INDUSTRY LICENSES/TAXES 10.00 MINUTEMAN PRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES 169.00 MN DEPT OF HEALTH TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 650.00 MN DRIVER & VEHICLE SVCS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CHARGE (46.00) MOONEY & ASSOCIATES OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 6,542.30 NAPA GENUINE PARTS CO/FINANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS (199.74) NEIL NELSON & ASSOC. TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 450.00 NELSON, MARK R. TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 33.06 NORTHLAND ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 52.75 OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 289.50 OFFICE TEAM SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 1,544.00 OTTO PACKAGING MIDWEST LLC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES (72.00) PARK LAND COMPANY DEPOSITS PAYABLE 3,210.08 PARK NICOLLET CLINIC HSM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 310.00 PARTS PLUS EQUIPMENT PARTS 24.35 PATHAGAMAGE, THAKSHILA YOUTH ATHLETICS/LEAGUES-exempt 40.50 96 PEWAG INCORPORATED GENERAL SUPPLIES 505.99 PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 95.87 PRESTIGE LINCOLN MERCURY EQUIPMENT PARTS 141.71 PRINTERS SERVICE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 56.60 PRO PRODUCTS INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (92.32) QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER POSTAGE 851.18 QUINLAN, ANNE ZONING/SUBDIVISION FEES 200.00 RANDY'S SANITATION INC GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 2,208.21 ROYAL LANDSCAPING CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 100.00 SAFETY-KLEEN CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 235.76 SCHARBER & SONS INC EQUIPMENT PARTS (3.51) SEDGWICK CLAIMS GMT SERVICES PROF/CONSULT SERVICES 2,155.00 SHIMEK, ANDREW AND JEFFREY CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00 SLP CRIME PREVENTION FUND UNREALIZED REV-SAFETY CAMP 0.00 SPECTRASITE RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 87.00 SPS COMPANIES INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 94.24 ST LOUIS PARK COMMUNITY BAND OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,500.00 STANDARD SPRING OF MPLS EQUIPMENT PARTS 356.21 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 473.53 SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 73.03 SUBURBAN TIRE CO TIRES 470.82 SUN NEWSPAPERS OTHER ADVERTISING 277.20 SWANSON & YOUNGDALE, INC. BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 285.00 TARGET/DAYTONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 125.94 TCHRA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 75.00 TEKSYSTEMS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 700.00 TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 52.18 TRANSMISSION SHOP INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 630.60 TRI STATE BOBCAT MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 2,130.00 TWIN CITY OPTICAL CO TREE MAINTENANCE (12.86) U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 39.09 UNIVERSITY OF MINN TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 200.00 UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA OFFICE SUPPLIES 13.62 VEIT & COMPANY GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 520.00 VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES (9.61) WALSER FORD GENERAL SUPPLIES 136.77 WELLS FARGO REMITTANCE CTR EQUIPMENT PARTS 3,352.21 WEST WELD GENERAL SUPPLIES 176.99 WESTSIDE EQUIPMENT BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 160.00 WHEELER HARDWARE EQUIPMENT PARTS 304.80 WILSON, SHALISA AWARDS/INDEMNITIES 25.00 WM H MC COY PETROLEUM FUELS MOTOR FUELS 19.17 ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 48.62 ZIEGLER INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 74.46 ZIMMERMAN, JEAN LICENSES/TAXES 202.03 ZIP SORT PRINTING & PUBLISHING 480.71 144,356.40 IMMEDIATE PAYABLES May 3, 2001 PARK PLACE HOTEL CO. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 22,825.00 UNIVERSAL TITLE CO LAND 30,046.51 52,871.51 97 CONSENT ITEM # 2 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting of May 7, 2001 2. Bid Tabulation: Motion to designate Kevitt Excavating, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $345,245.00 for Park Commons demolition/site restoration – City Project No. 01-15 Background: Bids were received on April 26, 2001 for the Park Commons demolition/site restoration project. This project includes the demolition of ten (10) commercial buildings, and grading of the disturbed sites. Advertisements for bids were published in the St. Louis Park Sun- Sailor on April 4, 2001 and in the Construction Bulletin on March 30, April 6, and 13, 2001. A summary of the bid results is as follows: Contractor Bid Amount Kevitt Excavating, Inc. $345,245.00 Landwehr Construction, Inc. 363,022.00 Kellington Construction, Inc. 372,770.00 Veit & Company, Inc. 374,693.00 Ingram Excavating, Inc. 403,800.00 F.M. Frattalone Excavating & Grading, Inc. 408,198.00 Carl Bolander & Sons Company 423,130.00 D.C. Enterprises, Inc. 436,959.00 USD Minnesota LLC 466,000.00 Holst Excavating, Inc. 494,510.00 Diamond 5 Construction, Inc. 690,000.00 Wickenhauser Excavating, Inc. Engineer’s Estimate 770,000.00 $470,000.00 Evaluation of Bids: A total of 12 companies submitted bids. A review of the bids indicates Kevitt Excavating, Inc. submitted the lowest bid. Kevitt Excavating, Inc. has satisfactorily completed a number of home demolition/site restoration projects throughout the City including the first phase demolition in the Park Commons area in 1999. Staff has determined that Kevitt Excavating, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid and recommends a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $345,245.00 Prepared By: Carlton Moore/Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 98 CONSENT ITEM # 3 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting of May 7, 2001 3. Bid Tabulation: Motion to designate Midwest Asphalt Corporation the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $386,057.60 for W. 16th Street/Zarthan Avenue – grading, base, storm sewer, curb and gutter, and bituminous paving – City Project Nos. 00-15, 00-16, & 01-12 Background: Bids were received on April 26, 2001 for street, curb and gutter, storm sewer, bituminous paving and traffic signal system. Advertisement for bids were published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on April 4, and 11, 2001 and in the Construction Bulletin on March 30, April 6, and 13, 2001. A summary of the bid results is as follows: Contractor Bid Amount * Midwest Asphalt Corporation $386,057.60 * Northwest Asphalt, Inc. 413,609.69 Hardrives, Inc. 453,786.65 North Valley, Inc. 502,182.52 Engineer’s Estimate $425,000.00 * Denotes Engineer’s correction upon extension Evaluation of Bids: A total of four (4) companies submitted bids. A review of the bids indicates Midwest Asphalt Corporation submitted the lowest bid. Midwest Asphalt Corporation has satisfactorily completed a number of projects in St. Louis Park. Staff has determined that Midwest Asphalt Corporation submitted the lowest responsible bid and recommends a contract be awarded to the firm in the amount of $386,057.60 Prepared By: Carlton Moore/Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 99 CONSENT ITEM # 4 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting of May 7, 2001 4. Bid Tabulation: Motion to designate Allied Blacktop the lowest responsible bidder for the construction of bituminous sealcoating and to authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $68,260.65. Background: On April 2, 2001, Council authorized for the advertising and receipt of bids for contract sealcoating. Advertisement for bids were published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on April 18, 2001 and in the Construction Bulletin on April 13, and 20, 2001. Bids from four (4) contractors were received on May 1, 2001 for this work. A summary of the bid results is as follows: Contract Sealcoating of Bituminous Pavements Vendor Bid Total * Allied Blacktop $68,260.65 Bituminous Roadways, Inc. $70,350.71 Pearson Bros., Inc. $79,198.81 ASTECH Corporation $82,678.00 * Recommended Low Bid Financial Considerations: The 2001 budget includes $75,000 for contract sealcoating. The award of the contract to Allied Blacktop in the amount of $68,260.65 will leave an unexpended balance of $6,739.35. It should be noted that the City has the right to alter bituminous material application rates, which may change the actual amount of material used to perform the sealcoating. This could have an impact on the final contract price being either higher or lower than the total bid price stated above. The expected impact should be negligible. Prepared by: Carlton Moore/Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 100 CONSENT ITEM # 5 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting of May 7, 2001 5. Traffic Study No. 556: Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing installation of permit parking in front of 3624 Rhode Island Avenue South. Background: The City has received a request from Mr. J. Lofrano of 3624 Rhode Island Avenue South to restrict on-street parking in front of his house. Mr. Lofrano is 92 years old, does not drive, uses a wheelchair or walker and has daily care givers attending to him and facilitating his transportation needs. His need for street access to vehicles in front of his property has prompted this request. Staff has discussed this request with Mr. Lofrano. The installation of handicapped parking signs is not feasible, as the parking stall design requirements cannot be met on our local street, and the service providers for Mr. Lofrano are not always using handicapped vehicle. However, the City’s Traffic Policy and practice does allow for permit parking in this situation. It has been the City’s practice to use permit parking which can be removed when the individual needing the access no longer resides there or no longer needs the access. Staff considers the resident’s request to be valid and supports the installation of permit parking for handicap access at 3624 Rhode Island Avenue South. This recommendation is based on the following: 1. The resident of the household is elderly and handicapped. 