HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001/10/15 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular 1
6:00 Board and Commission Interviews – Westwood Room
7:00 Special Meeting to Discuss Appointments – Westwood Room
7:20 Economic Development Authority – Council Chambers
AGENDA - CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
October 15, 2001
7:30 p.m.
1. Call to Order
a. Pledge of Allegiance
b. Roll Call
2. Presentations
3. Approval of Minutes
a. City Council Special Meeting Minutes of October 3, 2001
b. Study Session Minutes of October 8, 2001
Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes 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.
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 approve the contract with Hennepin Parks to clear and remove snow
from the LRT and Cedar Lake Extension Trails through the City of St. Louis
Park.
2
2. Motion to adopt the resolution that accepts this report considering major
equipment replacement scheduled and budgeted for 2002 and authorizes staff to
acquire equipment as allowed by Statute, Charter, or Ordinance.
3. Motion to terminate the Contract for Private Redevelopment between the St.
Louis Park EDA, the City of St. Louis Park, and DRF L-7 LLC dated July 30,
1999.
4. Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a contract with
WSB & Associates, Inc. for construction surveying and inspection for three (3)
flood problem areas in the amount of $143,000. Consultant for Assistance in
Construction Surveying and Inspection for three (3) Flood Problem Areas,
Projects #00-07, 01-08, & 01-09
5. Motion to adopt resolution accepting work on Park Commons demolition/ site
restoration, city project no. 01-15, contract no. 19-01, Kevitt Excavating,
6. Motion to adopt resolution accepting work on city-wide random curb & gutter,
city project no. 01-0, contract no. 74-01, Ron Kassa
7. Motion to accept the following reports for filing.
a. Board of zoning Appeals Minutes of June 28, 2001
b. Planing commission Minutes of September 19, 2001
c. Vendor Claim Report
8. Motion to approve resolution revoking specified streets as MSA routes and
motion to approve resolution designating specified streets as MSA routes.
Action: Motion to approve Consent Items
5. Public Hearings
5a. Year 2001 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant
Public hearing to inform the public and allow for citizen input regarding the Police
Department budget and the relation of that budget to Local Law Enforcement Block
Grant fund disbursement
Recommended
Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve grant fund
award.
5b. 2002 Budget Proposal for Special Service District No. 1
This report considers the approval of the 2002 budget and service charges for
Special Service District No. 1.
Recommended Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the
3
Action: 2002 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special
Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual
service charge to Hennepin County.
5c. 2002 Budget Proposal for Special Service District No. 2
This report considers the approval of the 2002 budget and service charges for
Special Service District No. 2.
Recommended
Action:
Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the
2002 Operating Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for
Special Service District No. 2 and directing staff to certify the
annual service charge to Hennepin County.
6. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None
7. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
7a. 1st Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Local Tax on Lawful Gambling
Reduction of tax on lawful gambling organizations from 2% to .075%
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve first reading and set second reading for
November 5th, 2001.
7b. Resolution of support for State of MN Capital Appropriation for Railroad
Switching Yard in Glencoe, Minnesota
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the resolution
7c. Resolution Adopting Railroad Task Force Recommendations
Adoption of Railroad Task Force recommendations of May 23, 2001 and statement
of intent to move toward implementation of the strategies contained in the
recommendations.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the resolution.
7d. Adoption of a Resolution Establishing 2002 Construction Permit, Business and
Contractor Licensing Fees
Consideration of Proposed Construction Permits, Business and Contractor License
4
Fees for Calendar Year 2002
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution establishing construction permit,
business and contractor licensing fees for the year 2002.
7e. The request of Jewish Community Center for Final Plat of Jewish Community
Center Addition (formerly Cedar Lake Woods Addition). Case No. 01-35-S
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Final Plat subject to
the conditions and stipulations listed in the resolution.
8. Boards and Committees
9. Communications
10. Adjournment
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make
arrangements, please call the Administration Department) at 952/924-2525 (TDD
952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
5
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
October 3, 2001
7:30 p.m.
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, Susan Sanger, Sue
Santa, Robert Young, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs.
Councilmembers Ron Latz and Chris Nelson were absent.
Also present were the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Scott); City Bond Counsel
(Mr. Utley); Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Ms. Jeremiah); City Engineer (Ms. Hagen);
Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin); City Engineer (Ms. Hagen); Planner (Mr. Smith);
Housing Program Coordinator (Ms. Larsen); and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson).
2. Presentations
a. Mayor Jacobs read the Proclamation for Minnesota Cities Week, October 7-13, 2001.
b. Mayor Jacobs read the Proclamation for Indoor Air Quality Month, October, 2001.
3. Approval of Minutes
a. City Council Special Meeting Minutes of September 24, 2001
The minutes were approved as presented.
b. Study Session Minutes of September 24, 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.
4a. Agenda
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
the agenda.
6
The motion passed 5-0.
4b. Consent Agenda
Mr. Meyer, City Manager, recommended that the item on the consent agenda regarding
Private Activity Revenue Bonds for Park Nicollet Health Services should be moved from the
consent agenda to the regular agenda as item 5b.
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
the following Consent Agenda Items.
The motion passed 5-0.
1. Adopt Resolution No. 01-108 designating polling places and appointing election
judges for the General Election on November 6, 2001.
2. Adopt second reading of Ordinance No. 2209-01 to vacate an old utility easement
in Park Commons East area, approve Summary Ordinance and authorize publication.
Case No. 01-08-VAC
3. Adopt second reading of Ordinance No. 2210-01 that authorizes the conveyance of
City-owned property along the south boundary of the “Westmoreland Park” plat to
the St. Louis Park EDA.
4. Adopt second reading of Ordinance No. 2211-01 to rename a portion of 38th and
39th Street west of Monterey Drive to its terminus at the Park Nicollet Clinic Park
Commons Drive effective April 1, 2002, approve Summary Ordinance and authorize
publication.. Case No. 01-48-ST
5. Adopt Resolution No. 01-109 authorizing the city to participate in Livable
Communities local housing incentives account program in 2002
6. Adopt second reading of Ordinance No. 2212-01 regarding miscellaneous Zoning
Ordinance amendments to Sections 14:7-3(A)(1) and 14:8-4.1 to extend the rights of
non-conforming uses from 6 months to 1 year and change the adoption requirements
for zoning code and map amendments in accordance with State Law, approve
summary ordinance and authorize its publication. Case No. 01-42-ZA.
7. Bid Tabulation: Motion to designate S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. the lowest
responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount
of $1,559,418.75 for storm water improvements at W. 33rd Street and Dakota
Avenue – City Project No. 00-07 (Area #15), W. 33rd Street and Texas Avenue –
City Project No. 01-08 (Area #13B), and W. 40th Street and Yosemite Avenue – City
Project No. 01-09 (Area #19)
7
8. Motion to accept the following reports for filing.
a. Human Rights Commission Minutes of August 15, 2001
b. Planning Commission Minutes of September 5, 2001
c. Vendor Claim Report
In regard to Item 1 of the Consent Agenda, Mayor Jacobs extended his thanks to all
election judges in St. Louis Park.
5. Public Hearings
5a. Public Hearing to consider reallocation of Community Development Block
Grant Funds and authorize execution of any Third Party Agreements.
Resolution No. 01-110
Linda Saveraid, Community Education Director for School District 283, introduced Porcia
Byrd, Community Education Advisory Council Chair. Ms. Byrd thanked the Council for their
consideration in allocating money to the Lenox Community Center for its continuous
improvement. Some members from the Lenox Community Center were also present.
Councilmember Santa asked for clarification regarding the reallocation of the funds, i.e., from
where do the funds come and what is not being done because of this? Ms. Larsen, Housing
Programs Coordinator, said $50,000 had been allocated to target neighborhood pilot projects,
specifically the Blackstone project, however, the Blackstone residents did not qualify for
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds, and the remaining money came from a
multi-family pilot revitalization project. Ms. Larsen said the reallocation of CDBG funds for
renovations to the Lenox Community Center meet CDBG eligibility requirements.
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Young to adopt
Resolution No. 01-110 approving reallocation of Urban Hennepin County Community
Development Block Grant funds, and authorizing execution of any related Third Party
Agreements.
The motion passed 5-0.
5b. Motion to adopt resolution allowing Park Nicollet Health Services to issue up to
$10,000,000 in Private Activity Revenue Bonds and approve all documents in
connection with the bond issue. Resolution No. 01-107
Mr. Meyer, City Manager, stated the purpose of a public hearing tonight would be to issue
Private Activity Revenue Bonds for Park Nicollet Health Services in an amount not to
exceed $10,000,000. Mr. Meyer explained a public hearing was held on September 4,
2001, however, at that time, the Council’s consideration was for preliminary approval only.
It is Mr. Meyer’s understanding that Mr. Utley, Bond Counsel, has stated the following:
Given the preliminary approval of September 4, 2001, the City then publishes notice of the
8
hearing and the resolution; tonight, October 3, 2001, is the proper time for the noticed
hearing.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing and, with no one wishing to speak, Mayor Jacobs
closed the public hearing.
Mr. Meyer asked Mr. Utley to clarify the action before the Council. Mr. Utley responded
that the motion Council was being asked to take is a motion to adopt the resolution
authorizing the issuance up to $10,000,000 and approve all documents in connection with
the bond issue.. Mr. Utley said that this is the final action the Council would take to
approve the bond.
It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt
Resolution No. 01-107 authorizing the issuance up to $10,000,000 in Private Activity
Revenue Bonds and approve all documents in connection with the bond issue.
The motion passed 5-0.
6. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public--None
7. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions
7a. Resolution to consider the Removal of Parking and the Installation of Lane
Striping on Minnetonka Boulevard from Texas Avenue to Huntington Avenue.
Maria Hagen, City Engineer, reported the purpose of tonight’s discussion is to consider
installing lane striping on Minnetonka Blvd. The objective of the lane striping is to provide
distinctive, non-ambiguous lanes in order to reduce accidents and increase safety, however,
parking would be eliminated on both sides of Minnetonka Blvd. from Texas Avenue to
Huntington Avenue. The issues are safety, mobility, parking requirements, and parking
needs. Because Minnetonka Blvd., also known as County Road 5, is a county road, the
City is required to meet Hennepin County standards in regard to re-striping. Ms. Hagen
said an open house was held on September 12 for residents and business owners; 12 of the
250-260 individuals notified were in attendance, and Staff received several phone calls
regarding the proposed striping or questions about it. Staff invited residents and business
owners to tonight’s meeting to provide input about the proposal.
Edmere Kolberg, 6617 Minnetonka Blvd., a 50-year resident of St. Louis Park, stated that
she was opposed to abolishing around-the-clock parking.
Councilmember Santa asked for clarification regarding Hennepin County standards, and
Ms. Hagen responded, east of Highway 100 on the four-lane section between Texas
Avenue and Huntington Avenue, Hennepin County is calling for the two inside lanes to be
11 feet wide and the outside lanes to be 11 ½ feet, the extra ½ foot is to provide a buffer
9
between the two traveling lanes. Hennepin County requires 10 feet for a parking lane as
opposed to a shoulder.
Annie Brown, 4833 Minnetonka Blvd., asked that parking be allowed with, perhaps, rush
hour restrictions.
Mr. Mursch, 4831 Minnetonka Blvd., stated his concern regarding his clients who have
difficulty walking; the lack of a drop off and pick up area would put him out of business.
Ms. Hagen said patrons would still have drop off and pick up accessibility.
Anne Gruden, 6621 Minnetonka Blvd, addressed the Council about the already keen
competition for parking spaces.
Mayor Jacobs would like to see more analysis on when accidents are occurring;
Councilmember Santa would like to know where the accidents are occurring; and
Councilmember Sanger would like additional and updated information. Councilmember
Sanger added it may be appropriate to reopen a discussion regarding a traffic light near the
Lenox Community Center.
Councilmember Santa moved that the action be postponed until additional information is
provided.
Councilmember Brimeyer said additional information will not change the situation, and the
options are unacceptable to him. He would like to pursue Councilmember Santa’s idea of
creative striping or, as Councilmember Brimeyer refers to it, nonstandard striping.
Councilmember Sanger said one outcome that should be considered is that bicyclists can
bicycle safely on Minnetonka Blvd.
In regard to timing issues, Ms. Hagen said striping is weather dependent and, irrespective
of tonight’s decision, would most likely take place next year.
Councilmember Brimeyer moved that this item be considered at a subsequent study session
with a nonstandard striping plan.
Ms. Hagen asked if this resolution to consider removal of parking and installation of lane
striping could be accommodated for the second study session in October.
Mr. Meyer, City Manager, asked for clarification on the timing issue, e.g., no action tonight
means the current system which has been in place for years will continue through the
winter, there will be no changes in the striping plan or in the parking plan until at least next
spring, therefore, the Council need not rush to make a decision and they have the
opportunity to think through the options. Mayor Jacobs’ concern is that postponement not
go too far down the line.
10
Mayor Jacobs re-stated the motion he believed was on the table which he believed was to
defer council decision for 30 days.
It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to defer for
30 days.
The motion passed 5-0.
7b. The request of Burlington Coat Factory for a Minor Amendment to a Special
Permit to allow changes to the building façade. Case No. 01-49-CUP
Resolution No. 01-111
Patrick Smith, Planner, reported on Burlington Coat Factory’s proposal to alter the front
portion of their façade at the main entrance. Staff thinks it is appropriate to allow current
nonconformities to remain.
Councilmember Santa asked about the percentages of class materials, and Mr. Smith said
the façade improvement will represent less than 10% of the building façade.
It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Young, to adopt
Resolution No. 01-111 approving a minor amendment to a Special Permit for Burlington
Coat Factory subject to the conditions in the resolution.
The motion passed 5-0.
8. Boards and Committees--None
9. From the City Manager: Mr. Meyer said an award was presented to the City of St.
Louis Park for its involvement in the Chain of Lakes Clean Water Partnership, St. Louis
Park was one of five participants in the project.
Mr. Meyer reported the City has been evaluating the impact of the State workers’ strike,
and it is believed the impacts of the strike on St. Louis Park will be fairly indirect. If a
long-term strike, snowplowing would be impacted, however, emergency vehicles will not
be hindered.
11. Adjournment
Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.
________________________________ _______________________________
City Clerk Mayor
11
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
October 8, 2001
The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m.
Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Ron Latz, Chris Nelson, Susan Sanger, Jim
Brimeyer, Jeff Jacobs and Sue Santa.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin), Public Works
Coordinator (Mr. Merkley), Public Works Intern (Ms. Helickson); Water Superintendant (Mr.
Anderson); Director of Community Development (Mr. Harmening); Planning Manager (Ms.
Jeremiah); Planning Coordinator (Ms. Erickson); Economic Development Coordinator (Mr.
Kleve); Finance Director (Ms. McGann); and City Clerk (Ms. Reichert).
1. EDA Financial Plan – Update on TIF Districts/Debt Management
Staff met with Council to update them on the cash flows from the TIF districts, policy issues
associated with the management of outstanding debt and other related financial matters.
Ms. McGann introduced EDA Attorney Steve Bubul of Kennedy and Graven and Rusty Fifeld,
Financial Consultant with Ehlers and Associates. Mr. Fifeld presented an update to the
Management Plan for Tax Increment Financing Districts which had originally been given to
Council in July of 2000. The report contained these basic findings:
♦ The EDA is in a financial position to meet its outstanding obligations.
♦ After paying for the Excelsior Blvd. bridge improvements and the obligations associated with
Park Commons (streetscape and infrastructure), the EDA will have approximately $1.7
million in available cash in the Excelsior Boulevard TIF District for future projects or reserve
funds. There will also be tax increment revenues from the Park Commons TIF district
available to the EDA after 2009.
♦ The elimination of the LGA/HACA penalty allows money that was set aside for this purpose
to be allocated to other redevelopment needs.
♦ The Vic Ponds and Park Center Boulevard TIF districts will eventually provide revenues
(after certain interfund loans are paid back) that can be used for future projects.
♦ The analysis assumes that the EDA will make its final referendum payment to the school
district.
2. Highway 7 and Louisiana Ave South Project Update
Mr. Kleve presented an update to council regarding alternatives available for the redevelopment
of the southwest corner of Hwy 7 and Louisiana and asked for direction as to which alternative
to pursue. He stated that the most problematic issue with the site is the location of the billboard
which would have to be moved or removed should any development occur on the site.
12
Council discussed the appropriateness of the site for the location of a WMEP school being
considered by the School District and timing of decisions that would need to be made by the
Council relative to that issue.
Councilmember Nelson felt that the Hwy7/Louisiana site was the only viable site for the school.
He suggested alternatives for use of the Brookside building and felt that an agreement beneficial
to the school and the city for use of the Hwy 7 site and/or Brookside could be worked out as
plans for the WMEP school developed.
Councilmember Sanger suggested that the school district use the Hwy 7 site for the WMEP
school and that they request additional bonding money from the state to remove the billboard.
She also asked if Frauenshuh could retain a link to the site while WMEP is being considered.
Ms. Jeremiah explained in detail zoning and comprehensive plan provisions related to billboard
use and how those provisions affect the Hwy 7/LAS site.
Mr. Kleve suggested that council could hold the site aside for use as a WMEP school and
meanwhile work to consider possible alternatives which would mesh with use of the Brookside
site.
Councilmember Latz stated that while he was prepared to listen to the school district proposal for
WMEP, any action involving sale or use of city property would need council approval. Since he
has not yet heard a concrete proposal on WMEP from the school district he did not feel he could
endorse any site for a WMEP school.
Ms. Jeremiah asked if Council was prepared to extend the Frauenshuh preliminary PUD.
After discussion council agreed to extend the PUD but terminate the redevelopment agreement.
Mr. Harming offered to make further recommendations to the Council at a future meeting.
3. Proposed Study of Quadian Site
Staff met with council to consider conducting an independent land use study of the Quadion
property in the Elmwood area. Council had previously authorized a larger scale study of the
entire Elmwood area. Because the Quadion site is currently for sale staff recommended that
council consider the best use for that property prior to a new owner taking over.
Councilmember Nelson asked about the possibility of a moratorium on development in the area
until the larger study is completed.
Mr. Harmening said that a moratorium could be put into place, but it was not recommended
unless council found there to be no other alternatives.
Councilmember Brimeyer asked if a moratorium were declared how long the area-wide study
would take to complete.
13
Mr. Harmening suggested that if Council was in agreement that Industrial zoning on the property
was a good use, that council need not take any action at all. Because the larger study is not yet
underway, it could be some time until it is complete.
Councilmember Nelson felt that doing an initial study of one property would be short sighted
and that this property should be looked at as only one piece of the larger area.
Mr. Harmening said that staff was planning a meeting with Quadion and would express the city’s
concerns about development of the property. He will inform the council about the outcome of
that meeting. For the time being, staff would not conduct a small scale study of the Quadion
property and would make every effort to work with Hennepin County to get the larger study
underway as soon as possible.
Mr. Harmening also expressed the need to involve residents and property owners in the larger
study from the outset. Without their active participation and support, a productive study will not
be possible.
4. Security of Water System
Mr. Anderson informed the council of additional security measures the water department was
taking to protect the city’s water supply and infrastructure. Council supported those plans and
commended Mr. Anderson for being proactive in this area.
5. Possible Sidewalk and Trail System Changes
Mr. Rardin outlined many small revisions to the Sidewalk and Trail plan that staff had identified
and asked for council’s direction as to how to proceed. For each of the possible revisions,
council discussed funding and appropriate public process.
Councilmember Sanger asked if there was a process to evaluate changes as they are suggested by
the public. Councilmember Latz suggested that the Council continue to use the current process,
where staff evaluates the proposals and if they are viable requests, brings them to Council for
their consideration.
Councilmember Nelson requested that staff meeting with a group of neighbors in his ward to
discuss one of the possible changes, but otherwise felt that the proposed revisions did not
seriously impact the residents or significantly alter the plan Council had adopted. Council
directed staff to move forward with the revisions.
Discussion took place as to the phasing of individual projects and options for alternate routes
along the 169 corridor. Council agreed to discuss options for connections in that area again at a
future meeting.
14
6. Solid Waste Contract
In anticipation of the expiration of the Solid Waste Contract, staff met with Council to begin
discussions about putting together an appropriate process for contract renewal. Mr. Merkley
asked Council to share their perceptions about the solid waste collection program and the
contractor’s performance.
In general, Councilmembers felt that complaints about poor service had subsided recently. In
some areas of the City, however, it was clear that residents continue to be dissatisfied with the
service. Council cited several observations about litter and can treatment, special pick-ups,
contractor responsiveness and other areas. Ms. Hellickson, Public Works Intern, recorded
Council’s comments which will be referred to as staff puts together next steps in the process.
Staff is projecting that the selection process will begin early in 2002 to allow adequate time for
completion before the contract expiration date of October 1, 2002.
7. Administrative Penalties
Council considered an administrative penalty procedure which would serve as an alternative to
the county court system in enforcing violations of some city ordinances. Council supported the
concept and asked questions about its specific application to certain violations.
Ms. Reichert and Mr. Rardin recommended that the process be limited in the initial stages of its
application to enforce sidewalk snow clearing, compliance with sprinkling restrictions and
compliance with water department orders to make directed repairs.
Prior to first reading, staff will create a clear outline of how the process will be applied to each
violation type for Council review.
8. Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned at 10:45 p.m.
City Clerk Mayor
15
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item #5a
Meeting of October 15, 2001
5a. Year 2001 Local Law Enforcement Block Grant
Public hearing to inform the public and allow for citizen input regarding the Police
Department budget and the relation of that budget to Local Law Enforcement Block
Grant fund disbursement
Recommended
Action:
Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve grant fund
award.
Background:
The Bureau of Justice Assistance has approved the City of St. Louis Park’s application for
funding under the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant Program (LLEBG), a program designed
to reduce crime and improve public safety. As a recipient of a Local Law Enforcement Block
Grant Program award, the St. Louis Park Police Department is requesting disbursement of
$19,080.00 in grant funds from the U.S. Department of Justice to be used for career development
training for department personnel
Recipients must agree to comply with special conditions that include the formation of a
community advisory board to review and endorse the proposed use of funds. This advisory
board was organized and met on August 22, 2001 at which time they gave unanimous
endorsement to the use of these funds for personnel career development training. In accordance
with the award’s special conditions, recipients must also deposit the funds in an interest bearing
trust fund for allowable expenses.
Recipients must also agree to hold a public hearing prior to the obligation of any funds to allow
for citizen input regarding the proposed use of these grant funds in relation to the organization’s
budget.
Prepared by: John D. Luse, Chief of Police
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
16
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item #5b
Meeting of October 15, 2001
5b. 2002 Budget Proposal for Special Service District No. 1
This report considers the approval of the 2002 budget and service charges for
Special Service District No. 1.
Recommended
Action:
Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the
2002 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special
Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual
service charge to Hennepin County.
Background
On June 3, 1996, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special
Service District No. 1. Annually, the City Council must adopt a service charge for the District
following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board
(Advisory Board) moved to approve the 2002 budget and service charges, as attached, at it’s
August 9, 2001 meeting. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on
September 19 & October 3. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the
District more than ten (10) days prior to the meeting.
Special Service District No. 1 Financial Position
As of August 31, 2001, the Special Service District No. 1 had an anticipated year-end fund
balance of $132,502. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve
should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. Based on this, a
2001 operating reserve of $79,502 was set with the remaining $53,000 to be credited against the
2002 property owners service charge, using the same formula as originally collected.
Maximum Service Charge Restrictions/Budgeting Parameters
In accordance with Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 96-87 (original service charge resolution), the
service charge increase annually is limited by an inflationary adjustment. This adjustment is
based upon the applicable consumer price index (CPI) percentage increase for the
Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The maximum allowable CPI increase is 5% from the
previous year’s service charge. Since there is no increase in service charges proposed for 2002,
the inflation adjustment allowance will not apply.
17
Proposed 2002 Budget and Service Charges
The Advisory Board recommended approval of a budget of $119,500 (same as set in 2001) and a
service charge of $106,000 (the same as set in 2001). The District will use budget reserve fund
balance to cover the estimated $6,500 difference between budgeted expenditures and anticipated
revenues being collected. In addition, $53,000 from the budget reserve will be used to reduce
the 2002 property owner service charges to an amount that provides adequate reserve while still
meeting the 50% reserve policy noted above (see Financial Position).
2002 City Portion of Service Charge
The City incurs service charges for the property located at 5005 W. 36th St. (Recreation
Center/Wolfe Park), which is in Special Service District No. 1. Charges paid in 2001 were
$27,379. The proposed fee for 2002 is $13,689, after the service charge adjustment.
Recommendation
Staff is not aware of any issues associated with this item and recommends Council approve the
resolution as requested.
Attachments
• 2002 Proposed Budget
• 2002 Proposed Service Charges
• Resolution
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator
Through: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
18
RESOLUTION NO. 01-117
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2002 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT No. 1
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2067-96, the City Council created Special Service
District No. 1 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on Exhibit
“A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 96-87, the City Council is authorized to impose service
charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2006 for taxes payable in
said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 96-87, the maximum service charge to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI)
data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, an increase in the annual service charge for 2002 meets the requirements set forth in
the inflation adjustment cap; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 96-87, the Service Charges shall be
payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of
ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November
30, 2001.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as
follows:
1. The 2002 Budget for Special Service District No. 1 of $119,500 is hereby approved as
recommended by the Special Service District No. 1 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2002 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 is $106,000 in the
amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this Resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2001
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
19
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT # 1
STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
BUDGET AND ACTUAL
2002 Budget Public Hearing
2001 2001 2000
Object 2002 2001 2001 2001 2000
Code Budget Budget Budget Anticipated Actual
(Proposed)(adopted)(revised)
Revenue
Service Fees - City Property 3419 27,379 27,379 27,379 72,622
Service Fees - Snow Hauling 3419 3,000 3,000 6,000
Charges for Services (Special Assessments)3701 78,621 78,621 78,621 78,621 54,249
Interest on investments 3780 2,067 340 4,067 2,000 8,104
Other payments (Park Shores)3791 1,933 1,933 1,933 1,933
Total Revenue 113,000 106,340 115,000 161,176 64,286
Expenditures
Equipment / Supplies 4225 1,000 2,000 2,000 1,577
Banner Replacements 4225 2,500
Special Signage (traffic, parking, events)4225
Landscape Materials (trees, shrubs, sod, etc.)4227 3,000 1,000 2,000 5,000 1,698
Cleaning/Waste Removal Supplies 4251 100 500 500
General Supplies 4269 1,500
Legal Notices 4341 200 200 200 107
Comp. liability insurance for public space improvements 4355
Electrical service for pedestrian lighting 4361 3,000 2,500 2,500 2,500 2,532
Electrical service for decorative lighting 4361
Refuse removal and recycling costs 4362 1,500 1,000 1,500 1,500 944
Banner installation and removal 4425 2,500 2,500 2,500 1,995
Low level pedestrian lighting and pole repair 4425 2,500 1,000 1,000
Installation, maintenance and removal of decorative lighting 4425
Cleaning, maintenance & repair infrastructure 4425 4,000 12,500 4,800 4,800
Landscape maintenance services 4427 25,400 25,000 22,500 22,500 18,662
Irrigation System maintenance and repair 4427 4,000 3,000 4,000 3,711
Cleaning of street, sidewalk, and alley & graffiti removal 4451 0 2,500 3,000 0
Snow and ice removal 4467 62,500 68,500 62,500 62,500 47,609
Administration / Promotional 4467 4,000 6,000 3,000 1,442
Contingencies 4900 3,300 5,000 467
Capital Expenses 4475 5,500
Total Expenditures 119,500 119,500 119,500 112,000 80,744
Revenue over (under) expenditures -6,500 -4,500 49,176 -16,458
Fund balance - January 1, 2000 99,784
Fund balance - January 1, 2001 83,326 83,326 83,326 83,326
Fund Balance - Current 78,826 132,502
Fund balance - January 1, 2002 (unadjusted)132,502
2002 Service Charge adjustment 53,000
Fund balance - January 1, 2002 (adjusted)79,502
2002
20
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Exhibit "A"
Special Service District #1
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
Authorized 2002 Service Charge
PAR.OWNER PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL
NO.2002 2002 2001 2000 2000
SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE
CHARGE CHARGE CHARGE CHARGE CHARGE
(unadjusted)(unadjusted)
1 3601 Park Center Boulevard PCOB Properties LLC 5,489 2,745 5,489 3,730 5,489
2 3601 Sth 100 South Dayton Hudson Corp.11,764 5,882 11,764 8,068 11,764
3 3777 Park Center Boulevard Park Center Ltd.12,220 6,110 12,220 8,465 12,220
4 5400 39th Street West AAA Minneapolis 6,012 3,006 6,012 4,106 6,012
5 3900 Park Nicollet Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 4,751 2,376 4,751 3,190 4,751
6 5500 Excelsior Boulevard Tower Place LLC 5,589 2,794 5,589 3,729 5,589
7 5200 Excelsior Boulevard Tower Place LLC 1,571 785 1,571 1,048 1,571
8 5100 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 2,052 1,026 2,052 1,453 2,052
9 3800 Park Nicollet Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 5,773 2,886 5,773 4,281 5,773
10 3800 Park Nicollet Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 1,281 641 1,281 950 1,281
11 5050 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 3,720 1,860 3,720 2,589 3,720
12 5000 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 846 423 846 582 846
13 4950 Excelsior Boulevard Koblas 633 316 633 426 633
14 4920 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 510 255 510 351 510
15 4916 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 756 378 756 520 756
16 4951 Excelsior Boulevard Park Nicollet Health Services 5,041 2,521 5,041 3,378 5,041
17 4961 Excelsior Boulevard Intercity Investment Prop.692 346 692 480 692
18 4995 Excelsior Boulevard Intercity Investment Prop.917 458 917 643 917
19 5001 Excelsior Boulevard Intercity Investment Prop.644 322 644 446 644
20 5201 Excelsior Boulevard Intercity Investment Prop.8,361 4,180 8,361 5,785 8,361
21 3700 Montery Drive City of St. Louis Park 27,379 13,689 27,379 19,587 27,379
TOTAL $106,000 $53,000 $106,000 73,806 106,000
Note:
(1)The proposed 2002 service charge is 50% of the unadjusted 2002 service charge. The adjustment was made to reduce the
operating reserve fund to a level sufficient to provide for future needs.
(2)The proposed 2002 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas used for the initial service
charge collection.
ADDRESS
21
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item #5c
Meeting of October 15, 2001
5c. 2002 Budget Proposal for Special Service District No. 2
This report considers the approval of the 2002 budget and service charges for
Special Service District No. 2.
Recommended
Action:
Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the
2002 Operating Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for
Special Service District No. 2 and directing staff to certify the
annual service charge to Hennepin County.
Background
On December 1, 1997, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for
Special Service District No. 2. Annually, the City Council must adopt a service charge for the
District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District
Advisory Board (Advisory Board) moved to approve the 2002 budget and service charges, as
attached, at it’s July 19, 2001 meeting. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun
Sailor on September 19 & October 3. The pubic hearing notice was sent to all property owners
within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the meeting.
Special Service District No. 2 Financial Position
As of August 31, 2001, the Special Service District No. 2 had an anticipated year-end fund
balance of $45,790. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should
be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. Based on this, a 2001
operating reserve of $21,040 was set with the remaining $24,750 to be credited against the 2002
property owners service charge, using the same formula as originally collected.
Maximum Service Charge Restrictions/Budgeting Parameters
In accordance with Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 97-165 (original service charge resolution),
the service charge increase annually is limited by an inflationary adjustment. This adjustment is
based upon the applicable consumer price index (CPI) percentage increase for the
Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The maximum allowable CPI increase is 5% from the
previous year’s service charge. Since there is no increase in service charges proposed for 2002,
the inflation adjustment allowance will not apply.
22
Proposed 2002 Budget and Service Charges
The Advisory Board recommended approval of a budget of $33,000 (same as set in 2001) and a
service charge of $33,000 (the same as set in 2001). The District will use $24,750 from the
budget reserve fund balance to reduce the 2002 property owner service charges to an amount that
provides adequate reserve while still meeting the 50% reserve policy noted above (see Financial
Position).
2002 City Portion of Service Charge
The City incurs service charges for the property located at 3929 Excelsior Blvd., which is within
Special Service District No. 2. Charges paid in 2001 were $106. The proposed fee for 2002 is
$26, after the service charge adjustment.
Recommendation
Staff is not aware of any issues associated with this item and recommends Council approve the
resolution as requested.
Attachments
• 2002 Proposed Budget
• 2002 Proposed Service Charges
• Resolution
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator
Through: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
23
RESOLUTION NO. 01-118
RESOLUTION APPROVING 2002 BUDGET
AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT No. 2
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2093-97, the City Council created Special Service
District No. 2 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on
Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 97-165, the City Council is authorized to impose service
charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2008 for taxes payable in
said year; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 97-165, the maximum service charge to
be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI)
data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and
WHEREAS, an increase in the annual service charge for 2002 is not proposed and therefore is
not subject to the inflation adjustment cap; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 97-165, the Service Charges shall be
payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of
ad valorem taxes; and
WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November
30, 2001.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as
follows:
1. The 2002 Budget for Special Service District No. 2 of $33,000 is hereby approved as
recommended by the Special Service District No. 2 Advisory Board.
2. The authorized 2002 service charge for Special Service District No. 2 is $33,000 in the
amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this Resolution.
Attest: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2001
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
24
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT # 2
STATEMENT OF REVENUE, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
BUDGET AND ACTUAL
2002 Budget - Public Hearing
Object 2002 2001 2001 2001 2000
Code Budget Budget Budget Anticipated Actual
(Proposed)(Adopted)(Revised)
Revenue
Service Fees - City Property 3419 106 106 106 40
Interest on investments 3780 200 200 200 200 3
Charges for services (Special Assessments)3701 32,894 33,000 32,894 69,291 13,872
Other payments (Residential snow removal)3791 1,000 1,000 1,000 687
Total Revenue 34,200 33,200 34,200 70,597 14,602
Expenditures
Equipments / Supplies 4225 500 500 500 1,193
Banner replacement 4225
Special Signage (traffic, parking, events)4225
Landscape Materials (trees, shrubs, sod, etc.)4227 4,500 4,000 2,000 1,500
Cleaning/Waste removal supplies 4251 500
Legal Notices 4341 200 125 107
Comprehensive liability insurance for public space improveme 4355
Electrical service for pedestrian lighting 4361 2,000 2,000 2,000 1,319
Electrical service for decorative lighting 4361 1,500
Refuse removal and recycling costs 4362
Banner installation and removal 4425 1,500 1,500 1,500 1,156
Low level pedestrian lighting and pole repair 4425 1,000 1,000
Installation, maintenance and removal of decorative lighting 4425
Cleaning, maintenance & repair infrastructure 4425 1,000 4,000 1,000 500
Landscape maintenance services 4427 10,500 13,500 13,000 13,000 8,638
Irrigation System maintenance and repair 4427 2,000 2,000 1,500
Poster, handbill, and graffiti removal 4451 500 500 500
Snow and ice removal 4467 7,000 8,000 7,500 6,000 2,305
Administration / Promotional 4467 1,800 500
Contingencies 4900 1,500
Capital Expenses - Landscape Improvements 4475 1,500 1,500
Total Expenditures 33,000 33,000 33,000 28,125 14,718
Revenue over (under) expenditures 1,200 1,200 42,472 -117
Fund balance - January 1, 2000 3,435
Fund balance - January 1, 2001 3,318 3,318 3,318 3,318
Fund balance - Current 4,518 45,790
Fund balance - January 1, 2002 (unadjusted)45,790
2002 Service Charge adjustment 24,750
Fund balance - January 1, 2002 (adjusted)21,040
25
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Exhibit "A"
Special Service District #2
Estimated Annual Cost Per Parcel
PAR.OWNER PROPOSED ACTUAL ACTUAL
NO.2002 2002 2001 2000 2000
SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE SERVICE
CHARGE CHARGE CHARGE CHARGE CHARGE
(unadjusted)(unadjusted)
1 3920 Excelsior Blvd Al's Liquor 1,519 380 1,514 657 1,514
2 3924 Excelsior Blvd American Inn 1,822 455 1,816 789 1,816
3 3542 Minikadha Ct.Sage Company
4 3551 Huntington Ave.Frank Murray
5 4100 Excelsior Blvd Sela Roofing & Remodeling 1,132 283 1,134 485 1,134
6 4120 Excelsior Blvd Baldwin & Mattson 1,089 272 1,086 471 1,086
7 3921 Excelsior Blvd Miller Management Co.578 144 576 250 576
8 3939 Excelsior Blvd Anderson-Cherne, Inc.953 238 954 410 954
9 3500 Glenhurst Ave Gary James
10 4011 Excelsior Blvd Richard Hogan
11 4015 Excelsior Blvd Jeffery Miller
12 4025 Excelsior Blvd Terrance Williams
13 4031 Excelsior Blvd Joann Armstrong
14 3601 Huntington Ave.Martin & Alice Fowler
15 3901 Excelsior Blvd Minikahda Union "76"1,168 292 1,172 499 1,172
16 3900 Excelsior Blvd Modelette Inc./Anderson Cleaners 301 75 309 122 309
17 3929 Excelsior Blvd City of St. Louis Park 102 26 106 40 106
18 3925 Excelsior Blvd A & A Agency Inc.632 158 627 276 627
19 3912 Excelsior Blvd Al's Liquor 1,509 377 1,501 657 1,501
20 3947 Excelsior Blvd Miller Management 1,460 365 1,453 635 1,453
21 4300 Excelsior Blvd Vacant sub building 646 162 656 269 656
22 4306 Excelsior Blvd Opitz Outlet 473 118 476 201 476
23 4308 Excelsior Blvd Office building 568 142 566 246 566
24 4301 Excelsior Blvd S & S Investments 1,294 324 1,306 547 1,306
25 4321 Excelsior Blvd Koval Furniture & Appliance 640 160 638 277 638
26 3757 Kipling Ave S Bruce Remmington
27 4409 Excelsior Blvd JEM Enterprises LLC 772 193 785 321 785
28 4415 Excelsior Blvd 573 143 577 244 577
29 4419 Excelsior Blvd Smith Motors 1,251 313 1,253 536 1,253
30 4424 Excelsior Blvd 999 250 998 431 998
31 4331 Excelsior Blvd Furniture Liquidators 966 242 965 417 965
32 4320 Excelsior Blvd Opitz Outlet 1,914 479 1,931 808 1,931
33 4400 Excelsior Blvd Kamps/Craven Prop. Partnership 3,745 936 3,723 1,630 3,723
34 4140 Excelsior Blvd Slumberland 1,871 468 1,865 810 1,865
35 3600 Huntington Ave.Elmer Nordstrom
36 4115 Excelsior Blvd Kooros & Grace Rejali
37 4121 Excelsior Blvd Kooros & Grace Rejali
38 4131 Excelsior Blvd Roxanna, Kooros & Grace Rejali
39 4221 Excelsior Blvd Nat'l Gear Molding Inc.408 102 414 170 414
40 4143 Excelsior Blvd Sam & Pearl Bix
41 4201 Excelsior Blvd Ackerberg & Assoc. Architects 1,893 473 1,892 815 1,892
42 4200 Excelsior Blvd Dijomi 1,240 310 1,236 536 1,236
43 4150 Excelsior Blvd 4150 Excelsior Blvd. Partnership 1,481 370 1,474 643 1,474
TOTAL 33,000 8,250 33,000 14,194 33,000
Note:
(1)The proposed 2002 service charge is 25% of the unadjusted 2002 service charge. The adjustment was
made to reduce the operating reserve fund to a level sufficient to provide for future needs.
(2)The proposed 2002 service charge calculations are based upon the same methodology / formulas used
for the initial service charge collection.
Authorized 2002 Service Charge
ADDRESS
26
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item #7a
Meeting of October 15, 2001
7a. 1st Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Local Tax on Lawful Gambling
Reduction of tax on lawful gambling organizations from 2% to .075%
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve first reading and set second reading for
November 5th, 2001.
Background:
In December of 1999 Council enacted a tax on lawful gambling in the city. The amount of tax
was calculated at 2% of the gross receipts of all licensed organizations less prizes actually paid
out by the organizations. Council’s stated intent in passing the tax was to ensure that city costs
are recovered, and adequate investigation and enforcement activities are conducted.
Since that time staff has evaluated the amount of tax being collected relative to expenditures
made by the City in administration and enforcement activities. Staff is recommending that
Council reduce the amount of tax to be collected from 2% to .075%.
Original Projections:
The Police Department had originally estimated that the cost of investigation and enforcement
related to gambling activity would be between $20,000 and $30,000 per year. In addition to
Police Department costs, projected costs related to routine administration of the license and
reporting requirements were estimated to be approximately $10,000 per year. Based on
projected City expenditures and 1999 gambling revenues, it was estimated that a tax of 2% of the
gross profits would amount to approximately $40,000/year which would adequately cover
projected costs. Council also stated at that time that if the city’s costs fall short of or exceed the
amount collected from a tax of 2%, Council would again act to adjust the amount of tax
collected.
Actual Experience:
Expenditures made by the City in both 2000 and 2001 have been far less than originally
projected and refunds of excess tax paid have been warranted both years. A refund totaling
$32,488.78 was issued to organizations at year end in 2000 and a refund of approximately
$20,000 is expected to be issued prior to year end of 2001 leaving the city with a projected
balance in the fund at year end 2001 of $2,899.18.
27
Revenues and Expenditures – Program #1088
2000
(actual)
2001
(estimated)
2000 & 2001
(Combined)
Revenues $40,991.24 $35,000.00 $75,991.24
Expenditures $10,243.06 $10,000.00 $20,243.06
Refund Issued $32,849 $20,000.00 $52,849.00
Balance ($2,100.82) $5,000.00 $2,899.18
Staff estimates that reducing the amount of tax to .075% will net between $10,000 and $13,000
per year which should adequately cover City costs related to administration and enforcement and
allow the City to maintain a positive, but not excessive, balance in the fund.
Prepared By: Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk
Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
28
ORDINANCE NO. _______-01
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
MUNICIPAL CODE, SECTIONS 13-1608 & 13-1613 CONCERNING
LOCAL TAX ON LAWFUL GAMBLING IN THE CITY
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 13-1608. Local Tax.
Any organization authorized to conduct lawful gambling shall pay to the city on a monthly basis
a local gambling tax in the amount of 2% .075% of the gross receipts of a licensed organization
from all lawful gambling less prizes actually paid out by the organization. Payment shall be
made no later than twenty-five (25) days after the end of the preceding month and shall be
accompanied by a copy of the monthly return filed with the State Gambling Control Board.
Section 13-1613. Effective Date
Effective date of the ordinance shall be January 1, 2002.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by City Council November 5, 2001
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
29
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item #7b
Meeting of October 15, 2001
7b. Resolution of support for State of MN Capital Appropriation for Railroad
Switching Yard in Glencoe, Minnesota
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the resolution
Background:
The Cities of Minnetonka, St. Louis Park, and Hopkins have been jointly working to eliminate
noise disturbances to their residents living adjacent to segments of rail lines where rail car
sorting operations are performed. In 1999, the Cities funded a noise study that concluded that
these sorting operations generate noise levels that exceed the State of Minnesota noise standards.
The cities have actively pursued solutions to mitigate the noise from these rail operations. All
efforts to date have been temporary solutions, while a permanent solution is pursued. The
construction of a switching yard in Glencoe, Minnesota was identified as the long-term goal that
would completely eliminate the blocking operations from the residential communities.
The railroad operator, Twin Cities & Western Railroad (TC&W), has cooperated with the cities
both with short-term and long-term mitigation programs. Short-term efforts have included
assisting the cities in funding the installation of a new crossover, as well as alternating the
locations where the operations are performed on a prescribed schedule. TC&W has also made
progress on the shared long-term goal by completing concept design, contacting adjacent land
owners to determine land availability and cost, and by preparing cost estimates.
The cities have also worked with the City of Glencoe to help achieve the long-term goals of that
city. Glencoe would benefit from both an operational and economic development standpoint.
Minnesota Prairie Line Reactivation:
As a related issue, TC&W is nearing completion of an agreement with MnDOT and the
Minnesota Valley Regional Rail Authority that would expand their operations to include the now
defunct Minnesota Prairie Line (MPL). This rail line was abandoned in the summer of 2000, and
several prior owners in recent times have had little success in maintaining its existence.
MnDOT is working to resurrect use of this line, and TC&W has stated that a switching yard
would improve their efficiency. This would enhance the likelihood of success of the MPL,
thereby supporting the State’s mission to transport more cargo by rail, as opposed to trucking
over already overcrowded highways.
Funding:
30
Out of a concern that this expansion would further worsen the already untenable noise problems
in the neighborhoods of the three communities, the cities approached MnDOT to request that the
TC&W rehabilitation of the MPL is expanded to include funding of a switching yard. This
request was denied, but MnDOT is now working cooperatively with the cities to identify other
state funding options.
To date, the short-term solutions implemented by the cities and TC&W have provided little
improvement. With increasing rail traffic levels imminent, the cities believe constructing the
Glencoe switching yard is essential to protect their communities from worsening conditions.
As a result, the cities of Minnetonka, St. Louis Park and Hopkins, in cooperation with the City of
Glencoe and the McLeod County Rail Authority, have submitted an application for State funding
to acquire land, and design and construct a new railroad switching yard in Glencoe. An
application has been prepared and submitted to the Minnesota Department of Finance for
$796,020 (50% of the project costs) to be awarded in 2002. The Cities are also seeking other
funding sources for the remaining 50% including other State funds and participation by the
railroad. It is also expected that the three cities would participate in part of the match.
A requirement of the submittal is a resolution of support from the governing body of the
applicant. Attached is the resolution for adoption by the City Council and the application. The
cities of St. Louis Park and Hopkins are expected to adopt a similar resolution. The City of
Glencoe adopted a resolution of support on September 17, 2001, subject to amending the
application to delete notation of any financial contribution from Glencoe. The City of
Minnetonka adopted the resolution on September 24th and the Hopkins City Council will be
considering it concurrent with St. Louis Park.
Recommendation:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution supporting a State of
Minnesota capital appropriation for a railroad-switching yard in Glencoe, MN.
Attachments:
Resolution of support
Prepared by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
31
RESOLUTION NO. 01-119
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR
STATE OF MINNESOTA CAPITAL APPROPRIATION
FOR RAILROAD SWITCHING YARD IN GLENCOE, MN
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota as follows:
Section 1. Background.
1.01. The Cities of Minnetonka, St. Louis Park and Hopkins (the Cities) have been jointly
working to eliminate noise disturbances to their residents living adjacent to segments of
rail lines where rail car sorting operations are performed.
1.02. In 1999, the Cities funded a noise study that concluded these sorting operations generate
noise levels that exceed the State of Minnesota noise standards.
1.03. The Cities have actively pursued short-term and long-term solutions to mitigate the noise
from these rail operations. To date, the short-term solutions have provided little
improvement.
1.04. The railroad operator, Twin Cities & Western (TC&W) is nearing completion of an
agreement with MnDOT and the Minnesota Valley Regional Rail Authority that would
expand their operations to include the now defunct Minnesota Prairie Line (MPL). The
Cities are concerned that this expansion would further worsen the already untenable noise
problems in the neighborhoods of the three communities.
1.05. The construction of a switching yard in Glencoe, Minnesota was identified as the long-
term solution that would completely eliminate the blocking operations from the
residential communities. A switching yard would be beneficial to Glencoe from both an
operational and an economic development standpoint.
1.06. Minnesota Statute 16A.86 prescribes the process by which local governments and
political subdivisions may request State of Minnesota capital appropriations.
1.07. The Cities, in cooperation with the City of Glencoe and the McLeod County Rail
authority, have submitted an application for a State of Minnesota capital appropriation in
the amount of $796,020 for land acquisition and design and development costs for a
railroad switching yard.
Section 2. Council Action.
32
2.01 The City Council of the City of St. Louis Park does hereby support the application for a
State of Minnesota capital appropriation by the Cities of Minnetonka, St. Louis Park and
Hopkins, in cooperation with the City of Glencoe and the McLeod County Rail
Authority, in the amount of $796,020 for a railroad switching yard in Glencoe,
Minnesota.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, on October 15, 2001.
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
33
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item #7c
Meeting of October 15, 2001
7c. Resolution Adopting Railroad Task Force Recommendations
Adoption of Railroad Task Force recommendations of May 23, 2001 and statement
of intent to move toward implementation of the strategies contained in the
recommendations.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the resolution.
Background:
The Railroad Task Force was created to develop a strategy for addressing rail issues in the City.
The purpose of the Task Force was stated as follows:
“To assist in the development of and gain support for a feasible Railroad Improvement Plan that
will ensure that future rail transportation through the City of St. Louis Park moves in the most
efficient and safest manner possible, while effectively interacting with other present and future
transportation modes with the least environmental impact on the community.”
The task force efforts built on the previously completed railroad study that provided the baseline
data to conduct further evaluation. The task force process included the technical evaluation of
creating a rail connection across the Golden Auto property, the Iron Triangle and a more
informal evaluation of a south connection through the Oxford Industrial Park. The process also
reviewed all at-grade rail/street crossings for safety and potential for closure. An evaluation of
environmental issues was conducted including noise and vibration analysis. The issue of
elimination of blocking was included as one of the strategies but was pursued largely outside the
task force process. The task force also took into consideration the impact of commuter rail and
light rail studies being conducted by other groups.
The task force included representatives from most affected neighborhoods and the task force
members are listed in the attached task force report.
Neighborhood Meetings:
On July 23rd at the City Council’s study session the report was presented to the Council for
discussion, and the City Manager was directed to meet with interested neighborhood groups for
discussion and input. All neighborhoods that participated in the task force were advised that the
City would assist in holding a meeting. A meeting of the Birchwood Neighborhood had been
held previously. The Lenox and Sorenson Neighborhoods held a joint meeting on September
11, 2001. The City Manager was also invited to a meeting of the Cedar Isle/ Dean
Neighborhood on October 2, 2001. Finally a meeting is being set up on October 25, 2001 with
the residents of the South Oak Hill area. This area is not formally organized but City staff is
34
working with residents on an organizing effort in this area that is to be combined with the
railroad discussion.
In each of the neighborhood meetings there were questions asked and presentations given. Each
of the neighborhood representatives that served on the task force was offered the option of
submitting a minority report or dissenting statement but so far none has been submitted. At the
meeting with the Minneapolis neighborhood, there was some question raised as to why St. Louis
Park would be adopting a strategy that potentially impacts Minneapolis. The explanation that
rail issues inevitably overlap municipal boundaries seemed to be understood.
Both the Twin City and Western Railroad and the CP Railroad submitted letters after the report
was completed by the task force indicating that they did not support the recommendations of the
task force and did not intend to be bound by them. The strategy does call for agreements from
the rail companies to limit their operations in a variety of ways.
Issues:
What is the impact of adopting the strategy?
The adoption of the strategy allows the City to address opportunities and threats with a clear
direction of what St. Louis Park’s priorities are. An example of the use of the strategy is in
discussions with MnDOT regarding the Highway 100 rail bridge. The strategy directs us to
have MnDOT plan for a freight rail capacity bridge over Highway 100 but may allow for a
reduction of the size of the bridge due to relative little usage.
What funds are available to advance the strategy?
One of the principle funding sources for implementation of the strategy is the Hennepin County
Environmental Response Fund. The Hennepin County Board of Commissioners has recently
adopted a policy regarding that fund that reserves $4,000,000 of the fund for the priority
established in the authorizing legislation – to construct a rail connection on the Golden Auto site.
St. Louis Park would be able to request additional funding for such a connection but would then
be competing with other applicants.
What are the next steps?
Staff is continuing to work on several parts of the recommendations. The blocking issue has
been submitted to the State of Minnesota for bond act funding for a switching yard in Glencoe.
The Glencoe City Council has agreed to support that funding application while adding that they
do not expect to provide any matching funds. Under separate action the City Council is being
asked to support the same funding application. Staff is also pursuing the acquisition of the
Golden site to preserve control for future usage. No action has yet been taken to pursue a
southern connection.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the recommendations of the Railroad Task Force
and that efforts toward implementation of the strategy continue.
35
Attachments:
Railroad Task Force Report
Prepared by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
36
RESOLUTION NO. 01-120
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE
RAILROAD TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATIONS
AND STATING THE INTENT OF THE CITY TO
MOVE TOWARD IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
STRATEGIES CONTAINED IN THE REPORT
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota as
follows:
WHEREAS, A Railroad Task Force was created to establish an overall strategy for
addressing rail issues in the city; and
WHEREAS, Several affected neighborhoods and other affected parties met from April
2000 to May 2001 and drafted a series of recommendations and a position statement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to support the work of the task force and establish a
strategy for directing our efforts regarding rail issues.
NOW THEREFORE LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, The City Council of the City of
St. Louis Park hereby adopts the recommendations of the Railroad Task Force, attached as Exhibit
A to this resolution, and states the intent of the City to direct efforts toward the implementation of
the strategies contained in the recommendations.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, on October 15, 2001.
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
37
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 7d
Meeting of October 15, 2001
7d. Adoption of a Resolution Establishing 2002 Construction Permit, Business and
Contractor Licensing Fees
Consideration of Proposed Construction Permits, Business and Contractor License
Fees for Calendar Year 2002
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution establishing construction permit,
business and contractor licensing fees for the year 2002.
Background
As part of the major revisions to the licensing chapter last year, license fees were removed from
the body of the code and adopted by resolution as a fee appendix. This format is consistent with
the future layout of the entire City Code following recodification. Annual review and adjustment
of fees when necessary will help keep the fees current and prevent large fee increases after years
of no change.
Analysis
All fees are designed to approximately reflect the total cost incurred by the city in providing
licensing and inspection services. Simplicity, fairness and consistency of fees are also
considered. Anticipated revenue from the proposed fees for both licensing and building permits
are included in the proposed 2002 budget.
• License Fees
Staff is proposing moderate increases of fees for five different license categories; Multi Family
Rental Housing, Lodging, Food, Public Sanitary Facilities and Parking Facilities.
Prior to last year, both food and multi-family rental housing fees had not changed for many
years. The increases proposed this year are larger than would be typical and due to a three year
phase-in of adjustments to the licensing fees. Inspection and licensing of food vending machines
will be new for 2002 as a result of our delegation agreement with the Department of Agriculture.
The fee is limited to $15.00 per machine by state regulations.
Listed below are the current fees, proposed 2002 fee increases and proposed increase in revenue.
Projected annual revenue is based on the current number of licensed establishments and units.
This number and actual revenue may increase or decrease with changes in businesses.
38
Current 2001 Proposed 2002 Proposed Annual
Fees/Revenues Fees/Revenues Increase in Revenue
Multi-Family
Per Building (303) $75/$22,725 $85/$25,755 $3,030
Per Unit (7000) $4/$28,000 $4.75/$33,250 $5,250
Fees/Revenues Fees/Revenues Proposed Annual
Current 2001 Proposed 2002 Increase in Revenue
Lodging
Per Building (7) $75/$525 $85/$595 $ 70
Per Unit (677) $2/$1,354 $2.75/$1,862 $ 508
Food and Beverage
Food L $125/$6,375 $145/$ 7,395 $1,020
Food M $325/$7,150 $355/$ 7,810 $ 660
Food H $525/$36,750 $565/$39,550 $2,800
Food H+ $725/$15,225 $775/$16,275 $1,050
Food V (vending) $0/$0 $ 15/$ 2,400 $2,400
Public Sanitary Facilities
PSF I $700/$3,500 $750/$3,750 $ 250
PSF II $250/$6,250 $275/$6,875 $ 625
PSF III $175/$1,575 $200/$1,800 $ 225
Parking Facilities
Enclosed $125/$3,000 $155/$3,720 $ 720
Ramps $ 75/$1,050 $ 95/$1,330 $ 280
Proposed Increase for 2002 License Revenues $18,888
• Permit Fees
Staff is proposing to increase Building Permit fees for small construction projects valued at
$2,000 or less. The current minimum Building Permit fee of $23.50 is not sufficient to recover
expenses associated with review, permitting, site inspection, travel time and data entry. A
minimum fee of $35.50 is consistent with other permit minimums. The attached permit fee table
reflects that the proposed fees would match the existing fee of $69.25 when the project value
reaches $2000.
The current fee payable to the city for the Point of Sale program for one and two family homes is
$50, with an additional cost for an inspection payable to a private inspector. This additional cost
39
currently varies from $100 to $150. The proposed 2002 fee for the Property Maintenance
program will be a one time fee of $150 payable to the city. This will balance the cost of adding
an additional Environmental Housing Inspector, vehicle and associated expenses. The document
issued for the Inspection program when a property is sold or transferred will be titled Certificate
of Property Maintenance for both homes and commercial buildings.
The fees for the Certificate of Occupancy (change of use) are determined by square footage of
the building in question. The fee table shows changes in the square footage that determines the
cost of the permit. No fee will be charged for a Certificate of Occupancy when issued as part of a
building permit for construction or remodeling.
The food and beverage installation equipment permit is also increasing. The base fee is proposed
to increase from $35 to $50.
Attachments: Resolution to Adopt 2002 Licensing Fees
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
40
RESOLUTION NO. 01-121
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING PERMIT AND
LICENSE FEES ISSUED BY THE CITY
WHEREAS, the Municipal Code authorizes the City Council to establish fees for permits
and licenses by resolution, and
WHEREAS, Permit and license fees are set by individual municipalities taking into
account the cost of program administration and fees charged by other municipalities in the
metropolitan market.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that effective January 1 2002, fees for
permits and licenses are established as follows:
Type
Building and Fire
Protection
Permits
Description
Up to $500
$500.01 to $2,000.00
Fee
$35.50
$35.50 for the first $500
plus $2.25 for each additional
$100 or fraction thereof, up to
and including $2000
$2,000.01 to $25,000
$25,000.01 to $50,000
$69.25 for the first $2,000
plus $14 for each additional
$1000 or fraction thereof, up
to and including $25,000
$391.25 for the first $25,000
plus $10.10 for each
additional $1000 or fraction
thereof, up to and including
$50,000
$50,000.01 to $100,000
$100,000.01 to $500,000
$500,000.01 to $1,000,000
$643.75 for the first $50,000
plus $7 for each additional
$1000 or fraction thereof, up
to and including $100,000
$993.75 for the first $100,000
plus $5.60 for each additional
$1000 or fraction thereof, up
to and including $500,000
$3233.75 for the first
$500,000 plus $4.75 for each
additional $1000 or fraction
thereof, up to and including
$1,000,000
41
$1,000,000.01 and up $5608.75 for the first
$1,000,000 plus $3.65 for
each additional $1,000,000 or
fraction thereof
Public or Private
Swimming Pools
Permit Fees Building permit fees apply
Plan Review
Electrical
Permit
Mechanical
Permit
When applicable:
Single family interior remodel only:
Installation, replacement, repair
Exception for single family dwellings:
Installation, replacement or repair of
a single appliance
Installation, replacement or repair:
Exceptions for single family
dwellings:
1. Replacement of furnace, boiler or
furnace and air conditioner
2. Installation of single fuel burning
appliance including fuel piping to
the appliance
3. Installation, replacement or repair
of single mechanical appliance
not included in 1 or 2
65% of building/fire permit fee
35% of building permit fee
$35 plus 1.75% of job
valuation
$35
$35 plus 1.75% of job
valuation
$50
$50
$35
Plumbing
Permit
Installation, replacement or repair:
Exception for single family dwellings:
1. Installation, replacement or repair
of single plumbing fixture
$35 plus 1.75% of job
valuation
$35
Sewer and Water
Permit
Installation, replacement or repair:
Exception for single family dwellings:
$35 plus 1.75% of job
valuation
1. Repair or replacement of single
sewer or water service
$35
Tent Permit Tent over 200 sq ft $75
Canopies over 400 sq ft $75
Certificate of
Property
Maintenance
Change in ownership
One and two family dwellings:
All other buildings:
$150
Up to 25,000 sf $250
25,001 to 75,000 sf $350
75,001 to 150,000 sf $500
150,001 and above sf $750
Certificate of Change of use
42
Occupancy
Food and
Beverage
Equipment
All buildings other than one and
two family dwellings:
Installation of food and beverage
equipment (used equipment
valued as if new for fee
calculation)
Up to 25,000 sf $250
25,001 to 75,000 sf $350
75,001 to 150,000 sf $500
150,001 and above sf $750
$50.00 + 1% of valuation of
equipment job cost
Dog License
Dog License – 1 year
Dog License – 2 year
$15
$25
Dog License – 3 year $35
Penalty for No License $35
Contractor
License
Mechanical Contractor License
Competency Test (housing,
mech.)
$85
$25
Competency Renewal-3 year
(mech.)
$15
Sold Waste Collection License $175
Vehicle Decal per vehicle $15
Tree Maintenance and Removal
License
$50
Vehicle Decal per vehicle $5
Business
License
Late Fee
$25 or 20% of annual fee
(greater)
Transfer of Ownership
Commercial Entertainment
Courtesy Bench
Environmental Emissions
Food and Beverage
Class H+
Class H
Class M
Class L
Class V – Food Vending per
machine
$50
$250
$35 each
$125
$775
$565
$355
$145
$15
Public Sanitary Facilities
Class I $750
Class II $275
Class III $200
Massage Therapy Establishment $125
Lodging (Hotel/Motel)
Building Fee $85
43
Unit Fee $2.75
Multiple Family Rental Housing
Building Fee $85
Unit Fee $4.75
Sexually Oriented Business
Investigation Fee (High Impact) $500
High Impact $4,500
Limited Impact $125
Tobacco Products and Tobacco
Related Devices Sales
$250
Vehicle Parking Facilities
Parking Ramp $95
Enclosed Parking $150
Pawnbrokers $250
Dog Kennel $125
Billboards $125
Temporary Use
Permits
Temporary Food Service ( 3+
days)
$125
Temporary Food Service (1-3
days)
$75
Temporary Outdoor Retail Sales $100
Circuses, Carnivals and
Amusement Rides
$250
Petting Zoos $50
Solicitor/Peddler Registration $50
Commercial Film Production
Application
$50
Construction Debris Container
(dumpster)
$15
Temporary Noise Permit $40
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2001
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
44
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item #7e
Meeting of October 15, 2001
7e. The request of Jewish Community Center for Final Plat of Jewish Community
Center Addition (formerly Cedar Lake Woods Addition). Case No. 01-35-S
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Final Plat subject to
the conditions and stipulations listed in the resolution.
Background
The Jewish Community Center (JCC) is proposing a major building expansion to add 32
classrooms, library, music room, and computer lab. In addition, the JCC is proposing a 6,200-
square-foot expansion to the physical fitness center. They are also proposing to expand their
parking lot to the south and east and add a drop-off area north of the new expansion.
To accommodate the parking lot expansion, the Jewish Community Center (JCC) is purchasing a
piece of City land immediately south of their existing facility. The proposed final plat would
combine the two parcels. Outlot A will be retained by the City for future ponding purposes. In
addition to the proposed plat, the expansion plans required rezoning and certain variances.
On August 1, 2001, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the rezoning,
preliminary plat and variance requests. At the public hearing, residents voiced concern over the
removal of trees, idling cars and buses near their homes, and the height of the proposed building.
The Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the JCC’s requests.
On August 20, 2001, the City Council voted 7-0 to approve the rezoning, preliminary plat and
variance requests. The Council had concerns with the final landscaping plan and wanted to
review the final landscaping plan along with the final plat.
On October 3, 2001, the Planning Commission considered the Final Plat of Cedar Woods
Addition. No one other than the applicant was present from the public. The Planning
Commission voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the plat subject to conditions, including certain
plan revisions that were to be completed prior to City Council consideration. Subsequently, the
County told the JCC that the proposed name of the plat was too similar to the plats. Therefore,
the JCC is renaming it to Jewish Community Center Addition.
Issues:
What has changed from the Preliminary Plat to the Final Plat?
Has the JCC completed revisions required by the Planning Commission?
Are there any outstanding issues?
What is the status of the sale of the City property to the JCC?
45
Analysis of Issues:
What has changed from the Preliminary Plat to the Final Plat?
The applicant has incorporated a number of City Council and staff recommendations made
during the preliminary plat review. More specifically, the applicant has modified the parking lot
layout on the south side of the site to move farther away from the existing vegetation to save
more trees. The applicant has reduced the turning radius and driveway widths in order to move
the turn-around in the northeast corner of the site farther from the sewer easement. In addition,
the internal parking stall depths have been reduced from 20 feet to 18 ½ and 18 feet in order to
move the parking lot farther away from the trail on the south side of the property. Moreover, the
middle entrance to the site that was initially proposed has been eliminated making the entrance
safer.
Additional landscaping has been added in the parking lot islands, between the turn-around and
the sewer easement on the north side of the property and between the parking lot and the trail on
the south side of the site.
Moreover, perimeter easements have been added to the final plat, and the sanitary sewer
easement on the north side of the site has been increased from 15 feet to 30 feet from the west
property boundary to the wetland.
Has the JCC completed revisions required by the Planning Commission?
The Planning Commission recommended that the realigned trail and sidewalk connecting the
trail to the pedestrian overpass on Cedar Lake Road be depicted on the site plan prior to City
Council review. The applicant has submitted a site plan showing how a concrete sidewalk and
stairway will connect the trail and path.
Are there any outstanding issues?
The applicant, adjacent neighbors, City Council and staff all agreed that the best screening plan
for the north side of the property would be to retain as much existing vegetation as possible and
plant evergreen trees along the north property line, which is the highest point between the
property boundary and the school. However, the undergrowth, which consists of buckthorn, will
need to be removed in order for the evergreen trees to survive. There are a scattering of boxelder
and hackberry trees in the sewer easement area that staff is recommending the applicant
preserve. A condition of approval is that the tree preservation plan be revised indicating which
trees are to be preserved in the sewer easement area.
The resulting landscaping plan will have a layering effect with evergreen trees being planted
along the property line, preserving the boxelder and hackberrry trees in the sewer easement area,
46
and overstory trees planted between the turn-around and sewer easement. The proposed
landscaping plan meets the bufferyard requirements.
Subsequent to the Planning Commission’s review of the final plat, the City Engineer submitted
comments regarding the final plans (please see the attached memorandum). The note regarding
the final grading plan has already been incorporated into the resolution, and staff has added a
condition regarding the final utility plan.
Finally, an exception is depicted on the final plat on the parcel that the JCC is purchasing from
the City. The City Attorney’s office has discovered this relates to an error in the legal description
and is in the process of correcting it. This will simply result in the legal descriptions changing
on the cover of the plat and the plat drawing will change to eliminate the exception piece. Staff is
recommending adding a condition from the Planning Commission’s recommendation that all
issues relating to the exception piece be resolved prior to the City signing the final plat.
What is the status of the sale of the City property to the JCC?
The purchase agreement requires closing to occur by October 31, 2001. Staff has been working
with the City Attorney on preparing for the closing and expects it to occur by the deadline. There
is an outstanding issue that needs to be resolved prior to closing. This relates to the JCC having
all approvals in place from the City and other public bodies prior to closing. With the City’s
approval of the final plat, all City approvals will be in place (other than administrative types of
approvals, e.g. building permits, erosion control permits, etc.) However, the Watershed District
has not yet approved a permit for the project. This is expected to occur by October 25, 2001.
Recommendation:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Final Plat of Jewish Community Center Addition
subject to the conditions listed in the proposed resolution.
Attachments:
• Proposed Resolution
• Final Plat
• Revised Development Plans
• City Engineer’s Memo
Prepared by: Patrick Smith, Planner
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
47
RESOLUTION NO. 01-122
RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR FINAL PLAT OF
JEWISH COMMUNITY CENTER ADDITION
(FORMERLY CEDAR WOODS ADDITION)
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. The Jewish Community Center, owners and subdividers of the land proposed to
be platted as Jewish Community Center Addition have 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 Jewish Community Center 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. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Official
Exhibits A through I. Exhibit E, utility plan shall be revised installing two
additional valves on the new 6-inch water main. Exhibit I, tree preservation plan
to be revised indicating the preserved trees in the sewer easement area parallel to
the north property boundary.
b. Prior to the City signing the Final Plat, the following conditions shall be met:
i. The title sheet shall be corrected with regard to the legal description.
ii. The City Attorney shall approve the owner’s policy of title insurance,
which insures the City’s interest in the plat, and ensure resolution of any
issues related to the exception piece.
48
iii. The developer shall pay all attorney fees.
iv. The developer shall furnish financial sureties for site improvements, and
other requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, including utilities,
erosion control, landscaping, placement of iron monuments, sidewalks,
tree preservation, and street repair/cleaning.
c. Prior to any site work, the following conditions shall be met:
i. The final plat shall be approved by the City Council.
ii. Trail and street easement and access license shall be approved by City
Attorney and executed by the JCC pursuant to the purchase agreement
between the City and the JCC.
iii. JCC shall close on the City owned property.
iv. Final construction documents for public infrastructure (sidewalks,
underground utilities) improvements shall be approved by the Public
Works Director.
v. Required erosion control permits, utility permits, and other required
permits shall be obtained from the City, Watershed District and any other
required agencies.
vi. A final tree preservation plan, preserving all trees over 4-inches in
diameter in the sewer easement area parallel to the north property
boundary, shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator and any
necessary construction fencing shall be in place.
vii. A final grading plan is approved by the Public Works Department.
viii. A final utility plan, installing two additional valves on the new 6-inch
water main that is looped around the building, is approved by the Public
Works Director.
d. Prior to issuance of a building permit, which may impose additional conditions,
the following conditions shall be met:
i. The applicant shall submit evidence of recording the final plat and
easements.
ii. A lighting plan, photometrics and irrigation plan meeting the Ordinance
regulations shall be submitted to and approved by the Zoning
Administrator.
iii. Exterior building material/colors shall be approved by the Zoning
Administrator.
e. Outlot A shall be retained by the City.
f. Prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the following conditions shall be met:
49
i. The required sidewalk, realigned trail and all building and site
improvements, other than landscaping and wear course of bituminous,
shall be completed.
ii. The applicant shall submit a Letter of Credit in the amount of 125% of the
cost of any outstanding improvements.
iii. Rooftop screening shall be in place in accordance with Zoning Ordinance.
iv. As built surveys of all required improvements as required by the Director
of Public Works shall be furnished to the City by the developer.
v. Official monuments shall be set at each corner, angle, or curve points on
the outside boundary of the final plat.
vi. An electronic copy of the final plat shall be submitted to the City.
g. A fence permit shall be required prior to the installation of the proposed fence and
the design of the fence to be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Department staff.
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.
(Insert Signature Block Here)
50
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
October 15, 2001
ITEMS TO BE ACTED UPON BY CONSENT
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.
1. Motion to approve the contract with Hennepin Parks to clear and remove snow from the
LRT and Cedar Lake Extension Trails through the City of St. Louis Park.
2. Motion to adopt the resolution that accepts this report considering major equipment
replacement scheduled and budgeted for 2002 and authorizes staff to acquire equipment
as allowed by Statute, Charter, or Ordinance.
3. Motion to terminate the Contract for Private Redevelopment between the St. Louis Park
EDA, the City of St. Louis Park, and DRF L-7 LLC dated July 30, 1999.
4. Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a contract with WSB &
Associates, Inc. for construction surveying and inspection for three (3) flood problem
areas in the amount of $143,000. Consultant for Assistance in Construction Surveying
and Inspection for three (3) Flood Problem Areas, Projects #00-07, 01-08, & 01-09
5. Motion to adopt resolution accepting work on Park Commons demolition/ site
restoration, city project no. 01-15, contract no. 19-01, Kevitt Excavating,
6. Motion to adopt resolution accepting work on city-wide random curb & gutter, city
project no. 01-0, contract no. 74-01, Ron Kassa
7. Motion to accept the following reports for filing.
a. Board of zoning Appeals Minutes of June 28, 2001
b. Planing commission Minutes of September 19, 2001
c. Vendor Claim Report
8. Motion to approve resolution revoking specified streets as MSA routes and motion to
approve resolution designating specified streets as MSA routes.
51
City of St. Louis Park
CONSENT ITEM # 1
Meeting of October 15, 2001
1. Motion to approve the contract with Hennepin Parks to clear and remove
snow from the LRT and Cedar Lake Extension Trails through the City of St.
Louis Park.
Background
The southwest LRT and the newly developed Cedar Lake extension trials are owned and
maintained by Hennepin Parks. However, Hennepin Parks does not clear or remove snow from
their trails during the winter. They will allow cities to plow snow from their trails under a signed
contractual agreement.
Trail Clearing Contract
The City of St. Louis Park did clear and remove snow from the LRT trail during the 2000-2001
winter season. This service was very appreciated by many of our residents who use the trail all
year. As a part of the snow removal policy, staff recommends the City of St. Louis Park clear the
regional trails through our City since Hennepin Parks does not. Approving this contract would
allow us to do so for the winter of 2001-2002.
Clearing or removing snow from the LRT trail would be done in much the same manner and
priority as last year. Clearing the Cedar Lake Extension will be more difficult. There are some
areas where the trail is 10 feet wide with only a 12-foot wide easement. The trails would be
cleared as a part of the Public Works snow removal policy. If there are times when the City gets
several inches of snow at one time, it may be difficult for maintenance staff to remove the snow
since there is no room to store it and no way to access the trail to remove it. Staff will keep the
City Manager and City Council informed if the snow accumulations are significant and
maintenance is not able to remove the snow. The contract with Hennepin Parks states that the
City must repair any damage to the trail done by the local municipalities while plowing snow.
Staff will take precautions to prevent damage in our snow removal process.
Future Snow Removal
It does not appear that Hennepin Parks will assume the responsibility to remove snow from their
regional trails. The City of St. Louis Park will be asked to sign a contract annually to remove
snow on the LRT and Cedar Lake Extension trails.
Attachments: Contract
Prepared by: Cindy Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
52
CONSENT ITEM # 2
St. Louis Park City Council
October 15, 2001
2. Adopt the attached resolution that accepts this report considering major
equipment replacement scheduled and budgeted for 2002 and authorizes staff
to acquire equipment as allowed by Statute, Charter, or Ordinance.
Background:
Procurement of vehicles is accomplished in a variety of ways. By Statute, Charter, and
Ordinance, all larger purchases are to be authorized by the Council and bid in accordance with
public contracting laws. Once Council authorizes equipment purchases, the City can call for bids
or the equipment can be purchased through other agencies that have already legally bid for this
equipment (i.e. State of Minnesota contracts, Hennepin County contracts, etc.). Replacement of
equipment costing less than $50,000 does not require Council authorization. Staff replaces this
type of equipment by purchasing it from State or County contracts or by obtaining competitive
quotes.
Budget:
In the first quarter of 2001, Public Works staff met with each equipment-using department to
discuss fleet management and both short term and long term planned replacements. From this
discussion, Public Works revised the planned replacements lists. From this list, year 2002
replacements were placed in the budget proposal earlier this year.
Final List for Replacement:
The final list for year 2002 contains 29 units estimated to cost (gross) $1,014,700. This listing is
attached for your information. Of those, there are 7 vehicles that will cost close to or more than
$50,000 and will require Council authorization.
Attachments: Resolution
Year 2002 Equipment Purchase Spreadsheet
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator
Through: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
53
RESOLUTION NO. 01-112
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING REPORT, APPROVING SPECIFICATIONS,
AND AUTHORIZING ADVERTISEMENTS FOR BIDS FOR
YEAR 2002 MAJOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has received a
report from the Director of Public Works related to major equipment scheduled for replacement
during year 2002.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that:
1. The Director of Public Works Report regarding year 2002 equipment replacement is hereby
accepted.
2. The following seven (7) pieces of equipment costing close to or more than $50,000 are
authorized for replacement or addition during year 2002:
Old
Vehicle
Unit No.
New Vehicle Description
1. 215 Mid-Sized Fire Pumper
2. 8547 Single Axle Dump Truck
3. 9203 1 Ton Minidump
4. 9204 1 Ton Minidump
5. 9232 1 Ton Minidump
6. 9414 Trackless Utility Vehicle
7. N/A Trackless Utility Vehicle
3. The Director of Public Works is further authorized to acquire all year 2002 equipment
purchases as allowed by Statute, Charter, or Ordinance through the following methods: by
bid, by purchase from State of Minnesota Contract, Hennepin County Contract, or by
quotations.
4. The necessary Specifications for year 2002 equipment purchases as prepared under the
direction of the Director of Public Works are approved.
5. When necessary, the City Clerk shall prepare and cause to be inserted at least two weeks in
the official newspaper and in the Construction Bulletin advertisements for bids for said
equipment listed above under said specifications. Advertisements shall appear not less than
twenty-one (21) days prior to the date and time bids will be received by the City Clerk, and
that no bids will be considered unless sealed and filed with the City Clerk and accompanied
54
by a cashier’s check, bid bond, or certified check payable to the City for five (5) percent of
the amount of the bid.
6. Bids received for the equipment listed above shall be tabulated by the Director of Public
Works who shall report his tabulation and recommendation to the City Council.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2001
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
55
2002 Equipment Purchases
Old
Unit
No.
Old Description Replacement
Cycle
Age Miles
by
2002
Primary
Department
New Vehicle Description Approx.
2002
1 9229 37” Mower 10 10 Bldg. & Structures 37” Mower $3,200
2 9201 Truck, ¼ T Compact 10 or 70,000 10 Engineering Truck, ¼ T Compact $16,250
3 9228 37” Mower 10 10 Facilities Maint. 37” Mower $3,200
(a) 4 215 Full Sized Fire Pumper 20 16 Fire Mid-Sized Fire Pumper $249,250
(b) 5 9417 Full Size Sedan 8 or 100,000 8 Fire Full Size Sedan
6 8637 Seeder 15 16 Grounds/ Nat Res Seeder $3,000
7 8719 Loader, Tractor 15 15 Grounds/ Nat Res Loader, Tractor $40,000
8 8719D Post Hole Drill 15 15 Grounds/ Nat Res Post Hole Drill $2,500
9 8821B Broom 15 20 Grounds/ Nat Res Broom $4,300
10 9202 Truck, ½ T 2x4 10 or 90,000 10 Grounds/ Nat Res Truck, ½ T 2x4 $18,800
11 9208 Cushman 10 10 Grounds/ Nat Res Cushman $16,000
12 9230 72" Mower 10 10 Grounds/ Nat Res 72" Mower $17,400
13 9205 Truck, 1T, Service 10 or 90,000 10 MSC Truck, 1T, Service $36,500
14 9231 Truck, ½ T 2x4 10 or 90,000 10 Operations Truck, ½ T 2x4 $19,400
(a)15 9414 Trackless 6 8 Operations Trackless $62,200
16 9414B Snowblower Attachment 6 8 Operations Snowblower Attachment $6,650
(a)17 Operations Trackless $62,200
18 Operations Snowblower Attachment $6,650
19 0001 Police Squad 2 2 Police Police Squad $26,000
20 0002 Police Squad 2 2 Police Police Squad $26,000
21 0003 Police Squad 2 2 Police Police Squad $26,000
22 0004 Police Squad 2 2 Police Police Squad $26,000
23 9416 Full Size Sedan 8 or 100,000 8 Police Full Size Sedan $21,600
24 9718 Truck, 1/4 T, 4x4 Sport-4 or 70,000 5 50,000 Police Truck, 1/2 T, 4x4 Sport-Utl $35,600
56
Old
Unit
No.
Old Description Replacement
Cycle
Age Miles
by
2002
Primary
Department
New Vehicle Description Approx.
2002
Utl
(a) 25 8547
130.10
94147
8436ub
Single Axle Dump
Truck,
Inc. Sander,
Inc. Front Plow,
Inc. Wing
15 or 60,000 17 Pool Single Axle Dump Truck
Inc. Sander,
Inc. Front Plow,
Inc. Wing
$114,500
(a) 26 9203 Truck, 1T, Minidump 10 or 60,000 10 Pool Truck, 1T, Minidump $46,800
(a) 27 9204 Truck, 1T, Minidump 10 or 60,000 10 Pool Truck, 1T, Minidump $46,800
(a) 28 9232 Truck, 1T, Minidump 10 or 60,000 10 Pool Truck, 1T, Minidump $46,800
29 9233 Truck, 1T, Utility 10 or 90,000 10 Sanitary Sewer Truck, ½ T 2x4 Ext. Cab $22,600
30 9316 All-terrain utility vehicle 10 9 Westwood Hills
Nature Center
All-terrain utility vehicle $8,500
TOTAL $1,014,700
Notes:
(a) Units estimated near or over $50,000 that Council will be requested authorization to purchase
(b) The Fire Department’s administrative vehicle replacement is temporarily on-hold pending the hiring of the Fire Chief
57
CONSENT ITEM # 3
St. Louis Park City Council
Meeting of October 15, 2001
3. Motion to terminate the Contract for Private Redevelopment between the St.
Louis Park EDA, the City of St. Louis Park, and DRF L-7 LLC dated July 30,
1999.
Background:
At the March 26, 2001 Study Session, Frauenshuh asked for 60 days to continue to market the
site it has control over at Highway 7 and Louisiana. The EDA/Council reacted favorably to this
request. At the June 25, 2001 Study Session staff updated the EDA/Council on the project and
reported that Randy McKay would be available for the July 9, 2001 Study Session. At the July 9,
2001 Study Session Randy McKay gave an update and asked for more time to look at the
financial impacts of tax reform on the project. At the August 27, 2001 Study Session, Randy
McKay said that Frauenshuh was prepared to step aside if directed.
Frauenshuh has had an approved Redevelopment Contract with the City/EDA since July of 1999
which has expired. Frauenshuh has had an approved preliminary PUD in place since August 2,
1999. This has been extended numerous times. It is currently extended through the end of
November. The termination of the Redevelopment Contract does not terminate the PUD (i.e. the
ability to move the billboard). This issue will come before the Council in November.
At the August 27 Study Session, the EDA/Council requested staff to do some research into the
alternatives available and these alternatives were presented to the EDA/Council at the October 8,
2001 Study Session.
Recommendation:
At the October 8, 2001 Study Session, Steve Bubul, the EDA’s attorney recommended that the
EDA and City terminate its contract with Frauenshuh since it will have to be completely
redrafted anyway if they bring in a new proposal. Staff concurs with this recommendation.
Prepared by: Tom Kleve, Economic Development Coordinator
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
58
CONSENT ITEM # 4
St. Louis Park City Council
Meeting of October 15, 2001
4. Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a contract with
WSB & Associates, Inc. for construction surveying and inspection for three
(3) flood problem areas in the amount of $143,000. Consultant for Assistance
in Construction Surveying and Inspection for three (3) Flood Problem Areas,
Projects #00-07, 01-08, & 01-09
This report considers the retention of an engineering consultant to assist City staff in the
construction surveying and inspection for three (3) flood problem areas scheduled for
construction during this year and next.
Background: At it’s August 6, 2001 meeting the City Council approved the City Engineer’s
Report for three (3) flood problem areas at Keystone/Roxbury/Lake St. Parks – City Project No.
00-07 (Area #15), W. 33rd Street and Texas Avenue – City Project No. 01-08 (Area #13B), and
W. 40th Street and Yosemite Avenue – City Project No. 01-09 (Area #19) and authorized receipt
of bids. The City Council awarded a contract for the construction of these 3 projects at their
October 3, 2001, meeting.
The firm of WSB & Associates, Inc. (WSB) designed the three (3) projects and has worked with
City staff in the project development. Due to staff commitments to on-going projects it is
recommended that WSB be hired for construction surveying and inspection services.
Discussion: In response to staff’s request, WSB submitted a proposal (attached) to assist the
City with construction surveying and inspection services. Activities to be performed by WSB
are as follows:
• Construction surveying/staking
• Construction inspection
• Assistance with payment requests
• Contract administration
It is anticipated that the level of involvement will vary with each project. However, following is
the estimated costs for each flood problem area:
Area #15 Area #13B Area #19 Total
Const.
Engineering
$ 97,000 $ 40,000 $6,000 $ 143,000
Est. Project Cost $ 1,130,000 $ 450,000 $75,000 $ 1,655,000
Staff has reviewed the consultant’s proposal and found the costs to be 9.1% of the estimated
construction costs. This is below industry standards, which typically are 12 to 15% of the
estimated construction costs.
59
Recommended Action: Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a contract
with WSB & Associates, Inc. for construction surveying and inspection for three (3) flood
problem areas in the amount of $143,000.
Prepared By: Carlton Moore, Superintendent of Engineering
Reviewed By: Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director
Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
60
RESOLUTION NO. 01-113
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON
PARK COMMONS DEMOLITION/SITE RESTORATION
CITY PROJECT NO. 01-15, CONTRACT NO. 19-01
Kevitt Excavating, Inc.
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as
follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated May 7, 2001, has satisfactorily
completed Park Commons demolition/site restoration as per Contract No. 19-01.
2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the
work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2001
City Manage r Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
61
RESOLUTION NO. 01-114
RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON
CITY-WIDE RANDOM CURB & GUTTER
CITY PROJECT NO. 01-01
CONTRACT NO. 74-01
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as
follows:
1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated June 18, 2001, Ron Kassa Construction,
Inc. has satisfactorily completed City-wide random curb & gutter as per Contract No. 74-
01.
2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the
work.
3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is
directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2001
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
62
Item 7a
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
SEPTEMBER 19, 2001--6:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Ken Gothberg,
Dennis Morris, Jerry Timian
MEMBERS ABSENT: Michael Garelick, Carl Robertson, Sally Velick
STAFF PRESENT: Patrick Smith, Tara Olson
1. Call to Order - Roll Call
Vice-Chair Gothberg called the meeting to order at 6:12 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes of September 5, 2001
Commissioner Morris moved approval of the minutes and the motion passed on a vote of
4-0 with Commissioners Bissonnette, Gothberg, Morris, and Timian voting in favor.
3. Hearings
A. Case 01-46-CUP – Request of Xcel Energy for a Conditional Use Permit for the
placement of fill in excess of 400 cubic yards at 2201 Edgewood Avenue South.
Mr. Smith presented a staff report.
Vice-Chair Gothberg opened the public hearing.
Mr. Smith recommended continuation of the public hearing until the next Planning
Commission meeting in order to allow the applicant time to submit a tree preservation
plan and details of the fence and accessory building.
Commissioner Morris made a motion to continue the public hearing until the October
3, 2001 Planning Commission meeting. The motion passed on a vote of 4-0 with
Commissioners Bissonnette, Gothberg, Morris, and Timian voting in favor.
63
4. Unfinished Business: None
5. New Business
A. Consent Agenda
B. Other New Business
6. Communications
Mr. Smith stated that he enjoyed attending the joint Planning Commission meeting held
at the City of Richfield. He said would like to attend such meetings in the future but
hopes to see more topic organization. Commissioner Gothberg said that he also enjoyed
meeting with the cities of Richfield, Edina, Bloomington, and Golden Valley and hopes
to attend next year.
7. Adjournment
Vice-Chair Gothberg adjourned the meeting at 6:22 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Tara Olson
Community Development Secretary
64
Item 7b
MINUTES JUNE 28, 2001
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals Committee conducted a regular meeting on
Thursday, June 28, 2001, at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis
Park, Minnesota.
Members Present: Acting Chair James Gainsley
Commissioner Susan Bloyers
Commission Tom Powers
Members Absent: Chair Paul Roberts
Staff Present: Scott Moore, Assistant Zoning Administrator
Tara Olson, Community Development Secretary
1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL
Acting Chair Gainsley called the regular meeting to order at 7:08 p.m.
2. APPROVE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMITTEE MINUTES
Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Powers, to approve the following
minutes as presented:
1) Board of Zoning Appeals Committee public hearing and regular meeting minutes dated
March 22, 2001.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer and Powers. Voting No: None.
3. CONSENT AGENDA
None
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMITTEE BUSINESS
a. Case No. 01-24-VAR - The request of Robert Rappaport for a variance from
the requirements of Section 14:5-4.2(F)(6) of the Ordinance Code relating to
zoning to permit a building with a front yard setback of 25.3 feet instead of
65
the required 28.3 feet setback for property located in the “R-1” Single
Family District at 3901 Basswood Road.
Mr. Moore presented a report – and concluded that since 5 of the 7 criteria have not been
satisfied, it is recommended that the request to permit a front yard setback of 25.3 feet instead of
the required 28.3 feet be denied.
With no more questions, Acting Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
Robert and Susie Rappaport, applicant, of 3901 Basswood Road, gave Commissioners current
property photographs and a notarized copy of a statement from their neighbors. Mrs. Rappaport
stated that she felt that this addition would not have negative impact on the neighborhood, as
stated in the staff report.
Mr. Rappaport has stated that his family presently owns three vehicles adding that the hardship
of parking has become an issue. Mr. Rappaport gave each Commissioner a proposed plan of the
garage and went on to say that his architect has designed the garage with a one-foot clearance
from the automobile to the garage door with a four-foot clearance between each vehicle and a
one-foot clearance to the proposed laundry room which is presently the existing garage.
Acting Chair Gainsley asked staff for the present standard size of vehicles.
Mr. Moore stated that a standard parking stall size is between 18 – 20 feet in length. The City’s
minimum parking stall requirements are 8 ½ feet wide and 18 feet deep.
Mr. Rappaport stated that the property directly east has a garage with a setback of 20.8 feet.
Would that have required them to receive a variance?
Mr. Moore stated that property is located within the City of Minneapolis with different codes.
Mr. Rappaport asked staff about a proposal of converting the existing single car garage into a
living space while building a two car garage in front of the existing single car garage. How
would staff feel about that proposal.
Mr. Moore stated that possibly a different plan could be developed to accommodate a two-car
garage conversion while still meeting the required setbacks.
Mr. Rappaport would like the Commissioners to know that this proposed extension would be 5
feet shorter than the property to the east.
Acting Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
66
Commissioner Bloyers stated that she didn’t see the hardship that would require the variance.
Commissioner Powers agreed with Commissioner Bloyer.
Acting Chair Gainsley agrees with Commissioners Bloyers and Powers. He understands that the
home located east of Mr. Rappaport’s is located in the City of Minneapolis which may cause
some confusion regarding setback requirements, but feels there is no hardship to give order of
granting this variance.
Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that the variance be
denied based on the staff report.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer and Powers. Voting No: None.
b. Case No. 01-25-VAR - The request of Stephan Jentran for variances from
the requirements of Sections 14:5-4.2(F)(10) and 14:5-4.2(F)(6) of the
Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit side yard setback of 2.61 feet
instead of the required 4.6 feet and a front yard setback of 17.8 feet instead
of the required 28.9 feet for property located in the “R-1” Single Family
District at 2108 Glenhurst Avenue.
Mr. Moore presented a report – and concluded that since 5 of the 7 criterion have not been
satisfied, it is recommended that the request to permit a side yard setback of 2.6 feet instead of
the required 4.6 feet be denied, and since staff believes all seven criterion have been satisfied, it
is recommended that the request to permit a 17.8 foot front yard setback instead of the required
28.9 feet be approved.
Chair Gainsley asked staff if the applicants lot area of 10,016 square feet was a calculation that
takes into account the arc-cutout. Mr. Moore stated that the square footage was given to staff by
the surveyor.
Chair Gainsley asked staff if an average R-1 Single Family lot was 9,000 square feet minimum.
Mr. Moore stated that is correct.
Chair Gainsley asked how much space will be between the existing garage wall and proposed
garage wall. Mr. Moore stated that he was unsure, but it would meet the 10-foot minimum.
Chair Gainsley inquired that if we were to grant the variance, would it still meet the 10-foot
minimum. Mr. Moore stated that he would need to double check the measurements to ensure
accuracy, but if the garage were narrowed by two feet it would definitely meet the minimum.
Chair Gainsley asked if a fire code wall would be required on the neighbor’s side of the proposed
garage addition. Mr. Moore stated that he was unsure and would to talk to a City Inspector.
67
Commissioner Powers stated that while looking at the aerial photo it looks as if the applicant’s
driveway is abutting the property line. Mr. Moore stated that the applicant has a shared driveway
with the neighbors and the property line splits the driveway.
With no more questions, Acting Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
Stephan Jentran, applicant, of 2108 Glenhurst Road, gave Commissioners current property
photographs. Mr. Jentran stated that he has a compact lot on a cul-de-sac. He has looked for
other alternatives but due to a large slope in the backyard, the irregular angle of the lot and the
sharing of the driveway with the neighbor he has no other alternatives. Mr. Jentran stated that
the adjoining driveway neighbor is not opposed of this addition.
Acting Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Powers asked staff if 10 feet of the addition would be encroaching due to the
angle of the property. Mr. Moore stated that was correct due to the angling of the property line.
Commissioner Powers stated that if the applicants were to follow code, the garage would have a
two-foot jog compared to the existing garage. Mr. Moore stated that would be correct, also that
is what staff had purposed.
Chair Gainsley responded to the Committee that he feels that a variance should be warranted due
to the hardship of the property angle.
Commissioner Bloyers cited Chair Gainsley in that the shape and the angles due add hardship for
the applicant and is willing to warrant the variance also.
Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that the variance be
granted to the applicant due to staff’s findings and also due to the hardship of the lot.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer and Powers. Voting No: None.
c. Case No. 01-26-VAR - The request of Patrick Collins for a variance from the
requirements of Section 14:5-4.2(F)(5) of the Ordinance Code relating to
zoning to permit a side yard setback 2.5 feet instead of the required 6 feet for
property located in the “R-1” Single Family District at 8400 Virginia Circle
North.
Mr. Moore presented a report – and concluded that since 5 of the 7 criterions have not been
satisfied, it is recommended that the request to permit a side yard setback of 2.5 feet instead of
the required 6 feet be denied.
68
Acting Chair Gainsley asked staff if the distance between the proposed addition and the adjacent
protrusion from the house was over 10 feet and also what the total square footage of the lot is
presently. Mr. Moore responded that the 10 feet will be met and the lot square footage of this
property is 12,750 square feet.
Acting Chair Gainsley questioned staff if the proposed total width of the proposed garage was 22
feet and the existing width of the present garage is 13.7 feet.
Mr. Moore stated that was correct.
Acting Chair Gainsley asked Mr. Moore if staff is suggesting the applicant build the proposed
garage in the back yard. Mr. Moore stated he was correct.
Acting Chair Gainsley questioned if the applicants will be converting the existing space to living
space. Mr. Powers stated that the applicants would need that existing space for a driveway.
Acting Chair Gainsley asked staff if the present grade in the backyard had significant factors on
the proposed garage. Commissioner Bloyer stated she had visited the site and noticed several
slopes and hills in the back yard.
Commissioner Powers asked staff if the applicant were to replace the driveway where would
staff suggest the placement. Mr. Moore stated that the driveway could be placed along the
existing garage.
With no more questions, Acting Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
Patrick Collins, applicant, of 8400 Virginia Circle North, thanked Commissioner Bloyer for
taking the time to look at his backyard topography. Mr. Collins explained to the Commissioners
that his neighbors on both sides of him would voice objection to the building of a garage in his
backyard compared to the garage being built adjoining his home. Mr. Collins also stated that he
has a letter from one of his neighbors complimenting the proposed addition onto the home and
has received several additional neighbors’ names and signatures stating that his proposal would
have no significant impact on them.
Acting Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
Commission Powers stated that he would not like to see a driveway running the length of the
property but is concerned that it is only 2.5 feet between the property line and the house.
Acting Chair Gainsley stated that he feels the variance is merited considering that there is a
significant grade problem.
Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that the variance be
granted based on the uneven topography of the lot.
69
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer and Powers. Voting No: None.
d Case No. 01-27-VAR - The request of Darin Foreman for a variance from
the requirements of Section 14:5-4.3(F)(3) of the Ordinance Code relating to
zoning to permit a side yard abutting a street setback of 11.79 feet instead of
the required 15 feet for property located in the “R-2” Single Family District
at 5701 Cambridge Street.
Mr. Moore presented a report – and concluded that since 5 of the 7 criterions have not been
satisfied, it is recommended that the request to permit a side yard abutting a street setback of
11.79 feet instead of the required 15 feet be denied.
Acting Chair Gainsley asked staff the total lot size of this property. Mr. Moore stated that the lot
was 10,362 square feet.
Acting Chair Gainsley asked staff if the development of Xenwood Avenue has any future plans.
Mr. Moore stated that he does not know of any present or future plans at this time, but spoke
with the Engineering Department, which had stated that they were unable to vacate the property
due to the existing utilities.
With no more questions, Acting Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing.
Darin Foreman, applicant, 5701 Cambridge Street, explained to the Commissioners that the staff
report suggesting to rearrange the addition to the east smaller and add more onto the south,
would cause conflict with the proposed kitchen layout. Mr. Foreman also stated that he would
like to utilize several existing fixtures in the kitchen and with staffs recommendation that would
cause a conflict in arrangement and in cost.
Acting Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing.
Motion by Chair Gainsley, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that the variance be granted to
the applicant due to hardship of the lot.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Powers and Bloyers. Voting No: None.
5. Old Business:
6. New Business:
a. Election of Officers
70
Commissioner Bloyer nominated Acting Chair Gainsley be elected as Chairperson.
Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that Mr. James Gainsley
be elected Chairperson.
Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyers and Powers. Voting No: None.
Commissioner Powers nominated Commissioner Bloyers be elected as Vice Chairperson.
Motion by Acting Chair Gainsley, second by Commissioner Powers, that Mrs. Bloyers be elected
Vice Chairperson.
7. Communications:
Mr. Moore stated that Current Zoning Ordinances were handed along with an annual
report for the year 2000 to each member.
8. Miscellaneous: None
9. Adjournment:
Commissioner Bloyer moved and Commissioner Powers seconded the motion for
adjournment. The regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals adjourned at 8:10
p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Tara Olson
Community Development Secretary
71
Item 7c
October 5, 2001
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
A & T UPHOLSTERY CO. EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 250.00
AAA-LICENSE DIVISION MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 4,751.37
ABLE COURIER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 12.20
ABRAHAMSON, KEN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 42.58
ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS IN POSTAGE 9.00
AIIM INTERNATIONAL SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 250.00
AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 48.25
ALEX, HEATHER M TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 36.57
ALL STAR SPORTS INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 172.95
ALMSTEAD'S SUPERVALU OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 861.21
ANDERSON, DON CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00
ANDERSON, SCOTT MEETING EXPENSE 72.77
API FUND FOR PAYROLL EDUCATION MEETING EXPENSE 389.00
ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE ACCT GENERAL SUPPLIES 393.03
ARMADILLO TRUCKVAULT INC. MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT (150.00)
BACKLUND, HARLAN TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 963.73
BAKER, BETSY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 129.83
BATTERIES PLUS GENERAL SUPPLIES 14.87
BCA/TRAINING & DEVELOPMENT TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 60.00
BEEKS PIZZA MEETING EXPENSE 61.89
BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 4,980.98
BOBS PERSONAL COFFEE SERVICE CONCESSION SUPPLIES 218.48
BOYER TRUCK PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS 178.99
BRO TEX INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 249.30
BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66)
BROCK WHITE CO LLC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,675.78
Babett's In The Park OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 308.73
CAHNERS BUSINESS INFORMATION PRINTING & PUBLISHING 554.20
CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 1,590.31
CARLSON, SHEILA OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 128.34
CENTER FOR ENERGY & ENVIRONMEN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 27,957.52
COMMISSIONER OF TRANSPORTATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 373.89
CONCEPT SEATING INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (180.00)
CRILEY, KATHI L MOTOR FUELS 97.90
CUMMINS NORTH CENTRAL INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 721.16
DEKEK, DARREL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00
DITZLER PROPERTIES CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00
ELIOT NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOC. OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 353.05
ENGELMAN, CHERYL L OFFICE SUPPLIES 35.22
ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 31.95
ENSMINGER, THOMAS CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00
ERICKSON, ROSS CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00
FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.67)
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,495.84
FLAGLER, JOHN J PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,438.00
FLANNIGAN, JANE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 240.24
72
FREEWAY RADIATOR SERVICE EQUIPMENT PARTS 173.60
G & K SERVICES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 45.35
GARDNER HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES 63.90
GARELICK STEEL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES (2.57)
GARTNER REFRIG & MFG INC BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 3,827.85
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (27.83)
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 708.80
GRAFIX SHOPPE EQUIPMENT PARTS 28.80
GRAINGER INC, W W EQUIPMENT PARTS 172.70
GROEN, MELANIE TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 98.00
HATCH SALES CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 4,589.54
HOME DEPOT/GECF GENERAL SUPPLIES 50.18
HORTON SALES COMPANY INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 60.15
HUIRAS, SHIRLEY OFFICE SUPPLIES 209.09
HYDRO SUPPLY COMPANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 15,068.74
IAFCI TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 75.00
IND SCHOOL DIST #283 PRINTING & PUBLISHING 6,760.01
INDELCO GENERAL SUPPLIES 183.77
INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT #2 OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 300.00
IOS CAPITAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT 686.93
J H LARSON COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 762.43
JAK TREES INC. CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 3,749.17
JAYTECH INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 171.03
JERRY STAMM BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 51.55
KASSA CONSTRUCTION, RON OTHER IMPROVEMENTS 47,208.80
KEYSTONE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRIES EQUIPMENT PARTS 151.42
KRANTZ, JAMES G CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00
LACAL EQUIPMENT INC EQUIPMENT PARTS (235.63)
LARSON, ALLEN, WEISHAIR & CO ADULT ATHLETIC/LEAGUES -EXEMPT 40.00
LINHOFF PHOTO & DIGITAL IMAGIN GENERAL SUPPLIES 44.62
LOGIS COMPUTER SERVICES 35,808.40
LUNA, LAURIE TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 90.00
MALAN MARIE MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 144.56
MCCONNELL, BECKY TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 385.00
MCGANN,JEAN MEETING EXPENSE 187.84
MEDSOFT CORPORATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 238.00
MENARDS BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 374.57
METRO FIRE INC NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 1,154.09
METROCALL TELEPHONE 292.35
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 11,380.07
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC POSTAGE 18.37
MINNESOTA ICE ARENA MGRS ASSOC TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 75.00
MINNESOTA PARK SUPERVISORS ASS TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 60.00
MN DRIVER & VEHICLE SVCS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CHARGE (46.00)
MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 102.49
NAPA GENUINE PARTS CO/FINANCE EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,107.96
NEENAH FOUNDREY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 1,231.14
NORTH HENNEPIN MEDIATION PROGR OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,900.00
NSP CO ELECTRIC SERVICE 442.12
ODV INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 17.94
73
OESTREICH, MARK TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 385.00
OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,930.84
OFFICE MAX GENERAL SUPPLIES 91.58
OLSON, TARA OFFICE SUPPLIES 136.58
ON SITE SANITATION OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 142.99
ORTON, PAM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8.48
OTTO PACKAGING MIDWEST LLC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES (72.00)
PAINTERS GEAR INC. EQUIPMENT PARTS 211.20
PANNING, CRAIG TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 409.22
PARK NICOLLET CLINIC HSM PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 854.80
PARTS PLUS EQUIPMENT PARTS 47.86
PBBS EQUIPMENT CORP BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 136.89
PEPSI-COLA COMPANY CONCESSION SUPPLIES (15.89)
POSTMASTER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 165.00
PRESTIGE LINCOLN MERCURY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 235.01
PRINTERS SERVICE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 28.30
PRO PRODUCTS INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (92.32)
PROFESSIONAL TURF & RENOVATION LANDSCAPING SERVICE 209.80
PROPANE GAS PRODUCTS MOTOR FUELS 40.44
QUILL CORPORATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 84.90
RACETTE, THOMAS C. FACILITY RENTALS - taxable 25.00
RANDY'S SANITATION INC GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 2,451.54
RELIANT ENERGY HEATING GAS 4,793.60
RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED EQUIPMENT PARTS (55.35)
RLK-KUUSISTO LTD ENGINEERING SERVICES 2,752.92
ROHLIK, CHAR OFFICE SUPPLIES 149.20
RUOHO, DAVID ICE RENTAL- TAXABLE 16.00
SCHARBER & SONS INC EQUIPMENT PARTS (3.51)
SCHWARTZ, LYNN MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 170.63
SEARS GENERAL SUPPLIES 103.72
SLP CRIME PREVENTION FUND UNREALIZED REV-SAFETY CAMP 0.00
SPS COMPANIES INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 89.84
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,442.89
ST CROIX RECREATION COMPANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 954.94
ST JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 179.90
STREICHER'S EQUIPMENT PARTS 85.09
STS CONSULTANTS LTD OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,452.68
SUBURBAN CHEVROLET EQUIPMENT PARTS 14.53
SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 203.57
SUBURBAN TIRE CO TIRES 564.62
SWEENEY BROS TRACTOR EQUIPMENT PARTS (138.42)
SYMPHONY INFORMATION SERVICES OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 850.00
TARGET/DAYTONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 16.90
THE LAWN RANGER INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 288.00
THE ROSE COMPANY INC. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 271.98
TRACY/TRIPP FUELS MOTOR FUELS 10,459.31
TRANSMISSION SHOP INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 702.81
VISU-SEWER CLEAN & SEAL INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 5,890.00
WALSER FORD EQUIPMENT PARTS 226.84
WALSH, CINDY S TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 222.00
74
WELLS FARGO REMITTANCE CTR COMPUTER SUPPLIES 7,023.01
WEST WELD GENERAL SUPPLIES 450.27
WHEELER LUMBER OPERATIONS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 594.22
WILSONS NURSERY TREE REPLACEMENT FEE 4,198.23
WSB ASSOCIATES INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 84.00
ZIEGLER INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,162.39
ZIP PRINTING PRINTING & PUBLISHING 52.19
ZIP SORT POSTAGE 20,461.56
266,061.88
October 12, 2001
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
A-1 FOAM SPECIALTIES INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 43.67
AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE PRODUCT LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 117.15
AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 3,540.70
AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIAT SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 28.25
ANDERSEN INC, EARL F OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 130.95
ANDERSON, SCOTT MEETING EXPENSE 333.82
ANOKA-HENNEPIN TECHNICAL COLLE TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 69.00
APCO, INTERNATIONAL GENERAL SUPPLIES 70.00
ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE
ACCT
GENERAL SUPPLIES 872.23
ARMADILLO TRUCKVAULT INC. MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT (150.00)
BACHMANS LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 213.96
BAKER, BETSY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 125.00
BEEKS PIZZA GENERAL SUPPLIES 33.00
BOBS PERSONAL COFFEE SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 242.91
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 657.25
BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66)
CAHNERS BUSINESS INFORMATION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 396.09
CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 416.06
CARLSON TRACTOR & EQUIP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 29.91
CARTRIDGE CARE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 536.86
COFFEE MILL INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 129.80
COLICH & ASSOCIATES LEGAL SERVICES 11,361.72
COLLINS COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 683.18
COLLISYS ELECTRIC CO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,857.89
COMMUNICATION BRIEFINGS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 79.00
CONCEPT SEATING INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (180.00)
CONSECO FINANCE VENDOR SERV CO OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 801.90
CONSTRUCTION RESULTS CORP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 37,955.00
CONSTRUCTION RESULTS CORP. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 47,240.00
CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 268.06
CUB FOODS SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES 580.03
CUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES LANDSCAPING SERVICE 1,415.00
DALCO CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 484.19
DATABASE TECHNOLOGIES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 25.00
DELEGARD TOOL CO SMALL TOOLS 174.01
75
DYNAMIC FASTENER GENERAL SUPPLIES 216.12
ELECTRIC PUMP WALDOR GROUP EQUIPMENT PARTS 7,498.67
EMERGENCY APPARATUS MTNCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,654.11
FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.67)
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 119.91
GARELICK STEEL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES (2.57)
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (27.83)
GOTHBERG, BRIDGET MEETING EXPENSE 58.91
GRAINGER INC, W W GENERAL SUPPLIES 10.62
GREEN ACRES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,607.80
HASLERUD, CARRIE GENERAL SUPPLIES 108.49
HAWKINS WATER TREATMENT GROUP CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 1,145.05
HENN CO ACCOUNTING SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,570.12
HENNEPIN CO DEPT OF COMM CORRE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 6,400.00
HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS D GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 7,943.60
HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 2,032.50
HIRSHFIELDS BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 215.06
HOME DEPOT/GECF NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 569.94
HOME HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES 204.97
HYDRO SUPPLY COMPANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 7,225.98
HYNES, ERIN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 10.48
IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 124.55
IOS CAPITAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT 1,223.20
J H LARSON COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 241.64
JOHNSTON-MADISON, CLAUDIA M OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 50.00
JUSTUS LUMBER COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 15.41
KRUELEN, JASON CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE 25.00
KULLY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 290.67
LACAL EQUIPMENT INC EQUIPMENT PARTS (235.63)
LAKELAND FORD TRUCK MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 72,621.00
LAND CARE EQUIPMENT CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 98.26
LEAGUE MN CITIES INS TRUST OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,160.36
MACQUEEN EQUIP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 30.19
MARK HOPPE MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 97.29
MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,391.25
MENARDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 106.28
MERRILL CORPORATION GENERAL SUPPLIES 5,987.72
METHODIST HOSPITAL GENERAL CUSTOMERS 6,684.80
METRO FIRE INC NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 1,405.62
METRO SALES INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 916.50
METROCALL TELEPHONE 234.24
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGE 54,549.00
MICRO CENTER GENERAL SUPPLIES 66.63
MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 90.05
MIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 389.52
MILLER, CAROL GENERAL SUPPLIES 125.62
MINN DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION TELEPHONE 4,782.09
MINNESOTA D A R E OFFICERS ASS TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 50.00
MINUTEMAN PRESS OFFICE SUPPLIES 99.00
MN ASSN ASPHALT PAVEMENT TECH SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 15.00
76
MN DEPT OF LABOR & INDUSTRY LICENSES/TAXES 15.00
MN DRIVER & VEHICLE SVCS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CHARGE (46.00)
MPLS AREA ASSOC OF REALTORS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 85.00
MRPA TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 485.00
MTI DISTRIBUTING CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 76.33
NEENAH FOUNDREY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 168.27
NSP CO ELECTRIC SERVICE 8,882.54
OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 866.28
OSHA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 249.95
OTTO PACKAGING MIDWEST LLC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES (72.00)
PALMS BAKERY MEETING EXPENSE 32.60
PAPER WAREHOUSE-GENERAL OFFICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 160.28
PC SOLUTIONS INC. EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 91.16
PEPSI-COLA COMPANY CONCESSION SUPPLIES (15.89)
PRAIRIE RESTORATIONS INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 176.00
PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 89.54
PRO PRODUCTS INC GENERAL SUPPLIES (92.32)
QUALITY CLEANING INC BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 8,675.00
QUANTERRA INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 33,550.00
RECYCLING ASSOCIATION OF MINNE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 365.00
RELIANT ENERGY HEATING GAS 3,968.39
REYNOLDS WELDING SUPPLY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 10.86
RIGID HITCH INCORPORATED EQUIPMENT PARTS 52.43
RIVERWOOD CONFERENCE CENTER TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 3,320.39
SCHARBER & SONS INC EQUIPMENT PARTS (3.51)
SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 2,322.77
SLP CRIME PREVENTION FUND UNREALIZED REV-SAFETY CAMP 0.00
SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL SMALL TOOLS 27.62
SNYDER ELECTRIC CO ELECTRICAL PERMIT 62.00
SPS COMPANIES INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 185.45
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,988.21
STANLEY STEEMER CARPET AND UPH BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 659.02
STATE TREASURER STATE SURCHARGE PAYABLE 3,615.82
STRAND MFG COMPANY SMALL TOOLS 239.63
SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 91.78
SUNSOURCE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 912.25
SWEENEY BROS TRACTOR EQUIPMENT PARTS (138.42)
SYSTEMS SUPPLY INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 413.34
TERMINIX INTERNATIONAL BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 89.00
THYSSEN LAGERQUIST ELEVATOR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 491.72
TKDA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 9,160.00
TRAFFIC CONTROL CORP OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,229.75
TWIN CITY OPTICAL TREE MAINTENANCE 12.86
U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 4,586.62
U S WEST INTERPRISE TELEPHONE 782.86
UHL CO INC BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 719.93
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED GENERAL SUPPLIES 4,424.44
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 1,370.00
USTA GENERAL SUPPLIES 43.50
VIDEO SERVICE OF AMERICA NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 165.00
77
VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER GENERAL SUPPLIES 724.18
WALDOR PUMP & EQUIPMENT CO. EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 521.27
WEBER ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT PARTS 89.50
WELLS FARGO REMITTANCE CTR GENERAL SUPPLIES 256.12
WM H MC COY PETROLEUM FUELS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 19.17
WSB ASSOCIATES INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 6,654.53
ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 42.65
ZEP MANUFACTURING GENERAL SUPPLIES 116.91
ZIP SORT POSTAGE 137.25
iATN SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 30.00
408,883.48
78
CONSENT ITEM #8
St. Louis Park City Council
Meeting October 15, 2001
8. Motion to approve resolution revoking specified streets as MSA routes and
Motion to approve resolution designating specified streets as MSA routes.
BACKGROUND: In the late 1950’s the State established a system of distributing gas tax
proceeds among cities, counties, and the State. Rules established at the time (and revised from
time to time) authorized cities to designate up to 20 percent of the streets under their control as
Municipal State Aid (MSA) streets. Construction and maintenance costs of such streets could
then be funded with this revenue. Streets designated under the MSA system generally carry
higher volume traffic and intersect state highways, county roads, or other MSA streets.
In response to the State’s actions of the late 1950’s, the City established its MSA system. The
system has been revised from time to time in response to the growth of the local street system
and changes in traffic patterns. In particular, Belt Line Boulevard was changed to its present
alignment and Shelard Parkway and Ford Road were added to the system in 1991. In addition,
the City placed Cedar Lake Road on the system when it was turned back to the City by the
County. Otherwise, the system remains relatively unchanged since its early days.
The City’s present MSA street system has been evaluated by staff to determine appropriateness
from both a functional and a practical point of view. Possible changes were discussed at Study
Sessions held October 26, 1998 and November 27, 2000. These changes were submitted to
Mn/DOT in December 2000 for their review and comment. MnDOT’s preliminary approval for
these changes was just obtained this past week.
Although MSA rules are somewhat complex, rules governing eligibility for route designation
and fund expenditures are relatively straightforward. In order to be eligible for designation as an
MSA route, a street must terminate at another MSA street, County highway, or State highway.
In order for a street improvement to be eligible for MSA funding, it must be designed to MSA
standards and the plans approved by Mn/DOT. The City is allowed to designate 28.19 miles
(20%) of its streets to the MSA system. Currently the City has designated 25.49 miles of streets
leaving 2.70 miles of streets yet to be designated to the MSA system.
This report offers recommended MSA system revisions which, if adopted, would increase the
size of the City’s MSA system by 2.39 miles leaving only 0.31 miles of street undesignated.
DISCUSSION: This is the first time the MSA system has been reviewed in its entirety. The
other past reviews were situational to consider specific transportation concerns. In this review,
79
staff has attempted to identify streets that may be built, that probably will not be built, that carry
higher traffic volumes, and streets that are considered to serve as a part of a network throughout
the City’s residential areas. On that basis, there are about 6.16 miles of streets that have been
identified that could be designated to the MSA system and about 3.77 miles that have been
identified that could be revoked (net increase of 2.39 miles).
Why should we do this? It more properly aligns our MSA system to the actual transportation
patterns in the City. The City will be able to spend MSA funds on these routes while it likely
can not on some of the current routes. Finally, these changes will increase the MSA funding we
receive from the State by about $30,000 per year (about 2%).
What are the impacts of doing this? Improvements to streets not on the MSA system have to
be locally financed so adding or removing streets from the system could have project financing
impacts. Usually, higher design standards apply to MSA financed improvements which may not
be desirable in all instances. Conversely, improvements to streets financed locally can be
designed to a lesser standard if desired. In a like manner, MnDOT requires all MSA routes to be
maintained to a recognized “state” standard which is generally higher than that provided for most
local streets. Residents could perceive that higher traffic will occur as a result of a street being
placed on the MSA system, although this does not happen. Finally, the Minnesota Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MMUTCD) applies when considering traffic controls on MSA
streets which could possibly complicate some traffic control requests and possibly frustrate
residents who may desire to minimize or eliminate “cut through” traffic.
What is the process utilized to make these changes? Public hearings or meetings are not
necessary for the City to revise its MSA system. The Council can revoke and designate MSA
streets by resolution and as approved by Mn/DOT. However, any MSA revisions that may be
considered should be consistent with the Transportation Chapter of the City’s Comprehensive
Plan.
Attachments: Resolutions (2)
Map – October 2001 (1)
Prepared by: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
80
RESOLUTION NO. 01-115
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING
MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREETS
WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the streets
hereinafter described should be designated Municipal State Aid Streets under the provisions of
Minnesota Law.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the streets described as follows, to-wit:
Street Name Termini
Aquila Avenue
West 36th Street to W. 34th Street
W. 34th Street Aquila Lane to Aquila Avenue
Aquila Lane
W. 34th Street to Boone Avenue
Aquila Avenue
Boone Avenue to Minnetonka Boulevard
W. 18th Street Hillsboro Avenue to Flag Avenue
Hillsboro Avenue
W. 18th Street to W. 16th Street
Pennsylvania Avenue Franklin Avenue to I-394 South Service Road
I-394 South Service
Road
Pennsylvania Avenue to Louisiana Avenue
Edgewood Avenue Cambridge Street to Oxford Street
Cambridge Street
Edgewood Avenue to Alabama Avenue
Alabama Avenue
MN&S Railroad to W. 36th Street
Colorado Avenue
Cedar Lake Road to I-394 South Service Road
I-394 South Service
Road
Colorado Avenue to Zarthan Avenue
Zarthan Avenue
W. 16th Street to I-394 South Service Road
W. 16th Street Zarthan Avenue to Park Place Boulevard
81
Parkdale Drive Park Place Boulevard to TH 100 Ramp
Stephens Drive TH 100 Ramp to Utica Avenue
Utica Avenue Stephens Drive to W. 23rd Street
W. 23rd Street Utica Avenue to TH 100 East Service Road
W. 25 ½ Street W. 26th Street to TH 100 East Service Road
TH 100 East Service Rd. W. 25 ½ Street to W. 23rd Street
Park Center Boulevard Excelsior Blvd. (CSAH 3) to W. 36th Street
Raleigh Avenue
W. 36th Street to W. 35th Street
W. 35th Street Raleigh Avenue to Belt Line Boulevard
Ottawa Avenue
CSAH 25 to Minnetonka Blvd. (CSAH 5)
be, and hereby are established, located, and designated Municipal State Aid Streets of said City
of St. Louis Park, subject to the approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of
Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
forward two (2) certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his
consideration, and that upon his approval of the designation of said streets or portion thereof, that
same be constructed, improved and maintained as Municipal State Aid Streets of the City of St.
Louis Park.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2001
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
82
RESOLUTION NO. 01-116
RESOLUTION REVOKING
MUNICIPAL STATE AID STREETS
WHEREAS, it appears to the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the streets
hereinafter described as Municipal State Aid Streets should be revoked under the provisions of
Minnesota Laws;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park that the streets described as follows, to-wit:
Route Street Name Termini
277
Oxford Street Edgewood Avenue to Dakota Avenue
Dakota Avenue to Colorado Avenue
Colorado Avenue to Brunswick Avenue
Brunswick Avenue to Alabama Avenue
279 W. 26th Street TH 100 to W. 25 ½ Street
280 Alabama Avenue So. MN&S RR to Brunswick Avenue
280 Brunswick Avenue So. 260 ft. South Cambridge Street to Oxford Street
Oxford Street to W. 37th Street
W. 37th Street to W. 36th Street
280 Dakota Avenue So. Cedar Lake Road to North City limits
285 Flag Avenue So. W. 18th Street to W. 16th Street (Franklin Avenue)
286 Franklin Avenue So. Hillsboro Avenue to Westmoreland Lane
Westmoreland Lane to Texas Avenue
Texas Avenue to Pennsylvania Avenue
Louisiana Avenue to Dakota Avenue
287 Natchez Ave/Monterey
Blvd/Monterey Ave So.
Minnetonka Boulevard (CSAH 5) to W. 29th Street
W. 29th Street to W. 28th Street
W. 28th Street to W. 26th Street
289 Wayzata Boulevard Dakota Avenue (North City Limits) to Golden Hills Drive/
Colorado Avenue So.
83
should be, and hereby are, revoked as Municipal State Aid Streets of said City subject to the
approval of the Commissioner of Transportation of the State of Minnesota.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to
forward two certified copies of this resolution to the Commissioner of Transportation for his
consideration.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2001
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk