HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999/01/04 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular 1
6:15 p.m. - Board and Commission Interviews (3rd floor conference room)
7:00 p.m. - Economic Development Authority
AGENDA - CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
January 4, 1999
7:30 p.m.
1. Call to order
2. Presentation - Years of Service - Steve Nelson, Housing Authority
3. Roll Call
4. Approval of Minutes
a. City Council meeting of December 21, 1998
Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented
b. Study Session meeting of December 14, 1998
Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented
5. Approval of agenda
a. Consent agenda
Note: All matters on consent (starred items) are considered to be routine and will be enacted by
one motion approving all. There is no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is
desired, the starred item will be moved to the regular agenda.
Action: Motion to approve - Motion to delete item(s)
b. Agenda
Action: Motion to approve - Motion to add item(s)
*c. Resolutions and Ordinances
Action: By consent, waive reading of resolutions and ordinances
6. Public Hearing -
2
6a. Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Trail Designation
Portion of Hutchinson Spur south of 36th St.
Case No. 98-39-CP
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to move a trail designation from a portion of the
former Hutchinson Spur railroad corridor south of 36th Street onto adjacent Phillips
Parkway right-of-way.
Recommended
Action:
Mayor to close the public hearing. Motion to adopt a resolution
amending the Comprehensive Plan to move approximately 600
feet of trail designation onto adjacent Phillips Parkway subject to
the conditions included in the resolution and to approve
summary for publication.
6b. Official Map Amendment - Trail Designation
Portion of Hutchinson Spur south of 36th St.
Case No. 98-30-OM
Remove a trail designation from the centerline of the old Hutchinson Spur railroad
corridor south of 36th Street. The trail will be constructed along Phillips Parkway
right-of-way and an existing easement on the old Hutchinson Spur property.
Recommended
Action:
Mayor to close the public hearing. Motion to approve First
Reading of an ordinance deleting the Official Map trail
designation from the centerline of the old Hutchinson Spur
corridor south of 36th St. and set Second Reading for January 19,
1999.
7. Petitions, Requests, Communications None
8. Resolutions and Ordinances
8a. Election of Mayor Pro-tem
State Statute section 412.121 requires that Council choose each year an acting
Mayor from the Council members
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution appointing a Mayor Pro-tem
8b. Vision SLP Outcomes and Indicators
Resolution granting support of the Vision St. Louis Park Outcomes and Indicators.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the resolution
3
8c. Moved to Public Hearing Section - Item 6a
8d. Moved to public hearing Section - Item 6b
8e. Minnehaha Trails Office Park Preliminary Plat Proposal
Case No. 98-35-S
McCullough Companies is requesting Preliminary Plat approval for 5 office
development lots on approximately 3 acres of land south of 36th Street and east of
Phillips Parkway on the old “Hutchinson Spur” railroad property.
Recommended
Action:
Adopt a resolution approving the Preliminary Plat subject to the
conditions included in the resolution.
8f*. Designate St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor as Official Newspaper for 1999
Minnesota Statutes and the City Charter require that a legal newspaper of general
circulation be designated for publication of the City’s official proceedings and
notices.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution designating the St. Louis Park Sun-
Sailor as the City’s Official Newspaper for 1999
8g*. Traffic Study No. 538: Permit parking restrictions on the north side of W.
35th Street in the 6200 and 6300 blocks.
This report considers “PERMIT PARKING ONLY” on the north side of W. 35th
Street in the 6200 and 6300 blocks.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to accept this report for filing and adopt the attached
resolution authorizing permit parking restrictions on the north
side of W. 35th Street in the 6200 and 6300 blocks.
8h*. Traffic Study No. 539: Request for permit parking at 2816 Alabama Avenue
South.
This report considers a residential request for “PERMIT PARKING ONLY” in
front of the residents’ home due to accessibility needs of their child.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing the
installation of permit parking in front of 2816 Alabama Avenue
South.
4
9. Reports from Officers, Boards, Committees
*a. Planning Commission Minutes from December 2, 1998
Action: By consent, accept report for filing
*b. Vendor Claims Report
Action: By consent, accept report for filing
10. Unfinished Business
a. Board and Commission Appointment(s)
Action: Motion to appoint Board and Commission Member(s)
11. New Business
12. Miscellaneous
13. Claims, Appropriations, Contract Payments
a. Contract payments
Final
Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. $ 7,426.91
Random Concrete Repair
Contract No. 61-98
Action: By consent adopt resolutions.
Partial
Hardrives, Inc. $ 10,007.32
Contract No. 14-98
Construction Phase 2 Excelsior Blvd.
Monterey Ave. to France Avenue
Action: By consent approve and authorize payments
14. Communications
15. Adjournment
5
Item # 4a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
December 21, 1998
1. Call to Order
Mayor Pro-tem Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m.
2. Presentations - None
3. Roll Call
The following Commissioners were present at roll call: Chris Nelson, Sue Sanger, Ron Latz,
Robert Young, and Jim Brimeyer and Mayor Pro-Tem, Jeff Jacobs.
Also present were the Deputy City Manager (Mr. Pires); City Attorney (Mr. Scott); Finance
Director (Ms. McBride); Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Anderson); Director of
Community Development (Mr. Harmening); Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin) and Police
Chief (Chief. Luse); and Zoning Administrator (Mr. Moore).
4. Approval of Minutes
4a. City Council Meeting of December 7, 1998
The minutes were approved as presented.
5. Approval of Agendas
a. Consent Agenda
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to approve the
consent agenda with the removal of Items 8h and 8i. The motion passed 6-0.
b. Agenda
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the
agenda. The motion passed 6-0.
c. Resolutions and Ordinances
By consent, Council waived reading of resolutions and ordinances.
6. Public Hearings
6a. Public Hearing to consider Tax Abatement Proposal - Medical Office
Development Project at the Southwest Corner of Highway 7 and Louisiana
6
Avenue
Resolution # 98-172
Mr. Anderson, Economic Development Coordinator presented a staff report with a general
description and overview of project proposal.
Mayor Pro-tem Jacobs closed the Public Hearing with the right of the Council to reopen it at a
future date.
Councilmember Nelson believed that this was the best use for this site and was in support of this
project. He commented on the need for physicians to relocate within St. Louis Park and noted
that this was a preliminary step. The building could not be built if the item was not approved
tonight since abatement was contingent on finding a way to fill a gap in financing.
Councilmember Latz asked staff to clarify which amount stated in the report was accurate for the
current estimated property tax eligible for abatement.
Mr. Anderson clarified that the accurate amount was $37,000.
Councilmember Latz stated that this location was the best as determined by the task force, but
noted that the cost of soil correction, which has been holding up development on the site,
wouldn’t even be covered by the projected tax abatement. He noted that none of the tax
abatement money would be used for removing the billboard. He said the School Board has
already approved the abatement and now there was a need to work with the County. Although he
desired to see a more intense development on the site, he believed this was a good project.
Councilmember Sanger was concerned about the gap in financing and was unwilling to support
this proposal without knowing that amount. She asked if staff knew an estimate of how much
the developer might come back and ask the City for.
Mr. Anderson stated that the developer might be able to address this issue. He stated that the
amount in the report is what has been projected to be the maximum capacity that could be
approved and that action tonight was an indication to the developer that this project was
proceeding. The developer could then take the next step with their investors and potential
tenants by allowing them to spend additional funds. This would give the County an affirmative
indication that the City and School District had put the core public financing piece in place and
may encourage the County to participate in the abatement.
Councilmember Sanger asked if the developer did request the amount stated in the report and
how long the pay back would be on the total package.
Mr. Anderson stated that incremental taxes would not finance the amount stated in the report. He
indicated that what we were working toward and exploring were cost savings in the project to
reduce that amount or identify other funding sources. That may include a portion of the City’s
future tax collection and also may recoup some amount from the purchase of the land.
Councilmember Sanger was concerned about Council approving proposals incrementally and
then opposing the same project at a later time. She stated she was not willing to do things this
way. In this case, it would be much easier to consider the proposal if the City had a clear sense
7
as to whether there would be additional requests beyond the 10 year tax abatement. She was also
concerned that there was no sunset on the ultimate removal of the billboard on the site under this
proposal and believed this would undermine the zoning ordinance and Comprehensive Plan on
billboards.
Councilmember Young stated that the billboard generated funds for the City and was a good
contributor for the City. He was not concerned about the abatement, but was concerned about the
gap in financing and believed that these funds would be requested from the City. He questioned
why there has been no new cost information since the July report. He believed that the project
did not make sense if it were going to cost the City that much and didn’t think the Council should
move forward without additional public financing information. He believed that there were
alternative buildings available in the City for physician’s to lease with no subsidies needed from
the City or tax payers. He didn’t believe there was a real urgent public need to finance the
moving of physician’s from one part of St. Louis Park to another.
Councilmember Latz didn’t believe that the existence of this billboard did any damage to the
City’s goal of removing billboards and felt that allowing the billboard to stay was justified
because the decision would allow development of this parcel of land. He believed this project
would not occur without the County’s agreement to the tax abatement and believed it was
important for the County to hear a message from this City that we believe in the value of the
project itself. More importantly that the City believes this project is one where tax abatement is
an appropriate tool to use. He believed it was important to pass the tax abatement portion and
didn’t believe the Council was committed to closing the financing gap in any other way by doing
it.
Councilmember Nelson concurred with Councilmember Latz and was in favor of approving
resolution in the interest of redevelopment.
Mr. Harmening, Director of Community Development clarified amounts that were included in
the budget for infrastructure improvements that might be necessary, cost concerns, and land
value.
Councilmember Nelson desired to see the billboard removed from the site, but pointed out that
the owner is unwilling to sell the billboard and unwilling to agree to a sunset provision. If the
City were to condemn the property, the additional cost would be unreasonable. He believed the
findings determined that it was in the City’s best interest to redevelop this property and clean up
the land and allowing the billboard to remain would accomplish this goal. He asked the City
Attorney to address the liability to the City if this proposal were approved tonight or if the City
denied the developers request for funding.
Mr. Scott, City Attorney stated that he was not concerned about liability and based on what was
stated in the resolution with contingencies it was clear to the developer that this project may not
come together.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she was not willing to use any City funds to enable any
billboards to remain and was concerned about going further down the path of a development.
8
Councilmember Young believed that the original report didn’t indicate that this area was a
brownfield and questioned the reason for reducing the property value. He also noted another
potential projects he was aware of that could house these dislocated physicians and noted that
those projects were not asking for any public financing. He was troubled that there were not cost
projections available and felt this was was a delaying tactic by staff who wanted to get the
abatement approved and then later request a large financing amount.
Mr. Anderson briefly explained the process of the proposal’s development and asked Mike
Denny of Frauenshue to address Councilmember Young’s concerns.
Mike Denny, Frauenshue Companies, explained that the numbers on the proforma were estimates
and that the reason firmer financing figures could not be presented tonight was that the soil
investigation report had just recently became available. He stated that he was looking for some
assurance from the financing bodies that they were in support of the abatement since the County
has not done an abatement before.
Councilmember Young asked if the developer could indicate a minimal financing amount that
they would have to ask the City for beyond the abatement.
Mr. Denny stated that this number was not available. He noted that if this site did not have the
soil remediation issue, they could compete with another site that didn’t have those issues.
Councilmember Latz stated that the timing of the proposal was being driven by the County who
was expected to consider the tax abatement in January.
Councilmember Brimeyer commented on the alternative of not approving the proposal. He
supported the tax abatement, but the financing gap had to get a lot closer to what he might value
the land at.
Mayor Pro-tem Jacobs supported the proposal, but was not willing to finance the amount of
funding listed in the report to make the project go.
Councilmember Young stated that if this project didn’t go forward, the worse that could happen
was that the City would still have open space or an opportunity to hear proposals on more intense
development that would be able to justify its costs. He indicated that if the proposal was
approved and there were going to be additional costs, the most the City should do is just donate
the land.
It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to approve a
resolution authorizing a tax abatement for the development of a medical office development at
the southwest corner of Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue. The motion passed 4-2.
Councilmembers Sanger and Young opposed.
It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to request staff to
seek County Board action of the provision of tax abatement for the project and prepare a final
economic development package for Economic Development Authority consideration following
such action. The motion passed 4-2. Councilmembers Sanger and Young opposed.
7. Petitions, Requests, Communications - None
9
8. Resolutions and Ordinances
8a. Vacation of water and sewer utility easement at 5101 Minnetonka Boulevard
Case No. 98-38-VAC
Ordinance #2132-98
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
second reading, adopt ordinance, approve summary and authorize publication. The motion
passed 6-0.
Councilmember Young asked if a commitment was received from this developer to fulfill an
agreement to construct a sidewalk for a previous development project that had not been
completed to date.
Mr. Scott, City Attorney indicated that the City has received a written commitment from the
developer to install the sidewalk at his cost in the spring.
8b. Amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance
Case No. 98-32-SO/ZA
Ordinance #2133-98
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to approve
second reading, adopt ordinance, approve summary and authorize publication. The motion
passed 6-0.
8c. Second Reading of the Ordinance Amending the Water & Sewer Utility
Rates for 1999.
Ordinance #2134-98
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to waive
second reading, adopt the ordinance and approve the summary of the ordinance for publication.
The motion passed 6-0.
8d. Resolution to Adopt the 1999 Budget
Resolution # 98-173
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to approve the
resolution. The motion passed 6-0.
8e. Resolution Approving the Property Tax Levy for 1999
Resolution # 98-74
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to approve the
resolution. The motion passed 6-0.
8f. Resolution to Amend the 1998 Budget
Resolution # 98-175
It was moved by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the
resolution. The motion passed 6-0.
10
8g. Resolution authorizing payment of State funds to the City for landscape
materials along TH 169
Resolution #98-176
By consent, Council adopted the resolution.
8h. Change Order No. 3 to Contract No. 4066 with Howard R. Green Company
for Professional Engineering Services
Resolution #98-177
Councilmember Sanger stated that the reason why she requested Items 8g and 8h to be taken off
consent agenda was because there has been a significant delay to work being done on Excelsior
Boulevard at significant disruption to traffic, residents and businesses and now the City was
being asked to pay for significant change orders to cover these costs. She asked how many of
these delays and costs were because of City initiated changes verses being attributable to other
entities who are working on project.
Mr. Moore, Supt. of Engineering, noted that the contractor ran into some difficulties in the first
phase of the project with multiple contractors were working on the South side simultaneously
and conflicting with each other. Staff streamlined the construction process, but the contractor
was behind and was being assessed for liquidated damages.
Craig Ebling, Regional Office Manager of Howard R. Green Company was present and reiterated
that the project was complex and that they had had difficulties with contractors. He explained
the amount of the Change Order included several construction delay factors that were unknown
until the project began.
Councilmember Sanger asked how much of the expenses were attributed to City or County
requests verses other reasons for a delay.
Mr. Moore explained the expenses and noted that these costs have not been incurred at this point,
but rather are what is anticipated to be additional professional services costs to complete the
project.
Mr. Rardin indicated that the way the contract was set up originally was that there were two
phases, Phase I pre-construction and Phase II construction and explained that various number of
hours were estimated for each of the tasks in each phase, but this amount has been used up. The
developer didn’t guarantee to provide all the inspection services with an unlimited number of
hours.
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to adopt the
attached resolution authorizing execution of Change Order No. 3 in the amount of $65,125.00 to
Contract No. 4066 for Professional Engineering Services increasing the total contract amount
from $478,583.00 to $543,708.00. The motion passed 5-1. Councilmember Sanger opposed.
8i. Change Order to No. 2 to Contract No. 14-98 with Hardrives, Inc. for the
Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape
Resolution # 98-178
11
Councilmember Nelson briefly commented on need for Change Order.
Councilmember Sanger asked if the bulk amount of the expenses were attributed to City or
County requests.
Mr. Moore, Supt. of Engineering indicated that this was the case.
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to adopt the
attached resolution authorizing execution of Change Order to No. 2 in the amount of
$163,340.63 to Contract No. 14-98 with Hardrives, Inc. increasing the total contract amount from
$2,115,845.91 to $2,279,186.54. The motion passed 6-0.
8j. Right of way acquisition of trail easement on Smith property located at 7500
W. 27th Street
Resolution #98-179
By consent, Council adopted the resolution authorizing the acquisition of a 14 foot wide trail
easement and a temporary construction easement at 7500 W. 27th Street by purchase or eminent
domain for the Hutchinson Spur Regional Trail - City Project No. 98-09.
8k. Addendum No. 2 to the professional services agreement with Bonestroo
Rosene Anderlik & Associates, Inc. (BRAA) for professional engineering
services on the Park Place Boulevard/W. 15th Street Improvements
Project No(s) 90-54 and 96-19.
Resolution #98-180
By consent, Council adopted the resolution authorizing execution of addendum No. 2 in the
amount of $66,443.87 to the agreement with BRAA increasing the total contract amount from
$66,100.00 to $132,543.87.
8l. Approval of lease agreement for a communications antenna with Bellsouth
Wireless Data, L.P. (Bellsouth).
Resolution #98-181
By consent, Council approved the resolution authorizing execution of lease agreement.
8m. Resolution of Approval for Special Laws enacted in the 1998 Legislative
Session related to “This Old Apartment”.
Resolution #98-182
By consent, Council adopted a resolution approving Chapter 389, Article 3, Section 3.4 of the
1998 Session laws and directed staff to complete the Certificate of Approval to be filed with the
Office of the Secretary of State.
9. Reports from Officers, Boards, Committees
a Vendor Claim Report
By consent, Council accepted report for filing.
b. Planning Commission Minutes of November 18, 1998
12
By consent, Council accepted report for filing.
c. Human Rights Commission Minutes of November 18, 1998
By consent, Council accepted report for filing.
d Police Civil Service Commission Minutes of December 2, 1998
By consent, Council accepted report for filing.
10. Unfinished Business
10a. Board and Commission Appointment(s)
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, and seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to appoint
Coleridge H. Doe to the Community Education Advisory Council. The motion passed 6-0.
11. New Business
11a. Golden Valley Dispatch Contract
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, and seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve
the contract to provide dispatching services for the City of Golden Valley and authorize the
Mayor and City Manager to execute contract. The motion passed 6-0.
12. Miscellaneous - None
13. Claims, Appropriations, Contract Payments
a. Contract Payments
Partial Payments:
M.C. Magney Construction, Inc. $54,122.45
33-98
Flannery Construction, Inc. $273,472.31
22-98
By consent, Council approved and authorized payments.
14. Communications - None
15. Adjournment
It was moved by Mayor Pro-tem Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to adjourn the
meeting at 9:00 p.m. The motion passed 6-0.
City Clerk Mayor
13
Item # 4b
Unofficial Minutes
City Council Study Session
December 14, 1998
7:00 p.m.
The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m.
Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Chris Nelson, Ron Latz, Sue Sanger, Jim Brimeyer
and Mayor Gail Dorfman.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer); Deputy City Manager (Mr. Pires); Director of
Community Development (Mr. Harmening); Economic Development Coordinator (Mr.
Anderson); Finance Director (Ms. McBride); Planning Coordinator (Ms. Erickson); Community
Outreach Coordinator (Ms. McDonell); and City Clerk (Ms. Larsen).
1. Vision St. Louis Park
At their meeting of October 26, 1998 Council had asked for an opportunity to revisit the
Outcomes and Leading Indicators for measuring progress and performance of Vision St. Louis
Park. Staff indicated to Council that they now wished to discuss changes that had been
incorporated and how the design of the document could provide direction to City staff and work
programs.
Mr. Pires presented an example of how the outcomes and indicators could be applied in reality to
City programs.
Mr. Meyer said that staff had struggled with the original 319 recommendations and said that he
felt the current document presented more reasonable and measurable goals that could be
communicated to staff and the public. He felt that the committee had done an excellent job in
developing a tool to communicate mission, goals and community vision to community, Council
and staff.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she did not endorse the indicators chosen by the Outcomes
Committee.
Councilmember Brimeyer said that we needed a tool for measurement and the absence of such a
tool was the primary reason for failure of documents like “Vision St. Louis Park”.
Mayor Dorfman cautioned Councilmembers against narrowing options by making more specific
indicators.
Mr. Meyer said that this was intended to be a tool to measure changing expectations.
14
Councilmember Nelson asked that the data gathering process be sensitive to staff resources and
did not want data which did not exist to be included.
Councilmember Brimeyer said that many cities have not been successful in linking vision with
performance measurements. He felt this was a document and process very much in the creation
stage and applauded the efforts of the Outcomes Committee for presenting such a fine product.
Councilmember Sanger asked how the indicators were selected.
Mr. Meyer said that they were careful to not include too many indicators and also to choose
indicators which clearly move toward outcomes. After Council endorsement the next step will
be to go to staff to determine if the data requested is indeed available.
Councilmember Sanger asked where Livable Community principles were included.
Mr. Meyer said that lots of items were not addressed in the outcomes and indicators because they
were not addressed by Vision St. Louis Park.
Mr. Pires said that the Vision Outcomes Committee was ready to move on to the next steps and
that the item would be brought back for a resolution of Council approval at the meeting of
January 4th.
2. EDA Proposed Budget Overview
Staff met with Council to discuss final steps in the compilation of the revised 1998 and proposed
1999 budget numbers for the EDA. Ms. McBride presented summaries by each district or fund
along with appropriation totals by programs within each district.
Mayor Dorfman asked what the long term outlook for the EDA budget was.
Mr. Harmening said that though staff was working on those projections, more work needed to be
done with the developer before a more accurate long term financial picture could be ascertained.
Ms. McBride informed Council that she was meeting with the State Auditor later that week.
Councilmember Brimeyer said that he wanted to be sure that the final EDA budget was clear
enough to be explainable to the general public.
Following discussion Council asked staff to provide a narrative summary highlighting the
activity and projects planned for the Excelsior Boulevard District and, the Park Commons
project, in particular.
Staff agreed to present that at the next meeting of the EDA.
15
3. Trail and Sidewalk Update
Staff, Bob Close and Bruce Jacobson of Close Landscape Architecture and Barry Warner of SRF
met with Council to provide an update concerning the progress of the Sidewalk and Trail Study.
The Consultants presented a quick review of baseline information discussed with the Task Force
including existing conditions, City policy questions, planned growth areas and the Decision
Resources phone survey.
They then presented some key issues and opportunities which had emerged from their work such
as photo boards, maps, a composite plan and other schematic diagrams. They reviewed input
received from Public Works, and the Parks and Recreation and Planning Commissions, and
presented an implementation strategy diagram.
They also indicated that next steps would be to refine the implementation plan and priorities,
prepare design guidelines, identify key policy issues and prepare the budget and cost estimates
for the proposed improvements.
Councilmember Sanger asked if the Task Force had discussed funding. Mr. Close responded that
they had, but only in terms of the phone survey results.
Mayor Dorfman asked if the Task Force process had been a positive one. Mr. Close said that this
Task Force had been engaged and cooperative. Mr. Jacobson said that the Task Force work had
been invaluable in his work on the project.
Mr. Warner then gave an update on progress of the Regional Trail. He said that they were
expecting a June 1st project completion date.
Councilmember Nelson asked if ISTEA funding requirements had been met. Mr. Warner said
that the project was on track to receive those funds.
Mr. Harmening informed Council that there was one portion of land yet to be acquired in the
industrial area northeast of Victoria ponds. He said that eminent domain proceedings may be
necessary.
4. Communications
Councilmember Brimeyer said that he had noticed a recent Council meeting was presented very
poorly on cable tv and asked staff to look into ways to improve the broadcast. He also asked that
someone look into sample ordinances relating to funding of public art projects. Mayor Dorfman
asked that the Friends of the Arts be asked to do that research as part of their strategic planning.
16
Mr. Meyer asked Council for their input on what they feel would work as regional park
improvements in the inner ring suburbs. Cindy Walsh is currently working with other park
districts and Hennepin Parks on this issue.
The meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m.
City Clerk Mayor
17
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 6a
Meeting of January 4, 1999
6a. Comprehensive Plan Amendment - Trail Designation
Portion of Hutchinson Spur south of 36th St.
Case No. 98-39-CP
Comprehensive Plan Amendment to move a trail designation from a portion of the
former Hutchinson Spur railroad corridor south of 36th Street onto adjacent Phillips
Parkway right-of-way.
Recommended
Action:
Mayor to close the public hearing. Motion to adopt a resolution
amending the Comprehensive Plan to move approximately 600
feet of trail designation onto adjacent Phillips Parkway subject to
the conditions included in the resolution and to approve
summary for publication.
Background:
The City of St. Louis Park currently designates the former Hutchinson Branch of Burlington
Northern’s railroad corridor (the “Hutchinson Spur”) as a proposed major pedestrian/bicycle
route. The “Hutchinson Spur” extends through St. Louis Park from Highway 7 northeast to
where it joins with the Burlington Northern main line east of Virginia Avenue. The proposed
trail is designated in the Comprehensive Plan as following the Hutchinson Spur alignment from
the Hopkins border to Virginia Avenue. East of Virginia Avenue, it is shown as following either
the Burlington Northern main line corridor or public streets to where it links with the Cedar Lake
trail system in Minneapolis. The intent is to provide a regional trail system that would link
Minneapolis with St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka, and west to Victoria.
The City of St. Louis Park has been awarded a Federal ISTEA grant and State bonding to help
offset costs related to constructing the trail provided it meets certain design criteria (e.g., it must
be at least 10 feet wide and include at least 2 feet of buffer/maintenance area on either side).
SRF Consulting Group has been retained by the City to help design the trail and coordinate with
all of the affected property owners.
The City purchased a significant portion of the Hutchinson Spur and easements for the trail.
However, for approximately 600 feet south of 36th Street, the trail study has indicated that it is
appropriate for the trail to be constructed immediately adjacent to the Hutchinson Spur along
Phillips Parkway right-of-way. This is the area of the proposed Comprehensive Plan
amendment.
Two open house/informational meetings as well as individual meetings with property owners
have been held to discuss the trail project. On November 18, 1998, the Planning Commission
18
held a public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan amendment. After closing the public hearing,
the Planning Commission deferred consideration of the Comprehensive Plan amendment so that
staff could explore some alternatives regarding concerns that were raised with conversion of an
existing sidewalk along the east side of Phillips Parkway to the multi-use trail. On December 2,
1998, the Planning Commission considered several options and recommended approval of the
Comprehensive Plan amendment subject to conditions that would address replacement of the
sidewalk. After the Planning Commission meeting, representatives of Sholom Community
Alliance (owners of the senior complex on the west side of Phillips Parkway) asked that the trail
consultants consider realigning the trail to the west side of the Sholom facility, close to Hwy.
169. SRF has addressed this issue in a memo which is attached to this report. As you will note
in the memo, SRF has reservations about this realignment approach.
Issues:
• Is the proposed amendment consistent with the trail study recommendations?
• What are the impacts on the existing sidewalk on Phillips Parkway?
• What is the current status of the development proposal?
Analysis of Issues:
• Is the proposed amendment consistent with the trail study recommendations?
The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment to move the trail designation to the Phillips
Parkway right-of-way south of 36th Street is consistent with the trail study recommendations.
The trail plan involves constructing the trail on the east side of Phillips Parkway for a distance of
about 600 feet south of 36th and then further east onto a trail easement that has already been
purchased on the old Hutchinson Spur property.
• What are the impacts on the existing sidewalk on Phillips Parkway?
The trail plan involves reconstruction of the existing sidewalk on the east side of Phillips
Parkway to a 10 feet wide, multi-use trail. However, staff and the Planning Commission are
recommending that a new five feet wide sidewalk also be constructed on the west side of Phillips
Parkway to accommodate residents of the Sholom Community Alliance properties who may
prefer a separate sidewalk. The Planning Commission recommends that the City pay for the cost
of the new sidewalk and the moving of benches and landscaping to the west side.
• What is the current status of the development proposal?
An application for preliminary plat approval for five small office buildings (called Minnehaha
Trails Office Park) has been recommended for approval by the Planning Commission subject to
several conditions. The Preliminary Plat is being considered by the City Council during the
January 4, 1999 meeting. The Preliminary Plat should not be approved unless it is deemed in
conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, it is staff’s recommendation that the
Comprehensive Plan is amended prior to action on the Preliminary Plat.
19
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution amending the
Comprehensive Plan to move a trail designation from a portion of the former Hutchinson Spur
property south of 36th Street onto adjacent Phillips Parkway right-of-way subject to the
following conditions:
1. The City shall construct a new sidewalk and relocate existing trees and benches to the
west side of Phillips Parkway.
2. The cost of the new sidewalk and relocated trees/benches shall be borne by the City and
the exact placement shall be discussed with Sholom Community Alliance prior to
installation.
• Attachments:
• Proposed Resolution & Summary
• 12/21/98 Memo from SRF regarding trail alignment (on file in City Clerk’s office)
• Major Pedestrian/Bicycle Routes Map from Comprehensive Plan (on file in City Clerk’s
office)
• Map of area to be amended (on file in City Clerk’s office)
• Map of proposed trail location (on file in City Clerk’s office)
Prepared by: Janet Jeremiah, Planning Manager, 924-2573
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
20
RESOLUTION NO. ___________
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVEPLAN
1990 TO THE YEAR 2010 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARKUNDER MINNESOTA
STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364
PORTION OF FORMER HUTCHINSON SPUR RAILROAD PROPERTY
SOUTH OF 36TH STREET
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan 1980-2000 was adopted by the City Council on March
5, 1984 and amended on April 1, 1991 as Comprehensive Plan 1990-2010, and provides the
following:
1. An official statement serving as the basic guide in making land use, transportation and
community facilities and service decisions affecting the City.
2. A framework for policies and actions leading to the improvement of the physical, financial,
and social environment of the City, thereby providing a good place to live and work and a setting
conducive for new development.
3. A promotion of the public interest in establishing a more functional, healthful, interesting,
and efficient community by serving the interests of the community at large rather than the
interests of individual or special groups within the community if their interests are at variance
with the public interest.
4. An effective framework for direction and coordination of activities affecting the
development and preservation of the community.
5. Treatment of the entire community as one ecosystem and to inject long range considerations
into determinations affecting short-range action, and
WHEREAS, the use of such Comprehensive Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and
more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and
will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and
WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change, thereby
bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities of
adjacent units of government, and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning
Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified according to
procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and
are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan, and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan currently designates the former Hutchinson Branch of
the Burlington Northern’s railroad corridor (the “Hutchinson Spur”) as a proposed major
pedestrian/bicycle route, and
21
WHEREAS, the intent is to provide a regional trail system that would link Minneapolis
with St. Louis Park, Hopkins, Minnetonka and west to Victoria, and
WHEREAS, on June 30, 1998, the City purchased a significant portion of the Hutchinson
Spur property for the trail, and
WHEREAS, McCullough Companies retained certain portions of the Hutchinson Spur
property for development, and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to move approximately 600 feet of trail designation onto
adjacent Phillips Parkway right-of-way, and
adoption of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 1980-2000 on December 2, 1998 on a
vote of 6-0, based on statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, extensive research and
analyses involving the interests of citizens and public agencies;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that the
Comprehensive Plan, as previously adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council, is
hereby amended as follows:
Move the trail designation from the former Hutchinson Spur property onto adjacent Phillips
Parkway right-of-way for distance of about 600 feet south of 36th Street subject to the following
conditions:
1. The City shall construct a new sidewalk and relocate existing trees and benches to
the west side of Phillips Parkway.
2. The cost of the new sidewalk and relocated trees/benches shall be borne by the
City and the exact placement shall be discussed with Sholom Community
Alliance prior to installation.
Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 4, 1999
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
98-39/N/res/ord
22
SUMMARY
RESOLUTION NO. ___________
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN 1990 TO THE YEAR 2010 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364
PORTION OF FORMER HUTCHINSON SPUR RAILROAD PROPERTY
SOUTH OF 36TH STREET
This resolution states that the trail designation shall be moved from a portion of the former
Hutchinson Spur property onto adjacent Phillips Parkway right-of-way for a distance of about
600 feet south of 36th Street.
Adopted by the City Council January 4, 1999
Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council
Gail Dorfman /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this resolution is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: January 13, 1999
23
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 6b
Meeting of January 4, 1999
6b. Official Map Amendment - Trail Designation
Portion of Hutchinson Spur south of 36th St.
Case No. 98-30-OM
Remove a trail designation from the centerline of the old Hutchinson Spur railroad
corridor south of 36th Street. The trail will be constructed along Phillips Parkway
right-of-way and an existing easement on the old Hutchinson Spur property.
Recommended
Action:
Mayor to close the public hearing. Motion to approve First
Reading of an ordinance deleting the Official Map trail
designation from the centerline of the old Hutchinson Spur
corridor south of 36th St. and set Second Reading for January 19,
1999.
Background:
In 1984, the City passed an ordinance placing the center 35 feet of the Hutchinson Spur railroad
corridor on the official map for future public use. The City’s Comprehensive Plan designated the
property as a proposed major pedestrian/bicycle route. The Hutchinson Spur property was
subsequently purchased by McCullough Companies for potential development.
In January, 1998, the City authorized a Master Plan Study of the Hutchinson Spur Regional Trail
by Close Landscape Architecture in conjunction with SRF. Neighborhood meetings were held in
April and August, 1998 to receive public input regarding use and alignment of the trail. The
neighborhood meetings included discussion of McCullough Companies’ interest in developing
part of the old railroad corridor. The remaining portions were purchased by the City for the trail.
It was noted that the developable areas were adjacent to public land that could accommodate
most of the trail alignment. In developable areas that were not adjacent to public land, easements
were purchased to accommodate the trail.
A Preliminary Plat proposal for five office lots along the old Hutchinson Spur property south of
36th Street is currently being reviewed by the City and other agencies. The City is planning to
locate the trail on the adjacent Phillips Parkway right-of-way for a distance of about 600 feet
south of 36th Street. Further south, the City purchased easements for locating the trail through
the proposed office development and existing billboard and cellular tower lot. The Official Map
amendment would address the current plan for aligning the trail south of 36th Street.
The Planning Commission considered the Offical Map amendment on December 2, 1999 and
recommended approval subject to certain conditions. The conditions address rebuilding an
existing sidewalk with benches and landscaping that will be impacted by the trail alignment.
24
Issues:
• Is the proposed amendment consistent with the trail study recommendations?
• What are the impacts on the existing sidewalk on Phillips Parkway?
• What is the current status of the development proposal?
Analysis of Issues:
• Is the proposed amendment consistent with the trail study recommendations?
The proposed Official Map amendment to move the trail designation from the centerline of the
old Hutchinson Spur property south of 36th Street is consistent with the trail study
recommendations. As noted, the trail plan involves constructing the trail on the east side of
Phillips Parkway for a distance of about 600 feet south of 36th and then further east onto a trail
easement that has already been purchased on the old Hutchinson Spur property.
• What are the impacts on the existing sidewalk on Phillips Parkway?
The trail plan involves reconstruction of the existing sidewalk to a 10 feet wide, multi-use trail.
However, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that a new five feet wide
sidewalk also be constructed on the west side of Phillips Parkway to accommodate residents of
the Sholom Community Alliance properties who may prefer a separate sidewalk. The Planning
Commission recommends that the City pay for the cost of the new sidewalk and the moving of
benches and landscaping to the west side.
• What is the current status of the development proposal?
An application for preliminary plat approval for five small office buildings (called Minnehaha
Trails Office Park) has been recommended for approval by the Planing Commission subject to
several conditions. The Preliminary Plat is being considered by the City Council during the
January 4, 1999 meeting. Assuming the Preliminary and subsequent Final Plat is approved,
building permits for construction could not be issued until the Official Map is amended to move
the trail designation from the proposed building lots.
Recommendation:
The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance removing the
Official Map trail designation from the old Hutchinson Spur property south of 36th Street subject
to the following conditions:
1. The City shall construct a new sidewalk and relocate existing trees and benches to the
west side of Phillips Parkway.
25
2. The cost of the new sidewalk and relocated trees/benches shall be borne by the City and
the exact placement shall be discussed with Sholom Community Alliance prior to
installation.
The proposed conditions of approval have been included in the resolution for approval of the
associated Comprehensive Plan amendment (Case No. 98-39-CP).
Attachment:
• Proposed Ordinance
Prepared by: Janet Jeremiah, Planning Manager, 924-2573
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
26
ORDINANCE NO.___________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING OFFICIAL MAP
DELETING THE TRAIL DESIGNATION FROM A
PORTION OF FORMER HUTCHINSON SPUR PROPERTY SOUTH OF 36TH STREET
THE CITY OF ST LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. The City of St. Louis Park hereby amends the Official Map by Ordinance (Case
No. 98-40-OM) by deleting the trail designation on a portion of the centerline of the old
Hutchinson Spur railroad corridor south of 36th Street within the property legally described as
follows to-wit:
All that portion of Burlington Northern Railroad Company’s (formerly Great Northern
Railway Company) 100 foot wide Hopkins to Hopkins Jct., Minnesota Branch Line right-
of-way, including improvements, if any now discontinued, being 50 feet wide on each
side of said Railroad Company’s main Track centerline as originally located and
constructed upon, over and across the Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 117
North, Range 21 West, Hennepin County Minnesota, bounded on the North by the
Southeasterly extension of the Northeasterly boundary line of THE FEDERATION
ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
bounded on the South by the following described line:
Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 18; thence
South 89 degrees 04 minutes 39 seconds West, assumed bearing, a distance of 1086.15
feet, along the South line of said Southwest Quarter, to an intersection with the Easterly
line of said Burlington Northern Railroad Company’s discontinued 100 foot right-of-way,
thence North 20 degrees 49 minutes 09 seconds East, a distance of 224.00 feet along said
Easterly line to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 69 degrees
10 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 44.73 feet; thence South 32 degrees 38 minutes
56 seconds West a distance of 269.61 feet to the intersection of said South line of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 18 and the westerly line of said discontinued right-of-way
and said line there terminating.
Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
27
Adopted by the City Council January 19, 1999
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution
___________________________________
City Clerk City Attorney
98-40/n/res/ord
28
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8a
Meeting of January 4, 1999
8a. Election of Mayor Pro-tem
State Statute section 412.121 requires that Council choose each year an acting
Mayor from the Council members
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution appointing a Mayor Pro-tem
Background:
Minnesota State Statute section 412.121 states that at the first meeting of each year the Council
shall choose an acting Mayor from the Council members. The acting Mayor shall perform the
duties of Mayor during the disability or absence of the Mayor from the City or, in case of
vacancy in the office of Mayor, until a successor has been appointed and qualifies.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Cindy Larsen, City Clerk
Approved by: Clint Pires, Deputy City Manager
29
RESOLUTION NO. ___________
A RESOLUTION APPOINTING JEFF JACOBS
TO THE OFFICE OF MAYOR PRO-TEM
WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 412.121 requires cities to choose each year an
acting Mayor from the Council members; and
WHEREAS, the acting Mayor shall perform the duties of Mayor during the disability or absence
of the Mayor from the City or, in case of vacancy in the office of Mayor until a successor has
been appointed and qualifies; and
WHEREAS, the Council has carefully reviewed the qualifications of all Council members and
has considered the desires of the residents and the welfare of the City as a whole,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the St. Louis Park City Council that Jeff Jacobs is
hereby appointed Mayor Pro-tem of the City of St. Louis Park and shall serve in that capacity
until a duly elected successor assumes the office at the first regular City Council meeting of the
year 2000.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 4, 1999
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
30
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8b
Meeting of January 4, 1999
8b. Vision SLP Outcomes and Indicators
Resolution granting support of the Vision St. Louis Park Outcomes and Indicators.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the resolution
Background:
At the October 26, 1998 study session of the St. Louis Park City Council, Council members
received a presentation from Roger Israel and Mark Schwartz of the Vision St. Louis Park
Outcomes Committee. The presentation reviewed committee work over the past two years to
identify outcomes and leading indicators that will help measure the progress and performance of
Vision St. Louis Park. Council further discussed this project at its December 14, 1998 study
session, where a number of questions were raised and addressed. The latest version of outcomes
and indicators is included in the attached report.
At the December 14 meeting, Council indicated that it wished to consider approving a resolution
of support for the Vision St. Louis Park Outcomes and Indicators at its January 4, 1999 meeting.
The purpose of this report is to request approval of such a resolution. We appreciate the valuable
feedback and questions from Council, believe that the outcomes and indicators have been
modified appropriately, and respectfully request that a resolution of support be approved. For the
Council’s information, the St. Louis Park School Board and St. Louis Park Business Council
have acted to approve the outcomes and indicators.
Next steps in this process include: setting targets for indicators, compiling historical data, and
designing methods for future data collection that have a minimal impact on staff resources.
Longer term steps include reporting results back to stakeholders, and incorporating results into
future visioning cycles.
Materials submitted at previous meetings are available upon request.
Attachments: Resolution
Outcomes and Indicators
Prepared by: Martha McDonell, Community Outreach Coordinator
Approved by: Clint Pires, Deputy City Manager
31
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF THE VISION ST. LOUIS PARK
OUTCOMES AND INDICATORS
WHERAS, The St. Louis Park City Council has been presented with the proposed outcomes and
indicators at the October 26, 1998 Council Study Session and discussion followed at the
December 14, 1998 Council Study Session; and
WHERAS, resolutions of support have been granted by both the St. Louis School Board and the
St. Louis Park Business Council in 1998; and
WHERAS, support of the indicators is needed at this time in order for the Vision St. Louis Park
Outcomes Committee to continue with the next steps of the Vision process, which includes data
gathering and target goal setting; and
WHERAS, all parties involved in the support of Vision St. Louis Park understand that the
outcomes and indicators document is process-oriented material and it may be changed as the
need arises,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park to grant
support of the Vision St. Louis Park outcomes and indicators.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 4, 1999
City Manager Mayor
Attest
City Clerk
32
Items 8c and 8d moved
to public hearing section
Items 6a and 6b
33
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8e
Meeting of January 4, 1999
8e. Minnehaha Trails Office Park Preliminary Plat Proposal
Case No. 98-35-S
McCullough Companies is requesting Preliminary Plat approval for 5 office
development lots on approximately 3 acres of land south of 36th Street and east of
Phillips Parkway on the old “Hutchinson Spur” railroad property.
Recommended
Action:
Adopt a resolution approving the Preliminary Plat subject to the
conditions included in the resolution.
Background:
Zoning Designation: RC Multiple Family Residential
Comprehensive Plan Designation: R-50 High Density Multiple Family Residential
The applicant proposes to subdivide a long, narrow (1,500 feet by 100 feet) portion of the former
Hutchinson Spur railroad right-of-way located east of Sholom Home Residences and west of
Knollwood Village (Target, Rainbow, etc.). 36th Street is to the north and a billboard and
cellular tower are located on a separate parcel of the applicant’s land to the south.
The preliminary plat shows the 2.94 acre site subdivided into five lots. The concept development
plan shows construction of four two-story office buildings, and one one-story office building
with associated parking for tenants and visitors. Offices are allowed in the R-50 Comprehensive
Plan designation and RC Zoning District.
A neighborhood meeting was held on November 5, 1998 at Aquila School to allow informal
review and discussion about the proposed development. Comments from the neighborhood
meeting have been incorporated into the Analysis of Issues section of this report.
A portion of the Hutchinson Spur Trail (a ten-foot wide walking and biking trail) will be built
along the west side of this property within an existing easement and within the Phillips Parkway
right-of-way. Comprehensive Plan and Official Map amendments are necessary to show the
modified trail alignment.
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on November 18, 1998 and heard comments
regarding the proposal from nearby residents and management of the senior community. Based
upon the concerns, the Planning Commission continued the public hearing and asked staff to
provide more information regarding options for pedestrians who may not want to use the regional
trail. The Planning Commission’s recommended approval subject to conditions on December 2,
1998.
34
Issues:
Does the proposed preliminary plat meet the requirements of the zoning code, subdivision
ordinances and other applicable regulations?
Does the proposed plat accommodate the Hutchinson Spur Trail?
Will the existing sidewalk and landscaping be preserved or relocated?
Is the proposed development compatible with other adjacent uses?
Analysis of Issues:
Does the proposed preliminary plat meet the requirements of the zoning code,
subdivision ordinances and other applicable regulations?
Zoning Code: In general, the proposed plat meets the City Code requirements. The development
plan meets the lot size, width, setback, land use and parking requirements of the zoning code.
Offices are permitted in the RC- Multiple Family Residential zoning district.
Subdivision Ordinance: City design standards call for an optimum block length of between 300
and 660 feet. When blocks are longer than 300 feet pedestrian circulation ways or easements
may be required. The Minnehaha Trails proposed block would be 1,500 feet long with no
pedestrian or vehicular movement across the block. Residents from Sholom Home have
historically walked across this property to access Knollwood Village. In fact there are two
distinct paths across this property, which connect to the rear of the Target site. A pedestrian
walkway should be provided near the center of Block 2 in order to maintain convenient
pedestrian access for the existing residents and to provide pedestrian access for future office
tenants to Knollwood Village. A pedestrian access easement should be provided with the plat
and the developer should build stairs at the time of construction. A sketch in the Planning file
shows the proposed location.
A sidewalk easement is required along the 36th Street frontage and a minimum six-foot wide
sidewalk is to be replaced by the developer in accordance with City Code requirements.
Lot 5 does not have direct vehicular access to a public street. Therefore a cross access and
circulation easement will be needed over the portion of Lot 4 which provides access to Lot 5.
Cross easements will also be needed where driveways are proposed to be combined to minimize
interference with the trail (see trail discussion below).
Fire Requirements: Due to the lack of road or driveway access for emergency vehicles, the
proposed building on Lot 5 will be required to be equipped with an automatic fire sprinkler
system. Also, an additional fire hydrant will be required on Lot 5 to meet the maximum 660-foot
access to buildings.
Does the proposed plat accommodate the Hutchinson Spur Trail?
35
The plat and the development plan accommodate the trail construction and use. The trail will be
constructed in the Phillips Parkway right-of-way for a distance of approximately 600 feet south
of 36th Street. The trail will then move onto an easement which has already been obtained on the
property being platted. As part of the agreement to dedicate the trail easement, the City agreed to
construct the segment of the trail located between the south end of Phillips Parkway and
Highway 7 to a capacity to accommodate truck access to the cell tower and billboard located
south of the proposed development.
During the Planning Commission public hearing, concerns were raised with the number of
proposed driveways that would cross the trail. Staff and the developer looked at the feasibility of
combining driveways to minimize disruptions to the trail. Staff and the Planning Commission
recommend combining the driveways for Lots 1 and 2 at the shared property line and allowing
the driveway at the Phillips Parkway cul-de-sac to serve Lots 3, 4, and 5. In this manner, there
would be only two driveways disrupting the trail. The developer has agreed with this solution to
help address concerns.
Will the existing sidewalk and landscaping be preserved or relocated?
The existing sidewalk will be redeveloped into the wider, multi-use trail on the east side of
Philips Parkway. Most of the existing landscaping and earth berm along Phillips Parkway will
be altered by the installation of the trail or by the construction of the office buildings.
Approximately 30 of the 160 trees will be removed. Fifty-five (55) trees will be preserved in
their current location. The developer plans to relocate 33 of the trees on-site and the City plans
to relocate approximately 40 trees as part of the trail construction project. City staff have
concerns that some of the trees will be too large to move. These issues will need to be resolved
in accordance with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance prior to any site work
During the Planning Commission public hearing, concerns were raised by residents and
management of the nearby senior community regarding the loss of the sidewalk. The residents
currently use the sidewalk for recreational and health purposes and are concerned with it
becoming a regional trail that they would have to share with bicyclists. The Planning
Commission considered several options to help address their concerns and recommended that the
sidewalk be rebuilt on the west side of Phillips Parkway. This location is immediately adjacent
to the senior community and would eliminate the need for the residents to cross Phillips Parkway
or use the regional trail. The Planning Commission recommended that the City bear the cost of
the new sidewalk and relocating landscaping and benches to the west side of Phillips Parkway.
The Planning Commission also recommended that the City discuss the exact location of these
amenities with Sholom Community Alliance prior to installation. These recommendations are
part of the Comprehensive Plan and Official Map actions, since they are related to the trail and
not the proposed office development.
Is the proposed development compatible with other adjacent uses?
Office Use: The office use is permitted within this zoning district. The small offices are an
appropriate transition between the residential uses to the west and the commercial uses to the
36
east. Traffic generated by the five office buildings will be minimal and should not be a nuisance
to adjacent residents. Reconstruction of the existing sidewalk to the west side of Phillips
Parkway should help address safety concerns by eliminating the need for residents to cross
Phillips Parkway and commercial driveways to use the sidewalk for recreational purposes.
Drainage Issues: The Solar Car Wash owner (located just east of Lot 1) expressed concern about
drainage impacts upon his property. Staff reviewed the proposed drainage plan and feels that
ordinary stormwater drainage is adequately addressed on the preliminary development plan.
However, due to narrowness of the site, slope, and limited area for snow storage (particularly
along the eastern property line) staff recommends preventing snow stockpiling in a manner that
would create negative effects upon adjacent property owners or upon the public trail.
MnDOT has submitted a letter regarding unresolved stormwater drainage permit issues. It is
staff’s understanding that MNDOT is awaiting detailed calculations before considering the
permit. These issues will need to be resolved prior to any site work.
Recommendation:
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt a resolution
approving the preliminary plat subject to the following conditions:
1. The Preliminary Plat exhibits shall be revised as required and the assent form and exhibits
shall be signed before Final Plat application.
2. A sidewalk easement shall be dedicated on the Final Plat along 36th Street and a 6 foot
sidewalk shall be constructed within the easement as approved by the City Engineer.
3. Access from Phillips Parkway shall be limited to 2 driveways at the following locations: at
the shared lot line between Lots 1 and 2 to provide access to said lots and at the Phillips
Parkway cul-de-sac to provide access to Lots 3, 4, and 5. Cross access and circulation
easements shall be placed over the shared driveways prior to initiation of any site work.
4. A 30 feet wide pedestrian access easement shall be dedicated at the center of Lot 2 from the
Phillips Parkway right-of-way to Knollwood Village.
5. Prior to execution of the Final Plat, all park and trail dedication fees and other required
financial sureties shall be paid.
6. Final utility plans and fire hydrant locations shall be as approved by the utility companies,
City Engineer and Fire Chief.
7. Tree protection/preservation/relocation shall be according to the applicant’s Tree
Preservation Plan and the City Code requirements.
8. Approval from the Watershed District and other agencies shall be obtained as necessary prior
to any site work. Any use of or work within the MnDOT right of way will require an
approved MnDOT permit.
9. The Comprehensive Plan and Official Map shall be amended to move the trail designation
prior to issuance of any building permits. Building permits may impose additional
requirements. Buildings on Lot 5 shall be constructed with automatic fire sprinkler system as
approved by the Fire Chief.
37
10. Pedestrian circulation, including stairs, shall be constructed in accordance with the required
easement and plans approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of an Occupancy Permit
for Lot 2.
11. No medical or dental office use is allowed without the issuance of a separate conditional use
permit.
12. No snow stockpiling is to occur along the east property line or in other areas that would
create a negative effect (drainage, salts, icing, etc.) upon adjacent properties or the public
trail.
13. Exterior trash storage shall be fully screened to comply with City Code requirements.
Attachments:
• Proposed resolution
• Proposed Preliminary Plat Exhibits (on file in City Clerk’s office)
Prepared By: Greg Ingraham, Planning Consultant (612) 377-2500
Reviewed By: Janet Jeremiah, Planning Manager
Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
38
RESOLUTION NO.__________
RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF
MINNEHAHA TRAILS OFFICE PARK
BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park:
Findings
1. McCullough Companies, owners and subdividers of the land proposed to be platted as
Minnehaha Trails Office Park have submitted an application for approval of preliminary 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 preliminary 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:
All that portion of Burlington Northern Railroad Company’s (formerly Great Northern
Railway Company) 100 foot wide Hopkins to Hopkins Jct., Minnesota Branch Line right-
of-way, including improvements, if any now discontinued, being 50 feet wide on each
side of said Railroad Company’s main Track centerline as originally located and
constructed upon, over and across th Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 117
North, Range 21 West, Hennepin County Minnesota, bounded on the North by the
Southeasterly extension of the Northeasterly boundary line of THE FEDERATION
ADDITION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
bounded on the South by the following described line:
Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Southwest Quarter of Section 18; thence
South 89 degrees 04 minutes 39 seconds West, assumed bearing, a distance of 1086.15
feet, along the South line of said Southwest Quarter, to an intersection with the Easterly
line of said Burlington Northern Railroad Company’s discontinued 100 foot right-of-way,
thence North 20 degrees 49 minutes 09 seconds East, a distance of 224.00 feet along said
Easterly line to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence North 69 degrees
10 minutes 51 seconds West a distance of 44.73 feet; thence South 32 degrees 38 minutes
56 seconds West a distance of 269.61 feet to the intersection of said South line of the
Southwest Quarter of Section 18 and the westerly line of said discontinued right-of-way
and said line there terminating.
39
Conclusion
1. The proposed preliminary plat of Minnehaha Trails Office Park 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:
1. The Preliminary Plat exhibits shall be revised as required and the assent form and exhibits
shall be signed before Final Plat application.
2. A sidewalk easement shall be dedicated on the Final Plat along 36th Street and a 6 foot
sidewalk shall be constructed within the easement as approved by the City Engineer.
3. Access from Phillips Parkway shall be limited to 2 driveways at the following locations:
at the shared lot line between Lots 1 and 2 to provide access to said lots and at the
Phillips Parkway cul-de-sac to provide access to Lots 3, 4, and 5. Cross access and
circulation easements shall be placed over the shared driveways prior to initiation of any
site work.
4. A 30 feet wide pedestrian access easement shall be dedicated at the center of Lot 2 from
the Phillips Parkway right-of-way to Knollwood Village.
5. Prior to execution of the Final Plat, all park and trail dedication fees and other required
financial sureties shall be paid.
6. Final utility plans and fire hydrant locations shall be as approved by the utility companies,
City Engineer and Fire Chief.
7. Tree protection/preservation/relocation shall be according to the applicant’s Tree
Preservation Plan and the City Code requirements.
8. Approval from the Watershed District and other agencies shall be obtained as necessary
prior to any site work. Any use of or work within the MnDOT right of way will require
an approved MnDOT permit.
9. The Comprehensive Plan and Official Map shall be amended to move the trail
designation prior to issuance of any building permits. Building permits may impose
additional requirements. Buildings on Lot 5 shall be constructed with automatic fire
sprinkler system as approved by the Fire Chief.
10. Pedestrian circulation, including stairs, shall be constructed in accordance with the
required easement and plans approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of an
Occupancy Permit for Lot 2.
11. No medical or dental office use is allowed without the issuance of a separate conditional
use permit.
12. No snow stockpiling is to occur along the east property line or in other areas that would
create a negative effect (drainage, salts, icing, etc.) upon adjacent properties or the public
trail.
13. Exterior trash storage shall be fully screened to comply with City Code requirements.
40
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 4, 1999
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
98-35/N/res/ord
41
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8f*
Meeting of January 4, 1999
8f*. Designate St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor as Official Newspaper for 1999
Minnesota Statutes and the City Charter require that a legal newspaper of general
circulation be designated for publication of the City’s official proceedings and
notices.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution designating the St. Louis Park Sun-
Sailor as the City’s Official Newspaper for 1999
Background:
MS 331A.02 and Charter Section 3.07 require that a legal newspaper of general circulation be
designated for publication of the City’s official proceedings and notices and such other matters
and measures as are required by law and City Charter.
For a number of years the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor has been the City’s official newspaper. This
newspaper is circulated throughout St. Louis Park at no charge to residents and is an ideal
medium for dissemination of information related to City government issues.
Attachment: Resolution
Letter from Frank Chilinski, Publisher
Prepared by: Cindy Larsen, City Clerk
Approved by: Clint Pires, Deputy City Manager
42
RESOLUTION NO. ____________________
A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING AN OFFICIAL
ST. LOUIS PARK NEWSPAPER
FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1999
WHEREAS, MS 331A.02 and Charter Section 3.07 require that a legal newspaper of general
circulation be designated for publication of the City’s official proceedings and notices and such
other matters and measures as are required by law and City Charter; and
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor is a duly qualified medium of legal publication;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the St. Louis Park City Council hereby designates
the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor as the City’s Official Newspaper for Calendar Year 1999.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 4, 1999
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
43
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8g*
Meeting of January 4, 1999
*8g. Traffic Study No. 538: Permit parking restrictions on the north side of W.
35th Street in the 6200 and 6300 blocks.
This report considers “PERMIT PARKING ONLY” on the north side of W. 35th
Street in the 6200 and 6300 blocks.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to accept this report for filing and adopt the attached
resolution authorizing permit parking restrictions on the north
side of W. 35th Street in the 6200 and 6300 blocks.
Background: Residents in the area of W. 35th Street in the 6200 and 6300 blocks submitted a
petition requesting permit parking only in front of their homes on the north side of the street.
The petition was submitted in accordance with the City’s policy for traffic control requests. The
request was initiated due to the use of on-street parking by people using Central Community
Center. Staff met with School District representatives and they do not have a problem with
installing permit parking on the north side of W. 35th Street. Central Community Center has
adequate on-site parking for this area.
On December 15, 1998 staff sponsored a neighborhood meeting for area residents. A total of 11
residents representing seven (7) properties attended the meeting. All of those in attendance
supported the installation of parking-by-permit only. Staff recommended the hours be from 7
a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday. All the residents supported this proposal.
Options: Staff has identified the following options available to the Council at this time:
1.* Approve the request. If so, the attached resolution authorizing the installation of
the parking regulations may be utilized.
2. Deny the request.
* Staff recommendation
Attachments: Map
Resolution
Prepared by: Carlton Moore, Superintendent of Engineering
Approved by: Clint Pires, Deputy City Manager
44
RESOLUTION NO. _______
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING "PERMIT PARKING ONLY"
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF W. 35TH STREET IN THE 6200 AND 6300 BLOCKS
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 538
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has been requested, has studied, and
has determined that traffic controls are necessary at this location.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis
Park, Minnesota, that the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to install the following
controls:
1. Parking by “Permit Only” on the north side of W. 35th Street on the 6200 and 6300
blocks.
Attest: Adopted by the City Council January 4, 1999
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
45
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8h*
Meeting of January 4, 1999
*8h. Traffic Study No. 539: Request for permit parking at 2816 Alabama Avenue
South.
This report considers a residential request for “PERMIT PARKING ONLY” in
front of the residents’ home due to accessibility needs of their child.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing the
installation of permit parking in front of 2816 Alabama Avenue
South.
Background: The City has received a request from Jim Younger and Tonja Kasin (2816
Alabama Avenue South) to restrict parking along the street in front of their residence. Their son,
Tyler, is confined to a wheelchair due to cerebral palsy, and the daily bus pick up at the curb in
front of their home has prompted this request.
Staff discussed this request with Mr. Jim Younger and informed him the City’s traffic policy and
practice does allow for permit parking in these situations. The installation of handicapped
parking signs is not feasible as the parking stall design requirements cannot be met on our local
streets. It is the City’s practice to use permit parking which can be removed when the individual
who needed the curb access no longer resides there or no longer needs the access.
Staff considers the residents’ request to be valid and supports the installation of permit parking in
front of 2816 Alabama Avenue South. This recommendation is based upon the following:
1. A resident of the household is confined to a wheelchair.
2. Access to curb side parking immediately in front of the residence provides more
convenient wheelchair access.
3. Conflicting parking tendencies of neighbors will be eliminated.
Options: Staff has identified the following options available to the Council at this time:
* 1. Approve the request. If so, the attached resolution authorizing the installation of the
parking regulations may be utilized.
2. Deny the request.
* Staff recommendation
Attachments: Map
Resolution
Letters
Prepared by: Carlton Moore, Superintendent of Engineering
Approved by: Clint Pires, Deputy City Manager
46
RESOLUTION NO. _______
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING PARKING RESTRICTIONS
ALONG ALABAMA AVENUE AT 2816
TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 539
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota that it
is in the best interest of the City to establish a parking restriction based upon permit issuance
along Alabama Avenue at 2816.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that parking shall not be permitted at any time unless
the vehicle prominently displays a City issued parking permit on the left rear windshield.
Emergency vehicles, governmental vehicles and commercial vehicles parked at curbside while
work is conducted are exempt from these restrictions.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the parking restriction enacted herein shall remain
in effect as long as the resident resides at the above address.
Attest: Adopted by the City Council January 4, 1999
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
47
Item 9a*
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
DECEMBER 2, 1998 --7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Paul Carver, Michael Garelick
Ken Gothberg, Dennis Morris, Jerry Timian
MEMBERS ABSENT: Sally Velick
STAFF PRESENT: Janet Jeremiah, Janice Loftus, Sacha Peterson
1. Call to Order - Roll Call
Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes of November 18, 1998
Mr. Garelick moved approval of the minutes of November 4, 1998 and the motion passed
on a vote of 4-0-2 with Carver, Garelick, Morris, and Timian voting in favor and
Bissonnette and Gothberg abstaining.
Chair Morris noted a correction on the agenda to move Case No. 98-40-OM from New
Business to Old Business.
3. Public Hearings
A. Case No. 98-35-S -- Request by McCullough Companies for preliminary plat
approval for Minnehaha Trails Office Park (Continued 11-18)
Janet Jeremiah, Planning Manager, presented the staff report and recommended Options 2
and 3 as outlined in the staff memo and indicated that with regard to Option 2, staff does
not have a specific recommendation regarding the appropriate funding approach for
constructing the sidewalk. This would be a policy decision to be made by the City
Council.
Barry Warner of SRF summarized the background of the regional trail and his role in
assisting the City with identifying the preferred alignment for the trail. He said that there
were two alternatives considered and in either case there was no public right of way
available for the regional trail, so there had to be an easement obtained from private
parcel owners for the accommodation of the trail. The regional trail, according to
MnDOT design guidelines cannot be less than 10 feet. Two options were looked at. The
first option was using the corridor as is currently shown and the second option was to
place the trail on the east side of the proposed office complex closer to the retail shopping
48
center. The second option was less desirable because there are varying degrees of cross
pitch from Phillips Parkway eastward towards Target and the retail center and, as one
goes North towards 36th Street, the cross pitch increases, so to accommodate the trail
there would have to be a provision for a retaining wall which would increase the width of
the easement that would be necessary, as well as, increase the cost of the project. Also,
aesthetics was a consideration and the back side of Target is not pleasing and does not
provide the character desired for the trail. Also, the crossing of 36th Street is important
so that there is some recognition that this is a logical crossing location rather than mid-
block. He indicated that, wherever required, access points or street access points would
be treated like those with the same type of safety crossing that would be employed for
street crossings. There would be advanced signing and stop signs for the regional trail, as
well as, surface paint and warning signs for the vehicles. All signage would need to meet
safety standards. The final submission of the plan to MnDOT will occur before the end
of the year.
Mr. Gothberg asked if developing a retaining wall would be more costly than building a
sidewalk west of Phillips Parkway.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that the estimated cost of building a sidewalk would be in the
range of $7,000 - 8,000 and a retaining wall would be in excess of that plus there would
be a need to purchase easements. Staff’s recommendation is to rebuild the sidewalk on
the west side of Phillips Parkway to allow the residents a safe place to walk and not cross
a public street. Staff is also recommending that the number of driveway entrances into the
office development be reduced to two combining two driveways in each case into one.
Mr. Garelick asked if senior housing was considered as a possible liability or positive
when looking at the trail.
Mr. Warner stated that he met with representatives of the Sholom facility in June and
discussed the location of the trail. Residents expressed safety concerns. Mr. Warner
indicated that generally, regional trails are not dangerous, but it is a question of how they
are used by walkers, bicyclists, etc. He has not seen that there have been dangerous
situations as a result of the mix of traffic on the trail.
Mr. Garelick asked how the sidewalk on the west side would be funded.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that this decision would be left to the City Council, but believed the
Planning Commission could make recommendations in regard to this. Staff came up with
potential alternatives which include assessing the adjacent property owner, cost sharing,
or the City paying the entire cost.
Chair Morris asked as part of the platting process, if there is no dedication of park or trail
easements as required, is there not a fee paid to the City in lieu of this.
49
Ms. Jeremiah stated that there would be park and trail dedication fees required from this
development based upon a calculation for a commercial development. The fee is based
on the assessed value of the property. In response to a question, Ms. Jeremiah indicated
that she believed the fees would be in excess of $7,000.
Chair Morris asked if the City can use these dedication fees for other capital
improvements.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that the City could not.
Mr. Gothberg noted that the residents stated that the sidewalk is their recreation, so one
could possibly interpret this as a recreational sidewalk.
Chair Morris opened the public hearing.
Herbert Schechter, 8621 W. 29th Street, Vice President of Sholom Community Alliance,
stated that, at this point, he felt very strongly that the sidewalk should remain in tact with
the benches and landscaping as it is right now and it makes no sense to demolish the
existing concrete sidewalk and the materials that are there. He believes that the trail
should be separate from the sidewalk in order to handle the traffic of the bicycles, etc. and
to mix these things together is not going to work. He is concerned about driveways
crossing the sidewalk and the trail and concerned that service vehicles should not be on
the trail to service the billboard and radio tower sites that are rented by the owner. He
stated that there is no need to build a sidewalk on the west side of Phillips Parkway and
that the development should be accessed from 36th Street and more options considered.
He noted that the developer could possibly grant an easement for the trail. The present
campus design is part of a master plan that was approved by the City. It was designed so
the sidewalk on the east side of Phillips Parkway would be a safe park like amenity. He
noted the reason for not having a sidewalk on the west side of Phillips Parkway in the
original plan was all the curb cuts and driveways serving the buildings and that would be
the same danger that we are concerned about on the east side. He explained that the
master plan is a model of good development and should not be destroyed. He questioned
if the consultant really appreciated the density of the housing and intensive use of seniors
in the area. He said he felt the issue of the mid block crossing was not of value because
there is a mid block crossing on 31st Street that is adjoining Aquila Park and Aquila
School, and the driveways are unexpected on this trail. If it was found that for safety it is
necessary to have a driveway on Phillips Parkway, it could be seen to put a driveway in
on the culdesac at the end, because the sidewalk does not extend past the culdesac and the
culdesac could more easily accommodate cars going in and out. He stated that he
appreciates the time that was given to him to express his concerns and he believes more
work needs to be done.
Michael Klein, 1811 Hillsboro Avenue South, CEO of Sholom Community Alliance,
stated that the community will be around long term and they are looking out for their best
interest. He believes placing a sidewalk on the west side does not make sense for issues
50
of safety. He appreciates the possibility of reducing the number of accesses, but is still
concerned about the safety of elderly residents with physical disabilities and language
issues using a multi-use trail. He recommended the trail and sidewalk be placed parallel
to each other and stated that they desire to work with developer.
Fannie Shanfield, 3630 Phillips Parkway, Knollwood Place read a petition (petition filed
in case file) and provided pictures of the site. She stated that even if the project was
facing east, she is concerned about sewer protection, intensity of lighting, power and
noise factors. She questioned why the land was not returned to the State of Minnesota
and asked if trees that were planted by association will be returned to Knollwood Place.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that there is no provision in State law to return the land to the State
and railroad was free to sell their property. No one expected that to happen and this was
not the preference of the City or residents to see the property developed, but the property
owner has certain rights within State law and ordinance, one of which is access from
Phillips Parkway. It is her understanding that a number of the trees can be moved and if
there is a preference by the residents as to where the trees would be moved this could be
taken into consideration.
Robert Kantor, 3630 Phillips Parkway, Knollwood Place, said he is concerned about the
safety of the residents who walk on the sidewalk everyday and asked if a survey of the
traffic congestion in the area was conducted (paramedics, metro mobility, visitors to
resident).
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that the City periodically reviews traffic concerns in the area and
the Public Works Department looked at any possible traffic impacts from the proposal
and felt that the current street could handle the traffic. She stated that the concern of
safety is why staff is recommending a sidewalk on the west side of Phillips Parkway to
prevent the residents from having to cross the parkway to get to the existing sidewalk
system. She stated that if there is a way for the campus planners to develop a sidewalk
system for its residents’ recreational uses which is completely internal to the campus,
that may be preferable.
Rabbi Schulman, 3630 Phillips Parkway, said he is concerned about ensuring safety for
all, especially to the elderly and urged the Planning Commission to do everything
possible to develop a plan to prevent any accident from occurring.
Karen O’Toole, 5315 Abbott Avenue South, Housing Administrator for Menorah Plaza
and Menorah West, stated that she is preparing a petition similar to Knollwood Place. She
agrees with the concerns of residents about the safety issues. Her preference is to have a
separated trail and sidewalk, if this is not possible, she asked if it is possible to have a
physical barrier separating walkers, roller bladers and bicyclists.
Mr. Kantor noted that if a sidewalk is built on the west side, it would cross 4 driveways,
where as now the sidewalk does not cross any driveways.
51
Greg Frank, McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc., stated that the issue of safety is a
concern and he had a chance to talk with Mr. McCullough after the last meeting and
recommends that they look at combining accesses into the development. There is a
proposed access at the end of Phillips culdesac coming into Lot 4 which is shared by Lots
4 and 5 and he recommended to Mr. McCullough to use that same access to access Lot 3
so we would access Lots 3, 4 and 5 from the culdesac on Phillips at the very far south of
Phillips Parkway. Building 1 could be flip-flopped so the building would be closer to
36th and Buildings 1 and 2 could have a shared driveway at the common lot line between
the two buildings. This would minimize the number of traffic crossings with the trail and
Mr. McCullough is agreeable to this solution.
In response to a request for clarification from Chair Morris, Mr. Frank clarified that Lots
1 and 2 would have a combined entrance at the common lot line between Lots 1 and 2
and Lots 3, 4, and 5 would have a single access as depicted for Lot 4 on the drawings. He
described the plan to Commissioners and residents in attendance.
Mr. Timian asked about the grade problem off 36th Street.
Mr. Frank indicated there is a 10 foot slope and access off 36th Street would require a
retaining wall.
Fanny Shanfield, 3630 Phillips Parkway, asked if the public culdesac which is used as a
driveway to underground parking would be redesigned.
Helen Silverman, Knollwood Place, asked whose idea it was to have a multi-use trail.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that it was recommended in 1984 that the regional trail be
designed as a multi-use trail.
Helene Frank, Knollwood Place, said she is concerned about the potential noise created
by the trail and believes it would disturb this quiet community.
Zelma Hurseth, Knollwood Place, asked why Phillips Parkway is considered a public
street.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that the street was dedicated, at the time the development was
built, as a public street perhaps because of a cost factor for maintenance which the City is
responsible for.
Mr. Schechter asked since there has been some changes in driveways, is the developer
willing to provide an easement so that there could be a separate trail and will the
developer build whatever access is required to the radio tower and billboard so they
would not use the trail.
52
Mr. Frank indicated that as negotiations were underway for the access to the billboard and
tower that Mr. McCollough felt it was very important in those negotiations to reserve a
right to cross the trail to get access to these sites and doubted he would waive the right
for this privilege. He stated that the proposed plan is reactive to the plan for the regional
trail recommended by the City and he is unsure if a change to the plan would be received
favorably by Mr. McCollough.
Chair Morris stated that this request is for preliminary plat approval and there will be
another opportunity for issues to be addressed and discussed before final plat
consideration.
Rabbi Shulman asked where parking would be for the development.
Chair Morris indicated that the parking would be open air surface parking.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chair Morris closed the public hearing.
Ms. Bissonnette asked if it is possible to designate and run the trail along Phillips
Parkway.
Mr. Warner stated this would only be possible by striping a bicycle lane on either side of
the trail for one-way traffic, but is not recommended for that short distance because it
would be confusing and would mix bicycles and bladers on an on-street alignment which
would be less safe for the trail users.
Mr. Timian asked which way would be safer for residents.
Mr. Warner stated that it would be safest to maintain an independent path for the trail and
if there would be adequate space, provide an independent pedestrian trail.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that if the trail was closer to Sholom on Phillips Parkway, residents
would have to cross the trail.
Mr. Warner stated that the project has to be approved by MnDOT and they may not
allow the trail on the street.
Chair Morris indicated that developing a pedestrian walkway over the trail abutting
private property could be a problem. He recommended working with owners of Target
for right of entry.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that staff is working on resolving this issue with the owners of the
Knollwood property, but have not made progress because the property is apparently
currently for sale.
53
Mr. Garelick stated he believes that the issue of safety is most important so that the
quality of life is maintained for the senior citizens. He believes the developer is trying to
modify accesses. It is his thinking that having the sidewalk on the west side as part of the
Ackerberg campus would give residents the most control and he didn’t see another
alternative.
Mr. Gothberg agreed with Mr. Garelick and said that the trail placement is sound and a
sidewalk on the west side would benefit residents.
Mr. Garelick stated that a west sidewalk would provide a better situation for this
exclusive area and noted the option of putting the trail on the street could not be done
because of State regulations.
Joy Markinson, Knollwood Place, asked why trail had to be placed at this location.
Chair Morris stated that the amenities that the residents are enjoying that are historic, but
as development comes along, it takes away the trees and other park like atmosphere that
are enjoyed. He believes this is where the trail has to be by logic of its linear extension.
The railroad spur was the chosen designation and that is why it has to be there, and it is
not practical to jog the trail through neighborhoods. How to make the trail safe to the
residents, as well as, to the trail users is difficult. His first preference is to keep a separate
sidewalk on the east side of Phillips Parkway with a separate trail, but this is not feasible,
therefore his next preference would be to move the sidewalk to the west side. He does
not believe the residents should pay for a new sidewalk.
Mr. Garelick reiterated that the trail needed to be there, but if you had the sidewalk on the
west side the residents would have more control because it is internal.
Chair Morris stated that the Planning Commission is an advisory body to City Council
and those present could also express concerns to the City Council.
Zelma Hurseth asked if the Planning Commission had been to the campus to examine
factors.
Chair Morris indicated that the Planning Commission visited the area on a recent tour of
the City.
Mr. Kantor stated that the path to Rainbow should not be a path, and is dangerous. How
did staff know about it?
Ms. Jeremiah stated that staff saw the path on a site visit.
Mr. Carver asked staff to clarify the issue in question.
54
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the immediate issue is the Minnehaha Trails Preliminary Plat
and staff recommends approval with 14 conditions. She indicated that it is possible to
amend the condition in regards to shared driveways. The original proposal has one
shared driveway for Lots 4 & 5, and there has been talk about revising that to combine all
of the driveways into just 2 driveways so that there would be one shared driveway for lots
1 & 2 and one shared driveway for lots 3, 4, and 5. With regard to the trail issue and the
rebuilding of the sidewalk these are separate matters and would be considered with the
Comprehensive Plan amendment. However, there needs to be a finding that the
preliminary plat is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Garelick stated that the sidewalk should be on the west side with relocation of
accesses reduced to two and if there is any extra money in budget or from fees
recommend it be earmarked to aesthetics.
Ms. Jeremiah proposed that staff provide a revised list of conditions of approval that the
Planning Commission could review at next meeting.
It was moved by Mr. Garelick to approve the preliminary plat subject to the conditions
that staff had in their original report and subject to the comments and additions by the
Planning Commission. The motion passed on a vote of 6-0 with Bissonnette, Carver,
Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, and Timian voting in favor.
4. Old Business:
A. Case No. 98-39-CP -- Amendment to Comprehensive Plan - Remove trail
designation from a portion of the Hutchinson Spur railroad right-of-way
south of 36th Street and redesignate trail onto adjacent right-of-way to the
west (deferred back to staff 11-18)
Ms. Jeremiah presented a staff report and concluded with a recommendationt that the
Planning Commission recommend approval of the amendment to the Comprehensive
Plan to move the trail.
Chair Morris indicated that the Commission was proposing a relocation of the sidewalk
and amenities to the west side at cost to the City.
Mr. Gothberg recommended that the City work with the residents.
Mr. Timian asked what the cost differential is for relocating the sidewalk and building
retaining wall.
Mr. Warner estimated that the cost of building the retaining wall would be between
$50,000 - $75,000 plus purchase of additional right of way.
55
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the cost for relocating the sidewalk would be $7,000 - $8,000
and additional cost of relocation of trees and benches.
Chair Morris asked if it is possible to separate the trail with a wall.
Mr. Warner stated that this was examined and it may be possible to put a grassed
median between the trail and sidewalk, have a trail with painted lines for separation, or
use of small cones, but a wall is not recommended because they turn into trippers, may
be unsafe and need to be maintained in winter.
Mr. Timian asked if there is space available for a wider trail and sidewalk together.
Mr. Warner stated that the current right of way for most of this space is adequate to
provide a 5-6 foot boulevard space and a 10 feet trail, anything beyond that would
require an easement to be negotiated or purchased from Mr. McCullough.
Mr. Timian asked if there are any State requirements about widths of boulevards.
Mr. Warner stated there is not a law, but said he is reluctant to put a trail immediately
next to the curb because it sets a trail user going in the opposite direction of the traffic in
a wrong way situation. There are additional maintenance requirements as well.
Chair Morris stated that this segment of the trail will connect Minneapolis, St. Louis
Park and Hopkins in one continuous trail.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that where the trail crosses the street there would be stop signs
on the trail to inform the trail users.
Chair Morris clarified that the 100 foot right of way behind Target is proposed as office.
Ms. Jeremiah clarified that the proposed amendment involves 600 feet of trail from 36th
to the end of the Phillips Parkway culdesac and then the trail moves east back on to the
old railroad corridor so it could cross under Highway 7.
Mr. Garelick hoped that residents will use the trail as it would provide an additional
walking area for them.
It was moved by Mr. Gothberg to recommend that the City Council amend the
Comprehensive Plan approving the removal of the trail designation from a portion of
the Hutchinson Spur railroad right-of-way south of 36th Street and redesignate trail onto
adjacent right-of-way to the west with the conditions discussed and the motion passed 6-
0 with Bissonnette, Carver, Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, and Timian voting in favor.
56
B. Case No. 98-40-OM -- Amendment to Official Map - Move trail designation
off of a portion of the Hutchinson Spur railroad right-of-way South of 36th
Street (deferred 11-18)
It was moved by Ms. Bissonnette that the Planning Commission recommend that the
City Council approve the amendment to the Offical Map subject to conditions
recommended by staff and the motion passed 6-0 with Bissonnette, Carver, Garelick,
Gothberg, Morris, and Timian voting in favor.
5. New Business
A. Consent Agenda - None
B. Other New Business
i. Case No. 98-41-CUP -- Request of Frauenshuh Companies (PHMC
Holdings) for a conditional use permit to permit the construction of a two
story medical/bank & dental building for property zoned C-2 General
Commercial located at 4951 - 4959 Excelsior Boulevard.
Sacha Peterson, Planning Associate presented the staff report and recommended
approval subject to 4 conditions in the staff report. She stated that revised grading
and drainage plans are being reviewed by Public Works.
Mr. Timian asked if this proposal is consistent with the concept of having Quentin
Avenue be a feeder into Park Commons.
Ms. Peterson stated that one of the explicit objectives of the Park Commons goals
is to accommodate and relocate existing businesses.
Mr. Timian asked if the concept is also to keep development like this on the north
side of Excelsior Boulevard.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that overall the concept is to limit the number of drive
through uses throughout Park Commons because of the potential conflicts with
pedestrians. The reason why this request is being considered is to try to balance
the needs of relocating existing businesses with the other Park Commons goals.
Staff considers the proposal acceptable with certain conditions, including a
finding that the traffic impacts are found acceptable.
Mr. Timian stated that the proposal seems to be adding more traffic and more
potential pedestrian and vehicle conflict.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that the overall redevelopment of the area will increase
traffic so the questions are how this is done and how are the pedestrians
accommodated within that traffic pattern.
57
Mr. Gothberg stated, from a pedestrian point of view, it makes more sense for
vehicles to acess the drive through off Excelsior Boulevard and exit onto Quentin.
Mr. Jeremiah noted that there is a median in Excelsior Boulevard at the location
of the exit from the drive through.
Steve Doughty, 2150 Bayard Avenue, Pope Associate Architects for Frauenshuh
was present and indicated that he did make an attempt to address the 2 to 1
building height to length ratio and addressed a two foot projection on the walls
that were not following that regulation. It does satisfy the requirement on the west
side, it doesn’t quite make it on the east side. He asked if there is any way he
could use the drive through canopy as a projection of the wall that is breaking up
the portion of the elevation that remains flat. He understands Staff’s decision to
minimize parking in the south end once the existing MRI building is removed,
and communicated that the developer is concerned about reducing the parking
ratio.
Chair Morris asked if Mr. Doughty was asking for a clarification of the parking
requirement from staff regarding future uses during Quentin realignment.
Mr. Doughty stated he is interested in the intent when Quentin is realigned.
Ms. Peterson stated that minimizing surface parking is a goal in the Park
Commons area. She indicated this could be revisited at the time of Quentin
realignment and if, at that time, the developer felt that they really needed that
additional parking, they could seek an amendment to the CUP. Regarding the
building wall deviation issue, the Zoning Administrators interpretation of the
zoning code is that the deviation must be all the way up to the full height of the
building to be considered, but there may be other options.
Chair Morris asked if there is going to be a one car exit.
Mr. Doughty stated that this is the case and the exit allows for one car to exit.
Brett Boushele, 4956 40th Street West, owns the property on the southwest corner
of the development and is excited about the development of a bank, but is
concerned about the safety of pedestrians with the Quentin realignment, especially
school children. He is also concerned about the purchase of the old Quentin right
of way property.
Ms. Peterson clarified what will happen to a portion of the property that is the
existing Quentin Avenue. The east 30 feet of it would be deeded back to the
property owner as of right, and it is uncertain what would happen to the remainder
of the property .
58
Ms. Jeremiah stated that currently a Park Commons West Study is being
conducted that will be examining this issue.
Chair Morris stated that he sees this bank drive through bringing in a lot of traffic
and would like to see a traffic study prior to making a decision. He is concerned
about having 5 drive through lanes with 1 ATM lane that have limited access to
enter and limited exits. He sees potential for shortcuts through neighborhood.
Ms. Bissonnette said she is interested in examining the traffic patterns and other
options for the site.
Chair Morris asked if air quality would be examined with so many vehicles
circulating and stacking up in such a small area.
Mr. Timian stated that it makes more sense to build some type of residential
development on the site facing residential and backing Excelsior Boulevard.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that this property is currently zoned for commercial uses and
when they discussed the Park Commons redevelopment plan there was no
recommendation to change it. She noted that the traffic study would look at three
different intersections: the existing Excelsior Boulevard and Quentin intersection,
the intersection to the South (Vallacher) main entrance to bank, and intersection
of 40th and Quentin and look at all day traffic and pm peak.
Mr. Timian requested also looking at Quentin and 41st Street.
Chair Morris recommended looking at the entire traffic circulation pattern through
the neighborhood.
Lyn Wick, 3965 Quentin Avenue South, said she believes it is interesting that this
plan doesn’t include the lot lines and homes that would be most directly affected
by this change. She is concerned about the impact on the increased volume of
traffic on the neighborhood and concerned about the main entrance being on
Vallacher. She said she believes there is a need for screening for the
neighborhood.
Ms. Peterson stated that a bufferyard D is required on the east side of the property,
which is about 200 plants units per 100 feet, between the two uses.
Ms. Wick said she does not understand the advantages gained from Quentin
realignment and she is interested in protecting the neighborhood from impact of
development and air quality.
59
Chair Morris indicated that this issue goes on to City Council with
recommendation and more information will be provided.
Ms. Peterson stated that there are some criteria in the zoning ordinance that have
not yet been met.
Rick Randall, 4901 Vallacher Avenue stated that people are already using 41st
and Vallacher for short cuts and he is interested in the outcome of traffic study.
Ms. Wick stated that signage in the immediate area does not work and is not
enforced.
Mr. Garelick stated that there are congestion problems and it will take additional
studies before we can act in a responsible way. He recommended further traffic
studies of traffic patterns be conducted in the area before final decision could be
made.
Chair Morris asked about the time requirement for completion of the study.
Ms. Peterson stated that staff needed to receive a letter from the developer and
then staff would commission the study and that would take up to two weeks. A
verbal update could be made at next Planning Commission meeting.
Chair Morris stated that he prefers that the results of the traffic study be included
with their agenda materials for review rather than having it presented at the
meeting.
It was moved by Ms. Bissonnette to defer the conditional use permit request until
completion of a traffic study and the Planning Commission’s review of the results
prior to their meeting and the motion passed 6-0 with Bissonnette, Carver,
Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, and Timian voting in favor.
Ms. Jeremiah requested that those in attendance leave their names and numbers so
that staff could contact them when this item would be back on the agenda.
6. Communications
A. City Council Action - November 16, 1998
B. Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes - October 22, 1998
C. Board of Zoning Appeals Agenda - December 1, 1998
D. Other
Mr. Gothberg commented on the study session report on property of 3536 Wooddale.
Chair Morris believed that there needs to be a focus outside the limits of what is being
60
considered and would like to see something when plans are received that shows the make
up of the neighborhood where these proposals are being set in.
Ms. Loftus distributed Friends of the Arts surveys to the Planning Commission to
complete and return.
7. Miscellaneous: None
8. Adjournment
Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Janice Loftus
Administrative Secretary
Prepared by:
Shirley Olson
Recording Secretary
61
Item # 9b*
December 24, 1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
A W W A OFFICE SUPPLIES 816.75
ADVANCED STATE SECURITY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,095.96
AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 56.60
ALBERS MECHANICAL SERVICES BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,387.50
ALMSTED'S NEW MARKET TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 45.94
ALTERNATIVES COMMUNICATIONS GR GENERAL SUPPLIES 29.43
APACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,025.12
APPLIANCE RECYCLING CENTERS OF CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 40.00
ARAMARK GENERAL SUPPLIES 149.98
ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE
ACCT
GENERAL SUPPLIES 421.45
AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES TELEPHONE 63.72
AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR CO EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 122.02
BARNES, ROBERT GENERAL SUPPLIES 44.99
BARON, EILEEN GENERAL SUPPLIES 198.46
BEARCOM RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 136.84
BERGER, CAROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2.66
BEST WESTERN KELLY INN TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 298.82
BIFFS INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (44.84)
BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 584.20
BOBS PERSONAL COFFEE SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 317.88
BOOMER, KRISTIN GENERAL SUPPLIES 50.00
BOYER TRUCK PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS 97.93
BRO TEX INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 733.88
BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66)
BUYERS PREFERENCE INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROFESSIONAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,375.90
CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 83.75
CATCO PARTS SERVICE EQUIPMENT PARTS (142.35)
COLLISYS ELECTRIC CO ELECTRICAL 242.98
COMM ACTION FOR SUBURBAN HENNE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 7,763.00
CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,385.60
CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 179.84
COORDINATED BUSINESS SYSTEMS L EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 79.00
CRILEY, KATHI L TELEPHONE 108.33
CROWN FENCE & WIRE CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 43.67
CURTIS 1000 INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 12.50
CUSTOM PRODUCTS & SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,220.00
CUSTOMIZED TRAINING SERVICES TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 750.00
DALCO EQUIPMENT PARTS 72.18
DCA INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 386.10
DELEGARD TOOL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES (65.54)
DENNYS ROLL-OFF SERVICES RENTAL EQUIPMENT 255.00
DIVERSIFIED INSPECTIONS INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 984.00
DREIER, LORI A STUDY INCENTIVE & MERIT PAY 357.50
62
DRYWALL SUPPLY INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 41.90
ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 276.44
FEIGES, DALE W INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
FIRST SYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 717.75
FITZGERALD, JOHN TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 800.38
GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT CORP EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.44)
GENERAL SPORTS CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,482.50
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS 569.64
GIWOYNA, NANCY COMPUTER SUPPLIES 59.98
GOVT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOC GENERAL SUPPLIES 85.00
HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFF SUBSISTENCE SERVICE 118.29
HIGHVIEW PLUMBING INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 823.03
HOME DEPOT/GECF EQUIPMENT PARTS 63.35
HOME HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES 40.81
HOWARD R. GREEN COMPANY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,510.50
I C B O SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 25.00
ICMA DISTRIBUTION CENTER GENERAL SUPPLIES 143.70
INDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 578.85
INST. FOR FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 475.00
INTERSTATE BEARING COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (166.20)
INTL INSTITUTE MUNICIPAL CLERK SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 95.00
IOS CAPITAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT 516.53
IPMA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 100.00
JAKUBIK, JILL INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
JOHNSON, KATE YOUTH ATHLETICS 110.00
JUSTUS LUMBER CO OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 402.58
LANGEFELS, DOUGLAS CONCESSION SUPPLIES 34.70
LAUMANN, JOHN GENERAL SUPPLIES 250.00
LISTON, MICHAEL L INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
LOFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 2,373.77
LOGIS COMPUTER SERVICES 23,256.83
LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC LUBRICANTS/ADDITIVES (300.00)
MADSON, HOWARD INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 370.50
MC BRIDE, KATHLEEN MEETING EXPENSE 61.37
MC DONELL, MARTHA GENERAL SUPPLIES 71.46
MENARDS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 84.19
METRO COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL SE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SERVICE 14,379.75
METRO SALES INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 296.16
METRO SYSTEMS GENERAL SUPPLIES 668.56
METRO WATER CONDITIONING INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 249.60
METROPOLITAN FORD EDEN PRAIRIE EQUIPMENT PARTS 4.68
MEYER, CHARLES GENERAL SUPPLIES 33.55
MINN LEGAL REGISTER SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 52.00
MN CHIEFS OF POLICE ED FOUNDAT TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 265.00
MN PIPE & EQUIPMENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 785.49
MN POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 300.00
MTI DISTRIBUTING CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 159.90
63
NATHENSON & ASSOCIATES, JUDITH AWARDS/INDEMNITIES 210.92
NATIONAL AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER C EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 300.00
NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE GENERAL SUPPLIES 225.02
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 335.00
NATL COUNCIL OF JEWISH WOMEN PROGRAMMING 15.00
NORTHLAND ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 114.29
NRG DISTRIBUTORS GENERAL SUPPLIES 37.00
NSP CO ELECTRIC SERVICE 20,113.41
O NEIL, SCOTT YOUTH ATHLETICS 11.00
OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 264.37
OLSON, SHIRLEY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 59.71
PALM BROTHERS CONCESSION SUPPLIES 56.84
PARK LIGHTING INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,416.33
PARTNERS IN PERSONNEL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 378.00
PARTS PLUS EQUIPMENT PARTS 57.78
PEPSI-COLA COMPANY CONCESSION SUPPLIES 565.38
PRESTIGE LINCOLN MERCURY EQUIPMENT PARTS 84.90
PRINTERS SERVICE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 122.75
R & R SPECIALTIES EQUIPMENT PARTS 139.00
RAINBOW FOODS GENERAL SUPPLIES 184.48
RC INDENTIFICATIONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 15.98
RELIABLE EQUIPMENT PARTS 21.47
RICE, SHAWN GENERAL SUPPLIES 90.05
RLK-KUUSISTO LTD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 873.80
SANTA, SUE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 23.22
SCHANUS, JAKE HEATING 21.00
SCHWARTZ, AMY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 18.00
SEARS & ROEBUCK CO BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 29.85
SEDGWICK JAMES OF MINN INC PROF/CONSULT SERVICES 135.00
SHEA, CATHY STUDY INCENTIVE & MERIT PAY 437.50
SLP POLICE RESERVE GENERAL SUPPLIES 523.30
SNYDER ELECTRIC CO ELECTRICAL 21.00
SPECIALTY SCREENING GENERAL SUPPLIES 61.77
SPS COMPANIES INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 31.08
SRF CONSULTING GROUP INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 15,370.73
ST LOUIS PARK TRUE VALUE GENERAL SUPPLIES 7.59
STAR TRIBUNE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 104.00
STRUCK, DONALD GENERAL SUPPLIES 124.00
SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 87.69
TAKUMI, VERNICE MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 22.43
TARAGOS, GERALD BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 475.00
TEKLOGIX EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 595.00
TKDA ENGINEERING SERVICES 1,434.01
TWIN CITY BEEKEEPING SUPPLY IN EQUIPMENT PARTS 57.50
U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 1,189.15
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 1,755.00
VICKERMAN INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 575.00
VOGEL, WILLIAM E INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
WARNER INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 62.66
64
WATSON CO INC CONCESSION SUPPLIES 772.65
WEST PUBLISHING PAYMENT CTR GENERAL SUPPLIES 104.37
WOODS' END LANDSCAPING MATERIALS 2,132.00
ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 69.07
ZIEGLER INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 289.35
ZIP PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES 673.43
ZIP SORT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 113.49
133,160.51
December 31, 1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
3CMA CONFERENCE GENERAL SUPPLIES 42.25
A & T UPHOLSTERY CO EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 95.00
A T S S A INC TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 115.00
ACE SUPPLY COMPANY INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 27.16
ADVANCE SURVEYING & ENGINEERIN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 550.00
AIM ELECTRONICS BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 103.68
AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 124.11
AMERICAN STEEL & IND SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 165.66
AMUNDSON, DELORES PROGRAMMING 7.00
ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE ACCT GENERAL SUPPLIES 256.50
ARROWWOOD RADISSON RESORT TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 690.12
ASPEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS 58.30
AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES TELEPHONE 15.57
BARR ENGINEERING COMPANY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 10,443.91
BATTERIES PLUS GENERAL SUPPLIES 4.25
BCSOFT COMPUTER SERVICES 3,542.25
BIFFS INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES (44.84)
BOBS PERSONAL COFFEE SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 259.41
BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 232.00
BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66)
CAMILON, MANNY MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 53.63
CARTOGRAPHICS INC COMPUTER SERVICES 360.00
CATCO PARTS SERVICE EQUIPMENT PARTS (142.35)
CHENEY SIGNS OFFICE SUPPLIES 19.79
CITY OF WOODBURY SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 24.00
CLARKLIFT OF MINNESOTA INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 135.43
COLLINS COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 360.00
COLLINS LIMITED, LEE GENERAL SUPPLIES 54.95
COLOR TILE GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,559.20
COMPRESSAIR & EQUIPMENT CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 116.83
COMPUMASTER TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 69.00
CONTINENTAL RESEARCH CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 210.87
CRONSTROM HEATING & AIR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 125.00
DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT CO OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIPMENT 566.18
DELEGARD TOOL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES (65.54)
65
DO IT BEST RENTAL CENTER GENERAL SUPPLIES 339.18
ELLANSON, LUKE R STUDY INCENTIVE & MERIT PAY 1,586.82
G & K SERVICES EQUIPMENT PARTS 26.54
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 28.03
GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT CORP EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.44)
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS 31.96
GOULD, LAURA GENERAL SUPPLIES 150.00
GREAT-WEST LIFE & ANNUITY INS DENTAL INSURANCE 2,182.90
GREENMAN TECHNOLOGIES OF MN IN CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 81.32
GRIMSRUD, TOM MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 19.50
GUEST SERVICES TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 180.00
HASLERUD, CARRIE GENERAL SUPPLIES 139.93
HEIN-FERRIS, MEGAN PROGRAMMING 7.00
HENN CO CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOC SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 80.00
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,308.03
HOME DEPOT/GECF OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 10.37
HOME HARDWARE COMPUTER SERVICES 56.35
HUIRAS, SHIRLEY OFFICE SUPPLIES 159.37
INACOM INFORMATION SYSTEMS COMPUTER SUPPLIES 321.83
INTERSTATE BEARING COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (166.20)
INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 307.49
IOS CAPITAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT 826.44
IOWA PAINT MFG CO INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 444.53
J H LARSON COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 827.40
K AND R COMMUNICATION SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 805.02
KIENENBERGER, BRIDGET GENERAL SUPPLIES 71.19
KRM INFORMATION SERVICES INC TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 145.00
LANDGREN, ROGER INSURANCE BENEFITS 270.61
LATHROP PAINT SUPPLY COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 133.78
LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC LUBRICANTS/ADDITIVES (300.00)
M/A ASSOCIATES INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 87.77
MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC SALARIES - TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 151.13
MAY, JANETTE GENERAL SUPPLIES 150.00
MENARDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 261.13
METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 660.99
METRO SALES INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 68.18
METRO SYSTEMS NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 315.26
METROPOLITAN FORD EDEN PRAIRIE EQUIPMENT PARTS 48.59
MILLAR ELEVATOR SERVICE CO EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 669.00
MINN DEPT OF AGRICULTURE GENERAL SUPPLIES 60.00
MINNESOTA CONWAY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 151.15
MN FIRE SVC CERTIFICATION BD. TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 35.00
MPELRA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 150.00
N Y S C A OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 280.00
NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 335.00
NORTHLAND ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 94.66
OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 25.71
PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER PROF/CONSULT SERVICES 39.80
PARTNERS IN PERSONNEL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 504.00
66
PETERSON MACHINERY CO INC, G C GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,521.83
PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 113.42
PRESTIGE LINCOLN MERCURY EQUIPMENT PARTS 80.92
QUICKSILVER EQUIPMENT PARTS 77.20
RANDY'S SANITATION INC GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 2,810.07
RYDER STUDENT TRANSPORT SERVIC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 150.00
SALONEK, MYRON TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 152.20
SAM'S CLUB CONCESSION SUPPLIES 25.74
SCHOELL & MADSON INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,157.36
SPEEDY LOCK & KEY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 75.00
ST LOUIS PARK TRUE VALUE GENERAL SUPPLIES 11.30
STEPP MANUFACTURING CO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 9.67
STEVENS, JEFF GENERAL SUPPLIES 43.10
STREICHER'S GENERAL SUPPLIES 25.45
SUBURBAN FEED & SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 114.63
SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 70.36
TAPLIN, RICHARD INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
TKDA PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 184.22
TRACY/TRIPP FUELS MOTOR FUELS 4,965.65
TRUE RIDE INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 308.47
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 570.00
VAN BENSCHOTEN, GRETA PROGRAMMING 9.00
VIKING OFFICE PRODUCTS OFFICE SUPPLIES 238.19
VOELKER, STACY M MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 31.14
WACOP TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 600.00
WATSON CO INC CONCESSION SUPPLIES 629.96
WAYTEK EQUIPMENT PARTS 42.73
WILLIAMS, TIM TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 249.17
WINTERGREEN RESORT TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 936.00
ZIEGLER INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 271.66
ZIP PRINTING PRINTING & PUBLISHING 115.66
ZIP SORT POSTAGE 47.83
52,926.91
December 28, 1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
GREAT WEST LIFE & ANNUITY INS DENTAL INSURANCE 1,276.66
1,276.66
December 31, 1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
COPYMED INC WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 1.12
DOLTON, FRED INJURY PAY 1,555.27
INST. FOR ATHLETIC MEDICINE WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 457.52
METHODIST HOSPITAL WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 75.43
PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 2,290.67
67
SEDGEWICK MANAGED CARE WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 38.00
THOMPSON, JIM INJURY PAY 858.98
5,276.99
December 30, 1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
ADA KIT-ICMA PROJECT GENERAL SUPPLIES 64.50
AETNA LIFE INSURANCE & ANNUITY DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,433.18
COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 203.00
FLANNERY CONSTRUCTION INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 273,472.31
GREAT-WEST LIFE & ANNUITY DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 4,313.00
I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,561.65
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-401 DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 236.44
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 9,381.47
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 645.00
LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,914.00
M C MAGNEY CONSTRUCTION INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 54,122.45
MACQUEEN EQUIP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 255.23
MINNESOTA MUTUAL LIFE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 551.00
MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,413.78
MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 945.00
PARK NATIONAL BANK DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 90,650.70
PERA DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 44,651.76
PERA FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT ASSO DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 3,220.20
PERA POLICE RETIREMENT ASSOC DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 8,961.76
SLP ASSOC OF FIREFIGHTERS-LOCA DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 918.40
SLP CREDIT UNION DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 31,214.52
USCM / MIDWEST DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 6,077.06
536,206.41