2. Access to the curb in front of the residence is needed. 3. Conflicting parking tendencies with neighbors will be eliminated. Options: Staff has identified the following options available to the Council at this time. * 1. Approve the request. If so, the attached resolution authorizing the installation of the parking regulations may be utilized. 2. Deny the request. * Staff recommendation Attachments: Map Resolution Prepared By: Carlton Moore/Maria Hagen, Public Works Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 101 RESOLUTION NO. 01-036 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARKING RESTRICTIONS ALONG RHODE ISLAND AVENUE SOUTH AT 3624 TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 556 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota that it is in the best interest of the City to establish a parking restriction based upon permit issuance along Rhode Island Avenue South at 3624. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that parking shall not be permitted at any time unless the vehicle prominently displays a City issued parking permit on the left rear windshield. Emergency vehicles, governmental vehicles and commercial vehicles parked at curbside while work is conducted are exempt from these restrictions. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the parking restriction enacted herein shall remain in effect as long as the resident resides at the above address. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to install the following controls: 1. Permit parking at 3624 Rhode Island Avenue South. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 7, 2001 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 102 CONSENT ITEM # 6 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting of May 7, 2001 6. Traffic Study No. 557: Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing the restriction of parking along the West side of Louisiana Avenue from a point 360 feet North of W. 28th Street to a point 280 feet South of W. 28th Street. Background: At it’s May 15, 2000 meeting, the City Council directed staff to implement a new traffic plan for Louisiana Avenue from W. 27th Street to South of W. 28th Street. This plan allowed for on-street parking along the East side of Louisiana Avenue but required the removal of all on-street parking on the West side of the 2700 block and the northern portion of the 2800 block. This allows for the installation of the left turn lanes and is anticipated to help reduce congestion. Adoption of the attached resolution is required to formally restrict the on-street parking and implement the approved Traffic Control Plan. Options: Staff has identified the following options available to the Council at this time. * 1. Approve the request. If so, the attached resolution authorizing the installation of the parking regulations may be utilized. 2. Deny the request. * Staff recommendation Attachments: Map Resolution Prepared By: Carlton Moore/Maria Hagen, Public Works Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 103 RESOLUTION NO. 01-037 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARKING RESTRICTIONS WEST SIDE OF LOUISIANA AVENUE TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 557 WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has studied and has determined that traffic controls are necessary at this location. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the C ity Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to install the following controls: 4. Restriction of parking along the west side of Louisiana Avenue from a point 360 feet North of W. 28th Street to a point 280 feet South of W. 28th Street. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 7, 2001 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 104 THIS ITEM HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE AGENDA. CONSENT ITEM # 7 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting of May 7, 2001 7. Motion to adopt the attached Resolution to enter into an Agreement with Hennepin County for the installation of a traffic signal system at the intersection of Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) and Natchez Avenue Background: The intersection of Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) and Natchez Avenue was identified as the main entrance/exit to the proposed Park Commons redevelopment area. Last year, city staff initiated discussions with Hennepin County requesting the installation of a new traffic signal system at this intersection to facilitate ingress and egress and to accommodate pedestrian traffic across Excelsior Boulevard. The site does not meet the technical warrants for a signal and, therefore, installation cannot be approved by County staff. However, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), through their review of the Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW), has specified that a traffic signal would be a condition of the issuance of an Indirect Source Permit (ISP) for the development. A Traffic Impact Study conducted by URS/BRW indicates that efficient traffic flow on Excelsior Boulevard can be maintained through modifications in signal timing. A resolution outlining these facts was adopted by the City Council in March 2001 and forwarded to the County for consideration. Discussion: County staff have prepared a cooperative agreement outlining terms and conditions of the signal installation. Important aspects of the agreement include the following: • Signal system will be designed and constructed by the city; it will include Emergency Vehicle Preemption (EVP) and interconnection capabilities • All costs of the installation will be borne by the city including on-going electrical and maintenance costs • County staff will be responsible for establishing signal timing; requests by the city for changes in the timing must be submitted to the County for approval • If the redevelopment does not occur or if the redevelopment plans change significantly, the County can withdraw its authorization for the signal installation The City Attorney has reviewed the agreement. It was approved by the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on April 17, 2001. Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of the attached Resolution to enter into an Agreement with Hennepin County for the installation of a traffic signal system at the intersection of Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) and Natchez Avenue. Attachment: Resolution Prepared by: Maria Hagen / Mike Rardin, Public Works Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 105 RESOLUTION NO. ________________ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR A NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL SYSTEM AT THE INTERSECTION OF EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD (CSAH 3) AND NATCHEZ AVENUE WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has requested of the County the installation of a permanent traffic control signal system at the intersection of Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) and Natchez Avenue in relation to the Park Commons redevelopment project, and WHEREAS, the County has indicated its willingness to provide authorization to the City for the installation of a traffic signal at said intersection under the terms and conditions outlined in a cooperative construction agreement, and WHEREAS, the City Council may enter into such agreements as authorized by its Charter; now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute Hennepin County Agreement No. PW 13-05-01 for installation of a new traffic control signal system at the intersection of Excelsior Boulevard (CSAH 3) and Natchez Avenue in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in Agreement No. PW 13-05-01. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council May 7, 2001 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 106 CONSENT ITEM # 8 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting of May 7, 2001 8. Motion to approve extension of Frauenshuh’s Final PUD and Final Plat consideration until August 31, 2001 – Case No. 99-19-PUD Background: On August 2, 1999, the City Council approved a Preliminary PUD and Plat for Frauenshuh to construct a 3-story, 60,000 square feet medical office building on the site with a future 7,000 square feet restaurant. Due to financial difficulties stemming from the need to move an existing billboard and correct soils on the site, the developer also requested tax abatement from the City, County and School District. The tax abatement was approved for the medical office proposal, in part due to the public purpose of retaining local doctors in St. Louis Park. On September 15, 1999, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD and Plat for the medical office proposal. Subsequently, many of the doctors who were expected to relocate to this site were told that they could remain in their existing leased space on the Methodist Hospital site. Some of the doctors are still interested in relocating and Frauenshuh has continued to market the site for medical office. However, they do not have enough medical office space committed to feel comfortable moving forward with the 60,000 square feet medical office building. So far, they have requested and received four extensions for consideration of their Final PUD, and the most recent extension expires this month. During the March 26, 2001 Study Session, Frauenshuh updated the Council on the status of their plans and indicated that they need another 60-90 days to determine if they will move forward with development on the site. Recommendation: Staff recommends extending consideration of the Final PUD and Plat until August 31, 2001 to allow additional time to market the site. Attachments:  Letter from Frauenshuh Prepared by: Janet Jeremiah, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager