HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998/12/21 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular 1
7:10 p.m.- Economic Development Authority
AGENDA - CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
December 21, 1998
7:30 p.m.
1. Call to order
2. Presentation
3. Roll Call
4. Approval of Minutes
a. City Council meeting of December 7, 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
6a. Public Hearing to Consider Tax Abatement Proposal Medical Office
Development Project at the Southwest Corner of Highway 7 and
Louisiana Avenue.
This report considers the approval of resolution authorizing a tax
2
abatement for a medical office development project at the southwest corner
of Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue.
Recommended
Action(s):
Mayor to Close the Public Hearing.
Motion: (two separate actions)
(1) approving a resolution authorizing a tax abatement
for the development of a medical office development at
the southwest corner of Highway 7 and Louisiana
Avenue.
(2) requesting staff to seek County Board action on the
provision of tax abatement for the project and prepare a
final economic development package for Economic
Development Authority consideration following such
action.
7. Petitions, Requests, Communications
8. Resolutions and Ordinances
8a. Vacation of water and sewer utility easement at 5101 Minnetonka Boulevard
Case No. 98-38-VAC
Second reading of request to vacate utility easement to permit development of a
four story, mixed use residential and commercial development
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve second reading, adopt ordinance, approve
summary and authorize publication
8b. Amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance
Case No. 98-32-SO/ZA
Second reading of amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance to correct
inconsistencies, clarify and modify submittal requirements, allow permits for site
work prior to final plat recording, and modify bonding and Development
Agreement requirements, and to amend Zoning Ordinance to enable Subdivision
Ordinance to determine street widths
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve second reading, adopt ordinance, approve
summary and authorize publication
3
8c. Second Reading of the Ordinance Amending the Water & Sewer Utility Rates
for 1999.
This action would increase the water and sewer utility rates by 2% rates effective
January 1, 1999.
Recommended
Action:
Waive second reading, adopt ordinance and approve the
summary of the ordinance for publication
8d. Resolution to Adopt the 1999 Budget
This action is the final step in the budget process for next fiscal year.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the resolution.
8e. Resolution Approving the Property Tax Levy for 1999
Resolution approving the property tax levy for 1999. The total property tax levy
proposed is 3.4% higher than the levy approved for 1998. The increase will
generate an additional $406,678 to help support the City’s operating budget of $32
million next year.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the resolution.
8f. Resolution to Amend the 1998 Budget
A revised estimate for the 1998 Budget was completed as part of the 1999 budget
preparation. The revised budget estimate numbers were detailed in the 1999
Proposed Budget document presented to the Council in August.
The changes to the 1998 budget requested in this amendment represent additional
revisions required since early fall. It will be the amounts in this final amendment
that are used to report budget to actual numbers in the year-end financial
statements.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the resolution.
4
*8g. Resolution authorizing payment of State funds to the City for landscape
materials along TH 169.
The City recently entered into an agreement with MNDot to provide landscape
buffering materials along Trunk Highway No. 169 from 16th Street West to 400
feet north of 16th Street West. The State is now requesting that Council adopt the
attached resolution which authorizes the State to make payments to the City for the
acquisition of landscape materials in accordance with that agreement.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution.
*8h Change Order No. 3 to Contract No. 4066 with Howard R. Green Company
for Professional Engineering Services
This report considers a request for Change Order No. 3 to Contract No. 4066 with
Howard R. Green Company for professional engineering services on the Excelsior
Boulevard Streetscape project.
Recommended
Action:
Motion 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.
* 8i. Change Order No. 2 to Contract No. 14-98 with Hardrives, Inc. for the
Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape
This report considers Change Order No. 2 to Contract No. 14-98 with Hardrives,
Inc. for work on the Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape project.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing execution of
Change Order 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.
* 8j. Right of way acquisition of trail easement on Smith property located at 7500
W. 27th Street.
This report considers the acquisition of a 14 foot wide easement for trail purposes
5
along the southerly edge of 7500 W. 27th Street to accommodate the Hutchinson
Spur Regional Trail.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached 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. 16th Street Improvements - Project
No(s) 90-54 and 96-19.
This report considers addendum No. 2 to an Agreement with BRAA for
professional engineering services on the Park Place Boulevard/W. 16th Street
Improvements - Project No(s) 90-54 and 96-19.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached 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).
Authorization to enter into a lease agreement between the City and Bellsouth for
space on the water tower at 5100 Park Glen Road for a public safety
communications antenna for an initial lease term of three (3) years with option for
three (3) additional three (3) year renewal terms.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the attached resolution authorizing execution
of lease agreement.
*8m. Resolution of Approval for Special Laws enacted in the 1998 Legislative
Session related to “This Old Apartment”
Request from the Office of the Secretary of State for Approval by Local
Governmental Units of Chapter 389, Article 3, Section 3.4 of the 1998 Session
Laws
Recommended Motion to adopt a resolution approving Chapter 389, Article 3,
6
Action: Section 3.4 of the 1998 Session laws and directing 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
Action: By consent, accept report for filing
*b. Planning Commission Minutes of November 18, 1998
Action: By consent, accept report for filing
*c. Human Rights Commission Minutes of November 18, 1998
Action: By consent, accept report for filing
*d. Police Civil Service Commission Minutes of December 2, 1998
Action: By consent, accept report for filing
10. Unfinished Business
a. Board and Commission Appointment(s)-None
Action: Motion to appoint Board and Commission Member(s)
11. New Business
11a. Golden Valley Dispatch Contract
Approval of agreement between St. Louis Park and Golden Valley for provision of
dispatch services and operation and maintenance of the Emergency
Communications Center.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the contract to provide dispatching services
for the City of Golden Valley and authorize the Mayor and City
Manager to execute contract.
12. Miscellaneous
7
13. Claims, Appropriations, Contract Payments
a. Contract payments
Partial payments:
M. C. Magney Construction, Inc. 33-98 $ 54,122.45
Flannery Construction, Inc. 22-98 $ 273,472.31
Action: By consent approve and authorize payments
14. Communications
15. Adjournment
8
Item #4a
UNOFFICIAL MINUTES
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
December 7, 1998
1. Call to Order
Mayor Gail Dorfman called the meeting to order at 7:33 p.m.
2. Presentations
2a. Human Rights Award
Mayor Dorfman read the Preamble to the St. Louis Park Home Rule Charter. She stated that in
presenting this award the City is reaffirming these words and celebrating the wonderful diversity
that makes up St. Louis Park, our community of many customs and cultures. She stated that the
Human Rights Award honors individuals in our community who make outstanding contributions,
because there are many people doing many things, but tonight we honor an individual who makes
outstanding continual contributions toward increasing the understanding between individuals.
Laurel Higgins, Chair of the Human Rights Commission welcomed those present and briefly
reviewed the selection process. Linda Trummer, Merril Page, Mike Rice and Sergeant Ward
Dohman along with students Rebekah Kirmsse, Sara Hamilton, and Chantha Samrith, were
present and expressed their appreciation for Eileen Soderberg’s contribution, presence in the
neighborhood, and the respect she shows to every student and staff.
In honor of the 50th anniversary of National Human Rights Day, December 10th, Mayor
Dorfman presented on behalf of the Human Right Commission and City Council, the Human
Rights Award to Eileen Soderberg in recognition of her outstanding community commitment.
3. Roll Call
The following Councilmembers were present: Jeff Jacobs, Chris Nelson, Sue Sanger, Ron Latz,
Jim Brimeyer, and Mayor Gail Dorfman.
Also present were the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Scott); Director of
Community Development (Mr. Harmening); Planning Associate (Ms. Peterson); Financial
Director (Ms. McBride); and Bruce Stepnick, City Assessor.
4. Approval of Minutes
4a. City Council Meeting of November 16, 1998
The minutes were approved as presented.
4b. Study Session Meeting of November 16, 1998
9
Page 18, Item I, Paragraph 4, Add to Councilmember Nelson’s comments: we should have a
clear policy established so that are comprehensive plan is actually being followed and we
wouldn’t have a conflict with the comprehensive plan. Option 5 was this combined with making
specific findings for this particular site so that it fit in with our Comprehensive Plan and made
some sense for this particular site.
4c. Study Session Meeting of November 23, 1998
Page 24, Item 4, Paragraph 3, Add to Councilmember Sanger’s comments: she also indicated that
garbage costs were premised on the use of the biobags.
Page 23, Item 3, Paragraph 2, Add to Councilmember Sanger’s comments: the reason for
stepping in was specifically because it appeared that the properties could be sold without the
City’s assistance.
5. Approval of Agendas
a. Consent Agenda
It was moved by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the
consent agenda with the removal of Item 8f. The motion passed 6-0.
b. Agenda
It was moved by Councilmember Jacobs, 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 on the 1999 Proposed Budget and Tax Levy
A slide presentation with outline of 1999 Proposed Budget and Property Tax Levy was presented.
Mayor Dorfman stated that in the past this hearing had been held separately from a regular
Council meeting, but new legislation called for the hearing to be held in conjunction with the
regular meeting. She briefly reviewed the process of budget development and highlighted some
of the major initiatives and accomplishments that occurred over the past year. She stated that the
City encourages citizen involvement at all levels as we move forward with different policy
considerations. She encouraged citizens to serve on advisory Boards and Commissions.
Mr. Meyer, City Manager, explained how City government was financed and stated that revenues
were received from property taxes, federal and state aid, utilities and charges for services. He
explained the specifics of the property tax portion of the financing. In summary, he stated that
after the City has determined what fees can be established for all items the balance of the bill is
the property tax which the State Legislature decides how to divide.
Ms. McBride, Director of Finance presented an overview of the 1999 proposed budget.
10
Mr. Stepnick, City Assessor presented information on property taxes, property assessments, and
market value trends. He noted that there is a new program which begins in 1999 for a Senior
Citizen Tax Deferral and information can be obtained by calling the Department of Revenue at
296-3781 or by calling Mr. Stepnick at 924-2536.
Allen Allis of the Inglewood Neighborhood stated that he would be happy if his tax bill went
down in the amount that it cost the City to mow the grass in the neighborhood park during the
dry spell this summer.
The Mayor closed the Public Hearing with the right of the Council to reopen it at a future date.
6b. Conditional Use Permit and Utility Easement Vacation
5101 Minnetonka Boulevard
Case Nos. 98-37-CUP and 98-38-VAC
Resolution # 98-161
Ms. Peterson, Planning Associate, presented a staff report and recommended approval of the
Conditional Use Permit and vacation of utility easement subject to the conditions outlined in the
staff report.
Steve Young, President of Young Architects, was present to answer questions. He expressed his
appreciation of Planning staff and BOZA Commissioners for their work on this project. He
presented sketches and floor plans of the proposed property.
The Mayor closed the Public Hearing with the right of the Council to reopen it at a future date.
Councilmember asked if consideration was given to the livable community principle of
developing retail as close to the front street as possible and avoid having parking in front.
Mr. Young indicated that Raleigh Avenue was the front street and the basis of the establishment
with the Planning Department.
Councilmember Brimeyer complimented the design of the property. He asked if a decorative
stucco fence could be considered instead of reducing the size of the building to accomplish the
landscaping to the south of the building.
Mr. Young indicated that a wall was considered early in the plan, but the grade and cost were an
issue.
Councilmember Brimeyer asked if Mr. Young was aware of what type of commercial retail uses
were being contemplated.
Mr. Young stated that parking use was considered and development would include a coffee shop,
sit down restaurant and neighborhood retail.
Councilmember Sanger thanked the architect for the unique design and for incorporating some of
the livable community principles. She asked if the movement of the utilities were going to be at
the developers expense.
Ms. Peterson indicated that movement would be at the developers expense.
11
Councilmember Nelson believed it was a classy design and a good addition to the ward. He
inquired about the projected rental rates.
Joshua Ahrens, Park Land Company, indicated that the rental range would be from $800-$1600.
Councilmember Nelson asked what kind of assistance from the City to the developer for
remediation costs were anticipated.
Mr. Harmening, Director of Community Development indicated that only preliminary
discussions have occurred.
Councilmember Nelson stated that he hoped that remediation could be done without tax
increment financing based on the burden that is already on the Planning Department and recently
a developer at a different location who was looking for that mechanism was turned away.
Councilmember Nelson asked why Raleigh Avenue was considered the front street.
Ms. Peterson stated that the definition in the zoning ordinance was that when there are two street
frontages, the street with the narrowest frontage was the front street.
Councilmember Nelson asked if any member of the public appear at the BOZA meeting
concerned about height of building.
Ms. Peterson stated that she believed that no concerned residents were present.
Councilmember Latz expressed his support for the use of a retaining wall to accomplish more
intense use of development.
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Jacobs, to adopt a
resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit, subject to conditions included in the resolution.
The motion passed 6-0.
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Jacobs, to approve First
Reading of an ordinance vacating a utility easement and to set second reading for December 21,
1998. The motion passed 6-0.
6c. Amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance
Case No. 98-32-SO/ZA
Ms. Peterson, Planning Associate presented a staff report and recommended approval of the
amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance as outlined in the staff report.
The Mayor closed the Public Hearing with the right of the Council to reopen it at a future date.
It was moved by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve First
Reading of an ordinance amending the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance and to set
Second Reading for December 21, 1998. The motion passed 6-0.
6d. Public Hearing for Transfer of Liquor Licenses and Resolution of approval
for Liquor license renewals for 1999
12
The Mayor closed the Public Hearing with the right of the Council to reopen it at a future date.
It was moved by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to approve the
liquor license transfer. The motion passed 6-0.
It was moved by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to approve renewal
of licenses on the attached list of establishments. The motion passed 6-0.
7. Petitions, Requests, Communications - None
8. Resolutions and Ordinances
8a. Second Reading of the Zoning Code Text Amendment
Case No. 98-31-ZA
Ordinance # 98-2130
It was moved by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to waive
second reading, adopt ordinance, approve summary ordinance and authorize publication. The
motion passed 6-0.
Councilmember Sanger asked if staff was aware of when the issue of possibly adding in some
kind of caps to parking would be discussed. Mr. Harmening indicated that discussions were
planned for early 1999.
8b. Second Reading of Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance
Case No. 98-9-ZA
Ordinance #98-2031
It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Jacobs, to approve
Second Reading of the proposed ordinance and authorize publication. The motion passed 6-0.
8c. 1999 Major Equipment Purchases
Resolution # 98-162
By consent, Council moved to adopt the resolution which accepts this report and authorizes staff
to acquire equipment scheduled for replacement in 1999 as allowed by Statute, Charter, or
Ordinance.
8d. First Reading of the Ordinance Amending Water & Sewer Utility Rates for
1999
It was moved by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to waive first
reading and set second reading for December 21, 1998. The motion passed 6-0.
Council briefly discussed the status of flood control projects.
8e. Request for a 90-day extension to record final plat for Excelsior Townhomes
7100-7102 Excelsior Boulevard
Resolution 98-163
13
By consent, Council adopted a resolution amending Resolution No. 998-130, granting 90 day
extension for filing of final plat.
8f. Bias/Hate Crime Plan
Resolution # 98-164
Councilmember Nelson asked the Chair of the Human Rights Commission to give a brief
overview of response plan.
Laurel Higgins, Chair of Human Rights Commission explained the response plan.
Councilmember Nelson asked the City Attorney to comment on the liability issue if staff or
Commissioners did not follow policy.
Mr. Scott stated that he had reviewed the policy and didn’t see anything significant from a
liability standpoint.
Councilmember Latz encouraged the Human Rights Commission to make suggestions as
responses were evaluated so that Council can take them to the appropriate legislative level to
make improvements in the statutory scheme that governs this area.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to adopt the
resolution. The motion passed 6-0.
8g. Extension for submitting Comprehensive Plan to the Metropolitan Council
Resolution #98-165
By consent, Council adopted resolution.
8h. Traffic Study No. 537: Request to change existing yield signs to stop signs on
Flag Avenue at W. 34th Street
Resolution # 98-166
By consent, Council adopted the attached resolution rescinding resolution No. 5073 and
authorizing the installation of stop signs on Flag Avenue and W. 34th Street.
8i. Resolution Renewal Revoking Municipal State Aid (MSA) Route No. 289
Resolution # 98-167
By consent, Council adopted the attached resolution revoking Wayzata Boulevard - MSA Route
No. 289.
8j. Consultant Services - Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation Related Activities
Resolution # 98-168
By consent, Council adopted the attached resolution authorizing execution of a contract with
ENSR Consulting and Engineering for consultant activities related to the implementation of the
Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation Remedial Action Plan for 1999.
9. Reports from Officers, Boards, Committees
14
a. Human Right Minutes of September 16, 1998
By consent, Council accepted report for filing.
b. Housing Authority minutes of October 14, 1998
By consent, Council accepted report for filing
c. Planning Commission Minutes of November 4, 1998
By consent, Council accepted report for filing.
d Vendor Claim Report
By consent, Council accepted report for filing.
10. Unfinished Business
10a. Board and Commission Appointment(s) - None
11. New Business
11a. Bid Tabulation: One (1) 1999 Heavy Duty Cab Chassis Truck
By consent, Council moved to designate North Star International Tucks the lowest responsible
bidder for one (1) 1999 Heavy Duty Cab Chassis Truck and authorize execution of a purchase
agreement with North Star International Trucks in the amount of $38,219.24.
11b. Contract Extension for Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation Laboratory
Services - Contract No. 1893
By consent, Council moved to authorize execution of a contract extension to Contract No. 1893
with Quantera Environmental Services for laboratory services related to the Reilly Tar &
Chemical Corporation groundwater sampling program through 1999.
11c. Amendment to the contract adjusting the hourly rate
By consent, Council moved to amend City Attorney’s contract to increase the hourly rate from
$100 to $110 per hour for attorney services and from $60 to $65 per hour for law clerks and
paralegals effective January 1, 1999.
12. Miscellaneous - None
13. Claims, Appropriations, Contract Payments
a. Contract Payments
Resolutions 98-169, 98-170, 98-171
FINALS
Midwest Asphalt Corporation $ 42,792.91
Shelard Parkway/Ford Road/Ford Lane
Contract No. 17-98
15
Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. $ 10,885.93
Alley Paving
Contract No. 58-98
Visu-Sewer Clean & Seal, Inc. $ 68,600.00
30” Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation - JCC
Contract No. 62-98
By consent, Council adopted the resolution.
PARTIALS
Hardrives, Inc. $ 128,537.86
Construction. of Excelsior Blvd., Phase II -
Contract No. 14-98
Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. $ 73,566.24
Random Concrete Repair
Contract No. 61-98
Thomas & Sons Construction, Inc. $ 20,116.25
Concrete sidewalk and street lighting
Contract No. 47-98
LeadCon, Inc. $ 57,000.00
W. 42nd St./Zarthan Ave. Reservoir Repairs
Contract No. 51-98
By consent, Council approved and authorized payments.
14. Communications - None
15. Adjournment
It was moved by Councilmember Dorfman, seconded by Councilmember Jacobs, to adjourn the
meeting at 9:12 p.m. The motion passed 6-0.
City Clerk Mayor
16
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 6a
Meeting of December 21, 1998
6a. Public Hearing to Consider Tax Abatement Proposal Medical Office
Development Project at the Southwest Corner of Highway 7 and
Louisiana Avenue.
This report considers the approval of resolution authorizing a tax
abatement for a medical office development project at the southwest corner
of Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue.
Recommended
Action(s):
Mayor to Close the Public Hearing.
Motion: (two separate actions)
(1) approving a resolution authorizing a tax abatement
for the development of a medical office development at
the southwest corner of Highway 7 and Louisiana
Avenue.
(2) requesting staff to seek County Board action on the
provision of tax abatement for the project and prepare a
final economic development package for Economic
Development Authority consideration following such
action.
Background
In light of previous discussions with the City Council, staff has been continuing its work with the
development group of Frauenshuh Companies and a group of local physicians on a private/public
financing plan for the proposed development of a 54,000 square foot medical office building and
restaurant project at the southwest corner of Highway 7 and Louisiana Avenue.
On November 16, the St. Louis Park School District approved the provision of a ten year tax
abatement in support of the project conditioned upon the provision of a tax abatement by the City
and Hennepin County in support of the project. On December 8, the County Board reviewed a
proposed tax abatement policy and moved to lay it over until January. It was suggested by
County staff at that meeting that the proposed policy and the Highway 7/Louisiana proposal may
be considered on a “dual track” basis in January by the County Board.
The development group remains poised to construct the 54,000 square foot medical office
building and 7,000 square foot restaurant building on the subject site in 1999. The primary
17
challenge at this point remains structuring a financing package that is acceptable to all parties and
able to support the project.
Financing Plan/Proposal
The EDA was previously advised of the inability to use a tax increment financing district as a
means to financing the public redevelopment costs involved with this project. Current
limitations in state statute would not allow the EDA or City to create a district on this site only.
The alternative to this that was previously explored was a larger district encompassing this site
and the Mill City site (the northwest corner). Development planning and timing issues have
created a problem in using this approach. The alternative approach presented to the Council in
July was the use of the 1997 tax abatement law (Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.1812 to
469.1815).
Tax Abatement
Attached to this report is an August 1998 memorandum from EDA legal counsel concerning the
tax abatement tool. Tax abatement provides cities, school districts and counties the authority to
in essence rebate the taxes that are produced by the development project for a period of up to ten
(10) years; this rebate functions in a fashion very similar to “pay as you go” tax increment
financingwhereby the developer finances the project and is reimbursed when and only if new
taxes are generated by the project. Each of the separate jurisdictions must hold a public hearing
and adopt a separate resolution granting the tax abatement. In this case, the St. Louis Park
School District has approved its provision of an abatement to support this project.
For the purpose of this proposal, the developer is seeking a tax abatement of the City’s portion of
new taxes generated by the project for a period of ten (10) years. Based on preliminary estimates,
the proposed City abatement breaks down as follows:
Current estimated annual property tax eligible for abatement: $ 40,000
Annual tax abatement request $ 40,000
Future value of 10 year abatement $400,000
Present value of abatements (8% discount rate) $207,000
Project Financing Sources and Uses
The total estimated cost of the development project is $10.8 million. The chart below illustrates
how the City’s abatement (and a ten year abatement by the County and School District) factors in
to the total financing package at this time:
Sources Uses
Developer Equity 1,819,000 Land 150,000
Private Debt 7,275,000 Soil Correction 1,040,059
Tax Abatement 1,024,500 Environmental 50,000
Other source 689,006 Infrastructure 200,000
18
Total 10,807,506 Structural mods. 324,000
Construction 9,043,447
Total 10,807,506
The tax abatements would be used to offset in total or a portion of the following project costs:
Land acquisition $ 150,000
Soils correction $1,040,059
Infrastructure $ 200,000
Environmental $ 50,000
Structural mods. $ 324,000
Total $1,764,059
Based on the cost of the proposed project and the developer’s projected value of the project, it is
expected that an approximate 12% cash-on-cash rate of return on investment can be achieved on
the project. The developer has indicated this is an acceptable return for this project. It should be
noted that staff is working with the developer to identify areas where cost reductions can be
realized. The EDA should expect additional discussion as the proforma and project cost
estimates are refined as the project proceeds.
Economic Analysis
This proposal seeks the abatement in the form of a “pay-as-you -go” rebate of taxes for a period
of ten years for the project. The abatements equal the portion of taxes that would otherwise not
be available from the site “but-for” the project. On a ten year basis, the following cash flow
would be generated by each of the School District, County and City:
Annual Abatement Future Value Present Value
School 80,000 800,000 445,522
County 67,000 670,000 372,224
City 37,000 370,000 207,000
Total 184,000 1,870,000 1,024,800
After imputing the tax abatement financing source, a financing “gap” of approximately $689,000
remains. The financing of this component of the overall public financing structure will require
further analysis by staff and the developer before being presented to the EDA for consideration.
The property tax abatement portion of the financing package is the core public financing piece of
the project and once in place will enable the developer to take the next step toward determining
the final estimated “gap”. It is possible that this figure could be reduced, which makes the
abatement a key action to returning to the City Council/EDA for final financing package
approval.
City Land Component
19
In addition to the public sources of financing sought to off-set project costs, the developer is
seeking to purchase the vacant City land on a deferred payment basis. Current poor site
conditions and polluted soils and groundwater create a perceived diminished value of the
property. Thereforeas part of the purchasethe developer would take title to the property,
undertake remediation activities and assume ongoing environmental liability and agree to make a
future payment (e.g. in year ten) in the amount of the present estimated land value of the property
based on a market value appraisal. Staff would suggest that the EDA seek a floor on this
payment in the range of $320-350,000.
Environmental Matters
The site in question has been tested for environmental pollution and has been enrolled in the
MPCA’s Voluntary Investigation Clean-up program (VIC). Parts of the site contain high levels
of creosote that migrated to the site from the former Reilly Tar and Chemical site. The pollution
is contained in both soils and groundwater. The developer’s current estimate for pollution
remediation is $50,000. Meetings with the MPCA through the VIC process will reveal additional
costs of remediation. The developer has indicated a desire to obtain liability coverage for any
future claims or costs associated with the environmental problem. Up to this point, discussions
with the developer have centered around the developer purchasing a private insurance policy to
cover such risk. The developer has given preliminary indication that this is an acceptable
approach, however, is asking that the cost of such a mechanism be factored in to the total
financing equation.
Outside Grant Funding Sources
The City received notification that this project was not selected for funding in the first round of
the new (DTED) Redevelopment Grant Program. Due to a limited amount of funds, and a high
number of projects, the project was not selected based on the competitive criteria established by
the Department. The next application funding round for this program is May 1999. Waiting for
this funding round would not be a practical option given the current timeframe constraints on the
developer and physicians group.
Billboard Site
Frauenshuh has reached basic terms with Fairway Outdoor Advertising for the acquisition of the
billboard site, which would involve relocating the existing billboard to the west. Under this plan,
and based on recent discussions with the City Council, the billboard site would be purchase and
the billboard would be removed at a cost within the projected budget.
Evaluation of Proposal Under City’s TIF Policy
Staff has undertaken an evaluation of this project in terms of its rating under the City’s current
tax increment financing investment standards. Out of a total possible 32 points, the project
received 27 points (84% of total possible points). This would give the project an average point
rating of 5.4 (A+) on a five criteria scale or a 4.22 (B+) on a 6.4 criteria scale (which evaluates
20
the project on the basis of the total points, including bonus points). The project also meets or
addresses 11 of the 17 development/redevelopment objectives identified in the City’s strategic
economic development plan.
Conditions of Tax Abatement
Under this proposal and the attached resolution, the City is being asked to:
• Provide a ten year tax abatement as authorized by statute to support the project in question
(present value $207,000).
• Approve the abatement conditioned upon the approval and execution of a final
redevelopment agreement by and between the St. Louis Park Economic Development
Authority, the City of St. Louis Park and Frauenshuh Companies or affiliated ownership
group.
• Approve the abatement conditioned upon the City and EDA’s satisfaction with the
involvement and conditions of the tax abatements to be provided by the St. Louis Park
School District and Hennepin County.
• Approve the abatement conditioned upon the project receiving all of the necessary project
approvals, permits, licenses and agreements required by any federal, state or city codes and
regulations.
• Approve the abatement conditioned upon the developer securing a source or sources of
financing for the remaining “gap” in project costs that are unable to be financed through tax
abatement (estimated at $689,000). This may include a separate request for additional city
financing, reductions in project costs, additional financing by developer or private lender or
increased project lease rates.
Attachments: Memorandum from EDA Legal Counsel on Tax Abatement
Resolution
Submitted by: David M. Anderson, Economic Development Coordinator
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
21
MEMORANDUM
TO: David Anderson
FROM: Steve Bubul
Kennedy & Graven
DATE: August 6, 1998
RE: Property Tax Abatement
In connection with proposals for the Frauenshuh medical office development, following is a
general description of the property tax abatement process under Minnesota Statutes, Sections
469.1812 to 469.1815:
Generally
Cities, counties and school districts are each authorized to rebate the taxes imposed by that entity
(but not taxes of any other jurisdiction). The term “abatement” is misleading, as the tax is not
forgiven or abated. The tax is paid normally, but the amount levied by the participating
jurisdiction is returned to the property owner, similar to “pay as you go” tax increment.
Each governing body must make a finding that the abatement:
(1) will produce benefits to the political subdivision at least equal to the costs; and
(2) is in the public interest because it will:
(a) increase or preserve tax base;
(b) provide employment opportunities in the political subdivision;
(c) provide or help acquire public facilities;
(d) help redevelop or renew blighted areas; or
(e) help provide access to services for residents of the political subdivision.
Procedure, Terms
Each governing body must adopt an abatement resolution after a public hearing with at least 10
days published notice. The notice must identify the property and the total estimated amount of
the abatement.
The maximum abatement for all properties for each political subdivision in any year is 5% of the
current levy or $100,000, whichever is greater. The maximum term of abatement is 10 years. A
political subdivision may not abate tax attributable to the land or to the areawide fiscal disparities
tax. After expiration of the specified term, no additional abatement may be granted for that
property for eight years, unless the abatement is for new improvements.
22
For the City and County, the abatement may be granted for up to a 10-year period without
modification, or the terms may be modified every second year. The School District must initially
approve the abatement, then must reauthorize it each year for up to nine additional years.
The School District may not abate the entire school district tax. The maximum amount that may
be abated is: (the net tax capacity) x (the school district’s total tax rate less one-half the general
education tax rate for that year).
Mechanics
The City (perhaps jointly with the EDA) would enter into a contract with the developer that is
very similar to a tax increment pay as you go contract. The City, County and School District
would each hold public hearings and approve abatement resolutions. If the County and School
District are amenable, the City could enter into agreements with them to make abatement
payments to the City, which are then paid to the Developer under the terms of the redevelopment
contract.
While there is no statutory requirement to make payments for “qualified costs,” the City could
nevertheless condition abatement payments on receipt of evidence that certain specified
development costs have been expended.
The levy for the abatements is not subject to levy limits that otherwise apply to the City, County
or School District.
23
RESOLUTION NO. _______
RESOLUTION APPROVING
PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT FOR CERTAIN PROPERTY
IN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
BE IT RESOLVED By the City Council (“Council”) of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota (“City”) as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
1.01. The City has determined a need to grant a property tax abatement regarding certain
property in the City described in Exhibit A hereto (the “Property”), pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.1812 to 469.1815 (the "Act").
1.02. This Council has fully reviewed the proposed Abatement (as hereinafter defined) and
on December 21, 1998 conducted a public hearing thereon, at which the views of all interested
persons were heard.
Section 2. Findings.
2.01. It is hereby found and determined that the benefits to the City from the Abatement
will be at least equal to the costs to the City of the Abatement.
2.02. It is hereby found and determined that the Abatement is in the public interest
because it will increase the tax base of the City, provide employment opportunities within the City
and help redevelop or renew blighted areas.
2.03. It is further specifically found and determined that the Abatement is expected to result
in the following public benefits:
(a) Create an estimated $7,500,000 increase in estimated market value for properly tax
purposes.
(b) Permit development of an underutilized site that is difficult to develop because of
nearby pollution and extremely poor soil conditions.
(c) Attract and retain medical practices, offering easier access to care and increased
number of health plans to residents of the City.
(d) Facilitate the first step in revitalizing an underutilized major intersection in the City,
which will help stimulate further development that creates additional tax base for
the City.
(e) Increase employment and living wage jobs in the City.
24
(f) Utilize and support existing and transportation systems.
Section 3. Actions Ratified; Abatement Approved.
3.01. The Council hereby ratifies all actions of the City’s staff and consultants in arranging
for approval of this resolution in accordance with the Act.
3.02. Subject to the provisions of the Act, the Abatement is hereby approved and adopted
subject to the following terms and conditions:
(a) The term "Abatement" means the real property taxes generated in any tax-payable
year by extending (i) the City’s total tax rate for that year; against (ii) the tax
capacity of any commercial improvements constructed on the Property in
accordance with the Development Agreement (defined hereafter), excluding the tax
capacity of the land and excluding any portion of the tax capacity attributable to the
area-wide tax under Minnesota Statues, Chapter 473F, all as of January 2 in the
prior year.
(b) The Abatements will be paid for a period of ten years, commencing in the first tax-
payable year after substantial completion of the commercial improvements on the
Property in accordance with a development agreement (the “Development
Agreement”) between the City, Independent School District No. 283 (the “School
District”), Hennepin County (the “County”) and Frauenshuh Companies or another
entity agreeable to the City (“Developer”), or such other date as is specified in the
Development Agreement.
(c) The Abatements will be paid by the City to the Developer at least semi-annually,
promptly upon receipt by the City of property tax settlements from Hennepin
County, subject to all the terms of the Development Agreement.
(d) In no case shall the City pay to the Developer Abatements that exceed in any one
year the greater of 5% of the City’s levy for that year or $100,000.
(e) In accordance with Section 469.1813, Subd. 6 of the Act. the City elects that the
Abatement authorized under this resolution may not be modified during its term.
(f) The City makes no warranties or representations regarding the amount or
availability of the Abatements.
(g) Payment of any Abatements is conditioned upon the following:
(i) approval by the board of commissioners of the County of an abatement of
the County’s share of property taxes attributable to improvements to the
25
Property under substantially the same terms and conditions set forth in this
resolution;
(ii) approval by the School Board of the School District of an abatement of
the School District’s share of property taxes attributable to improvements to
the Property (to the extent permitted under the Act) under substantially the
same terms and conditions set forth in this resolution;
(iii) execution of a Development Agreement regarding Development of the
Property, which at a minimum incorporates the terms of this Abatement and
the abatement of County and School District taxes under the Act.
(iv) approval of the project related planning and zoning approvals,
permits, licenses and/or agreements required by any federal, state or city
codes and regulations.
(v) availability of additional source(s) of financing for the remaining “gap”
in project costs that are or may be unable to be financed through tax
abatement (estimated at $689,000).
3.03. If a Development Agreement is not executed by December 31, 1999, this resolution
will be deemed null and void as of that date.
Adopted by the Economic Development Authority December 21, 1998
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
City Clerk
26
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8a
Meeting of December 21, 1998
8a. Vacation of water and sewer utility easement at 5101 Minnetonka Boulevard
Case No. 98-38-VAC
Second reading of request to vacate utility easement to permit development of a
four story, mixed use residential and commercial development
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve second reading, adopt ordinance, approve
summary and authorize publication
Background:
The Park Land Company is requesting a vacation of a water and sewer utility easement along the
east side of the property to permit a four story, mixed use residential and commercial
development on the site, which is the former Nevens Cleaners site. The City Council approved a
Conditional Use Permit for the development on December 7, 1998, subject to approval of the
vacation request.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the vacation request on November 4, 1998.
The City Council held a public hearing and approved first reading of the vacation request on
December 7, 1998. There are no changes to the proposed ordinance from first reading. Staff is
recommending that the vacation would take effect upon acceptance of the new utilities in the
Raleigh Avenue right of way by the Public Works Director.
Recommendation:
Staff is recommending approval of the proposed ordinance.
Attachments:
• Proposed Ordinance
• Proposed Summary Ordinance
Prepared by: Sacha Peterson, Planning Associate
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
27
ORDINANCE NO.___________
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A WATER & SEWER UTILITY EASEMENT
5101 MINNETONKA BOULEVARD
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Section 1. A petition in writing signed by a majority of all of the owners of all property
abutting upon both sides of the water and sewer utility easement proposed to be vacated has been
duly filed with the City Clerk, requesting vacation of the water and sewer utility easement, and
the City Clerk has furnished a copy of said petition to the City Manager who has required filing
of same to the newspaper, the St. Louis Park Sailor, on November 25, 1998 as directed by the
said notice and has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the
water and sewer utility easement is not needed for public purposes, and that it is for the best
interest of the public that said water and sewer utility easement be vacated.
Section 2. The following described water and sewer utility easement, as now dedicated
and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated:
The East 235 feet of the North 233 feet of the West 250 feet of the following described
premises, namely: the West 5/8 of the Northeast Quarter of the Northwest Quarter and
the East 1/8 of the Northwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 6, Township
28, Range 24, excepting that portion taken for road or highway purposes.
Section 3. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this ordinance in the
Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be.
Sec.4. This Ordinance shall take effect upon acceptance of the new utilities in the
Raleigh Avenue right of way by the Public Works Director.
Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
Reviewed for Administration
City Manager Mayor
Attest:: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
98-38/N/res/ord
28
SUMMARY
ORDINANCE NO._____________
AN ORDINANCE VACATING A WATER & SEWER UTILITY EASEMENT
5101 MINNETONKA BOULEVARD
This ordinance states that a utility easement shall be vacated (and utilities relocated) to permit the
development of a four story, mixed use commercial and residential building.
This ordinance shall take effect upon acceptance of the new utilities in the Raleigh Avenue right
of way by the Public Works Director.
Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
Gail Dorfman /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: December 30, 1998
98-38sum/N/res-ord
29
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8b
Meeting of December 21, 1998
8b. Amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance
Case No. 98-32-SO/ZA
Second reading of amendments to the Subdivision Ordinance to correct
inconsistencies, clarify and modify submittal requirements, allow permits for site
work prior to final plat recording, and modify bonding and Development
Agreement requirements, and to amend Zoning Ordinance to enable Subdivision
Ordinance to determine street widths
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve second reading, adopt ordinance, approve
summary and authorize publication
Background:
Staff is proposing several changes to the Subdivision Ordinance to make some needed
refinements since its adoption in 1997. Staff is also proposing to eliminate street width
requirements in the Zoning Ordinance for multifamily housing, and allow the Subdivision
Ordinance to determine and guide street width standards.
The following is a summary of the proposed changes:
• Grading permits: Permit issuance of grading/erosion control permits to allow grading
and tree removal only on a site, prior to recording of the final plat, provided certain
conditions are met by the developer;
• Development Agreement: Grant the City Council discretion to waive the requirement
for a Development Agreement when no public improvements are involved in a
development;
• Modify bonding requirements for new plats to change the items to be covered for public
improvements and require bonding for certain items for private improvements;
• Correct inconsistencies in the Ordinance (examples include whether metric plans are
always required or may be required by staff; and making plat submittal requirements
consistent with County recording requirements);
• Clarify the plat and data requirements section to distinguish between requirements for
the plat drawing versus other requirements of the plat application, and to clarify the
timing of requirements;
• Modify some plat data requirements for consistency and reasonableness;
• Correct minor typos;
30
• Clarify street design requirements and modify Zoning Ordinance for consistency.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed Subdivision Ordinance
amendments on October 5, 1998. Also on October 5, 1998 the Commission simultaneously
initiated and recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance.
The City Council held a public hearing and approved first reading of the ordinance on December
7, 1998. There are no changes to the proposed ordinance from first reading.
Recommendation:
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed ordinance and
summary ordinance.
Attachments:
• Proposed Ordinance
• Proposed Summary Ordinance
Prepared by: Sacha Peterson, Planning Associate
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
31
ORDINANCE NO.______
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
SECTIONS 14-908, 14-912, 14-921, 14-922, 14-923, 14-940A AND 14-940B.1 & 2
AND
ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING
SECTION 14:5-4.5D1f and 14:5-4.6D1f
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Findings
Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the
Planning Commission (Case No. 98-32-SO/ZA)
Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Subdivision Ordinance, Sections 14-908, 14-912, 14-921, 14-
922, 14-923, 14-940A AND 14-940B.1 & 2 are hereby amended to read as follows:
SECTION 14-908 EXCEPTIONS
B. PROCEDURE FOR EXEMPTED SUBDIVISIONS....
If proposed subdivision complies with all of the requirements of this section, it will be
approved by the Director of Inspections, the Planning Manager, and the City Assessor and
forwarded to Hennepin County for filing.
SECTION 14-912: FINAL PLAT:
F. Recording Final Plat: If the final plat is approved by the City Council, ...
No building permits shall be let for construction of any structure on any lot in the plat
until the City has received evidence of the plat being recorded by the County. In addition,
no erosion control permits shall be issued and no utility work or public improvements
shall begin until the City has received evidence of the filing of such final plat, or all of the
following conditions have been met:
1. The final plat is approved by the City Council.
2. A Developer’s Agreement is executed and financial security is in place as
required.
3. A final grading plan is approved by the Public Works Department.
4. An erosion and sediment control plan is approved by the Public Works
Department.
5. A final tree preservation plan is approved by staff as required.
6. If utility work is requested, final utility plans are approved by the Inspections and
Public Works Department.
7. If construction of public utilities is requested, final construction documents
are approved by the Public Works Department.
8. The City receives a copy of the Watershed District permit approving the project.
32
Furthermore, that the developer shall accept all risk associated with site work undertaken
prior to recording of the final plat, and that any trees removed shall be replaced in
accordance with the City’s Tree Preservation Ordinance regardless of whether the site is
developed.
SECTION 14-921: PRELIMINARY PLAT: The subdivider shall prepare and submit an
application, preliminary plat drawing, preliminary utility plan, and preliminary grading plan,
preliminary tree preservation plan, together with any necessary supplementary information,
mailing labels, and required fees. The plans shall display dimensions in English and, if required,
metric, and shall contain the information set forth in the subsections which follow:
A. Preliminary Plat Drawing:
1. Legal description of lands to be subdivided.
2. Proposed name of subdivision; names shall not duplicate or too closely resemble
names of existing subdivisions within Hennepin County.
3. Location of boundary lines in relation to a known section, quarter section or
quarter-quarter section lines comprising a legal description of the property.
4. Graphic scale of plat, not less than one inch to one hundred feet (1" = 100'), or in
metric, 1:1200.
5. Date and north arrow.
6. Existing Conditions:
a . Boundary lines, boundary line dimensions, and total acreage of proposed
plat, clearly indicated.
b. Existing zoning classifications for land within and abutting the
subdivision, including shoreland zoning boundaries or overlay zoning
districts if applicable.
c . The boundaries of any wetlands or floodplains within the proposed plat,
clearly indicated.
d . Location, widths and names of all existing or previously platted streets or
other public ways, showing type, width and condition of improvements, if
any, railroad and utility rights of way, parks and other public open spaces,
permanent buildings and structures, easements and section and corporate
lines within the tract and to a distance of one hundred fifty feet (150')
beyond the tract.
e. Boundary lines of adjoining unsubdivided or subdivided land, within one
hundred fifty feet (150'), identified by plat name or ownership, including
all contiguous land owned or controlled by the subdivider.
7. Proposed Design Features:
a. Layout of proposed streets showing the right-of-way widths, center line
gradients, typical street sections, and proposed names of streets. The name
of any street heretofore used in the City or its environs shall not be used
33
unless the proposed street is a logical extension of an already named street,
in which event the same name shall be used. The proposed street name
shall not include the word “Park”. The City Council may reject any
proposed street name it deems inappropriate.
b. Locations and widths of proposed alleys and pedestrianways.
c. Location, dimension and purpose of all existing and proposed easements
both public and private.
d. Layout, numbers, lot areas and lineal dimensions of lots and blocks, to a
degree of accuracy necessary to determine Zoning Code compliance.
e. Minimum front, side street, interior side, and rear building setback lines.
f. The lot width at the building setback line.
g. Areas, including streets, alleys, pedestrianways, parks, and utility
easements intended to be dedicated or reserved for public use, including
the size of such area or areas in acres.
B. Preliminary Plat Application. The following must accompany the preliminary plat
drawing at the time of application:
1. Identification of portions of property that are registered (torrens). A copy of the
certificate of title shall accompany the preliminary plat application.
2. Names and addresses of all persons having property interest and names,
addresses, and registration numbers of:
a. the developer;
b. architect
c. landscape architect
d. engineer; and
e. surveyor
C. Preliminary Grading Plan: The developer shall submit a preliminary grading and drainage
plan which must include the following information:
1. North arrow, scale (not less than l' = 100', or if in metric, 1:1200), and legend.
2. Lot and block numbers, house pad location, home style and proposed building pad
elevations at garage slab and lowest floor for each lot.
3. Topography in two foot (2') contour intervals with existing contours shown as
dashed lines and proposed contours as solid lines. Existing topography shall
extend one hundred fifty feet (150') outside of the tract.
4. Location of all natural features on the tract and to a distance 150’ from the tract.
Natural features are considered to include, but are not limited to the following:
tree lines, wetlands, ponds, lakes, streams, drainage channels, bluffs, steep slopes,
etc.
34
5. Location of all existing storm sewer facilities, including pipes, manholes, catch
basins, ponds, swales, and drainage channels within one hundred fifty feet (150')
of the tract. Existing pipe grades, rim and invert elevations, and normal and high
water elevations must be included.
6. If the plat is located within or adjacent to a 100-year flood plain, flood elevations
and locations must be clearly shown on the plan.
7. Spot elevations at drainage break points and directional arrows indicating site,
swale and lot drainage.
8. Locations, grades, rim and invert elevations of all storm sewer facilities, including
ponds, proposed to serve the tract.
9. Locations and elevations of all street high and low points.
10. Street grades shown, with a maximum permissible grade of ten percent (10%) and
a minimum of five-tenths percent (0.5%).
11. Phasing of grading.
12. The location of all oversize nontypical easements.
D. Erosion Control Plan: This plan shall incorporate the elements as required by the Zoning
Ordinance.
E. Tree preservation plan: This plan shall incorporate the elements as required by the
Zoning Ordinance.
F. Preliminary Utility Plan:
1. Easements: Location, dimension and purpose of all proposed easements.
2. Underground Facilities: Location and size of existing sewers, water mains,
culverts, or other underground facilities within the tract and to a distance of one
hundred fifty feet (150') beyond the tract. Such data as grades, invert elevations,
and location of catch basins, manholes and hydrants shall also be shown.
3. Sanitary Sewer Facilities: Locations, grades, rim and invert elevations, and sizes
of all proposed sanitary sewer facilities to serve the tract.
4. Hydrants And Valves: Location, type, and style of all proposed hydrants and
valves for the proposed water mains.
G. Preliminary Landscape plan: This plan shall show the proposed tree replacement and
bufferyard requirements set forth in the Zoning Ordinance.
H. Statement of Proposed Use: A statement of the proposed use of the land including the
type of residential buildings, proposed number of dwelling units, type of business or
industry. This shall be used to determine whether existing roadways and utilities have the
capacity to accommodate the development.
I. Supplementary Information: Any or all of the supplementary information requirements
set forth in this subsection shall be submitted when deemed necessary by the City staff,
consultants, advisory bodies and/or City Council.
35
1. Existing conditions to a distance of up to 500’ from the proposed subdivision
tract, include such features as structures, street right of ways, natural features,
topographical contours, etc.
2. Proposed protective covenants, deed restrictions, commons areas.
3. Soil borings for locations within the proposed subdivision prepared by a qualified
person.
4. A survey prepared by a qualified person identifying tree coverage in the proposed
subdivision in terms of type, weakness, maturity, potential hazard, infestation,
vigor, density and spacing.
5. Statement of the proposed use of lots stating type of buildings with number of
proposed dwelling units or type of business or industry, so as to reveal the effect
of the development on traffic, fire hazards and congestion of population.
6. If any zoning changes are contemplated, the proposed zoning plan for the areas,
including dimensions, shall be shown. Such proposed zoning plan shall be for
information only and shall not vest any right in the applicant. If appropriate
zoning is not in place, the preliminary plat is deemed to be immature and shall be
denied by the City Council.
7. The subdivider shall be required to submit a sketch plan of adjacent properties so
as to show the possible relationships between the proposed subdivision and future
subdivisions. All subdivisions shall be required to relate well with existing or
potential adjacent subdivisions.
8. Where structures are to be placed on large or excessively deep lots which are
subject to potential replat, the preliminary plat shall indicate a logical way in
which the lots could possibly be resubdivided in the future.
9. When the City has agreed to install improvements in a development, the
developer will be required to furnish a financial security satisfactory to the City.
10. House plans which demonstrate lots to be buildable and the resulting structures
compatible in size and character to the surrounding area.
11. A comprehensive screening plan which identifies all proposed buffering and
screening in both plan and sectional view.
12. Preliminary Traffic Analysis: Analysis shall cover all roadways which will be
affected by the proposed plat, including traffic capacities at intersections, current
traffic counts, traffic projections from the proposed development, necessary
roadway improvements to accommodate the proposed development.
13. Other information as deemed appropriate.
SECTION 14-922: FINAL PLAT: The owner or subdivider shall submit a final plat, final
grading, development, and erosion control plan, final utility plan, final tree preservation plan,
final landscape plan, and other documents as described below, together with any necessary
supplementary information.
36
A. Final Plat Drawing. The final plat, prepared for recording purposes, shall be prepared in
accordance with provisions of State statutes and County regulations, and shall contain the
following information:
1. Name of the subdivision, which shall not duplicate or too closely approximate the
name of any existing subdivision.
2. Location by section, township, range, County and State, including descriptive
boundaries of the subdivision, based on an accurate traverse, giving angular and
linear dimensions which must mathematically close. The allowable closure error
of any portion of a final plat shall be one foot (1') in seven thousand five hundred
feet (7,500').
3. The location and description of all monuments. Locations of such monuments
shall be shown in reference to existing official monuments on the nearest
established street lines, including true angles and distances to such reference
points or monuments.
4. Location of lots, streets, public highways, alleys, parks and other features, with
accurate dimensions in feet and decimals of feet, with the length of radii and/or
arcs of all curves, and with all other information necessary to reproduce the plat
on the ground. Dimensions shall be shown from all angle points of curve to lot
lines.
5. Lots and outlots shall be numbered clearly. Blocks are to be numbered, with
numbers shown clearly in the center of the block.
6. The exact locations, widths and names of all streets to be dedicated.
7. Location, width, and type of all easements to be dedicated.
8. Name and registration number of land surveyor making the plat.
9. Scale of the plat shall be 20, 30, 40, 50, 60 or 100 scale, if in English, with the
scale written and shown graphically on a bar scale along with the date and north
arrow. If the City requires the plat in a metric, acceptable scales shall be provided
by the City.
10. Title Information Required on Final Plat:
a. Statement dedicating all easements as follows: “Easements for installation
and maintenance of utilities and drainage facilities are reserved over, under
and along the areas marked "drainage and utility easements".
b. Statement dedicating all streets, alleys and other public areas not
previously dedicated as follows: “Streets, alleys, and other public areas
shown on this plat and not heretofore dedicated to public use are hereby so
dedicated.”
c. Space for Certification by the following parties (to be certified by
appropriate parties prior to the City signing the final plat):
37
1) Registered surveyor, in the form required by Minnesota Statutes,
section 505.03, as amended.
2) Execution of all owners of any interest in the land, any holders of a
mortgage thereon, of the certificates required by Minnesota
Statutes, section 505.03, as amended, and which certificate shall
include a dedication of the utility easements and other public areas
in such form as approved by the City Council.
3) Certificates of approval and review to be filled in by the signatures
of the Mayor and City Clerk.
The form of approval of the City Council is as follows:
Approved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota
This ______ day of______________________, 19(20)____
Signed.__________________________________________
Mayor
Attest,_______________________________
City Clerk
Dated this ______day of _________________________, 19(20)_____
B. Final Plat Application. The following information shall be submitted as part of the final
plat application. All plans shall be prepared in accordance with current City
specifications:
1. Final grading plan.
2. Site development plan.
2. Erosion control plan.
3. Final utility plan.
4. Final landscape plan.
5. Final tree preservation plan.
6. A title report prepared by a title company indicating owners and encumbrances on
the property and a statement as to which parts of the property are registered
(torrens).
7. Address map.
8. Any supplementary information which may be required.
C. Prior to the City signing the final plat, the developer shall submit an owner’s policy of
title insurance which insures the City’s interests in the plat, i.e. publicly dedicated streets,
sidewalks, easements and the like.
38
SECTION 14-923. ADDRESS MAP: With submission of the final plat, the applicant shall
submit to the Community Development Director ten (10) copies of the plat map showing all
addresses on the plat correctly labeled in conformance with all applicable County and City
ordinances and policies, which shall subsequently be distributed to the utility companies and
local school districts. The Zoning Administrator shall supply the applicant with addresses for the
new plat.
SECTION 14-931: BLOCKS AND LOTS:
A. BLOCKS:
1. Block Length: In general, intersecting streets, determining block lengths, shall be
provided at such intervals so as to serve cross-traffic adequately and to meet
existing streets. Where no existing plats control, blocks should not exceed six
hundred feet (600’) nor be less than three hundred feet (300’) in length,...
SECTION 14-932: STREETS AND ALLEYS: There shall be a continuous network of
streets and alleys within the subdivision which connect with existing streets and alleys.
Q. Street Right-of-Way Widths: Street right-of-way widths shall conform with those
requirements indicated in SECTION 14-932 (R) Street Sections for each of the following
designated streets:
Street Classification Street Section
High-Density, Minor Arterial
Low Density, Minor Arterial C-70, C-110
Major Collector C-70, C-110
Minor Collector R-60, R-75, C-70
Local Streets R-50, R-60, R-75, C-70
Private Streets R-24-P, R-24-AP, R-50, R-60
Alleys A-22-R, A-26-R, A-30-C
R. Street Sections:...
Land Use Allowable Street Type
Single Family Attached A-22-R, A-26-R, R-24-P, R-24-AP, R-50, R-60, R-75
Single Family Detached R-50, R-60, R-75
Multi-Family Residential A26-R, A30-C, R-60, R-75
Commercial A30-C, C-70, C-110
Industrial A30-C, C-70, C-110
SECTION 14-940: GENERAL PROVISIONS:
A. Before a final plat is signed by the City, the subdivider shall pay all applicable fees and
enter into a development contract setting forth the conditions under which the plat is
approved, unless the City Council deems a development contract unnecessary.
B. Before a final plat is signed by the City the subdivider shall also furnish the City financial
security in the form of a cash escrow, bond, or letter of credit. If the subdivider fails to
39
perform any obligations under the development contract, the City may apply the security
to cure the default. Terms for return of the financial security shall be those set forth in the
Zoning Ordinance or shall be set forth in the development contract.
1. If the developer is going to install public improvements, the required security
shall be the sum of the following fixed or estimated costs:
a. Utilities.
b. Streets.
c. Street lights and, if the City Council deems appropriate, operating cost for
two (2) years.
d. Erosion control.
e. Engineering, to include developer's design, surveying and inspection.
f. Landscaping.
g. Principal amount of special assessments previously levied against the
property together with one year of interest.
h. Real estate tax for one year, if there are special assessments.
i. Director of Public Works’ fees.
j. Placement of iron monuments.
k. Sidewalks.
l. Utility/street repair and street cleaning.
m. Public and private tree replacement.
n. Other items as deemed appropriate.
2. If the City is going to install public improvements, the required security shall be
the sum of the following fixed or estimated costs:
a. Principal amount of special assessments for public improvements to be
installed together with one year of interest.
b. Street lights.
c. Erosion control.
d. Deferred park dedication charges on commercial and industrial property.
e. Landscaping.
f. Real estate tax for one year.
g. Principal amount of special assessments previously levied against the
property together with one year of interest.
h. Placement of iron monuments.
i. Utility/street repair and street cleaning.
40
j. Public and private tree replacement.
k. Other items as deemed appropriate.
3. For private improvements, the required security shall be the sum of the following
fixed or estimated costs:
a. Erosion control, unless bonded separately.
b. Private utility services in public right of way.
c. Tree replacement.
d. Utility/street repair and street cleaning.
e. Sidewalks.
f. Placement of iron monuments.
g. Other items as deemed appropriate.
Sec. 3. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 14:5-4.5 and 14:5-4.6 is hereby
amended to read as follows:
D. USES PERMITTED BY CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
1. MULTIPLE FAMILY/CLUSTER HOUSING
Conditions:
f. No portion of the required road system may be used to satisfy the off-street
parking requirements.
Sec. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 98-32-SO/ZA are hereby entered into and
made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case.
Sec.5. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication.
Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager Mayor
Attest:: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
41
98-32/N/res/ord
42
SUMMARY
ORDINANCE NO._____________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK
SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE
SECTIONS 14-908, 14-912, 14-921, 14-922, 14-923, 14-940A AND 14-940B.1 & 2
AND
ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING
SECTION 14:5-4.5D1f and 14:5-4.6D1f
This ordinance shall correct inconsistencies; clarify and modify submittal requirements; allow
grading permits prior to final plat recording; and grant flexibility in requiring Development
Agreements in the Subdivision Ordinance; and amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow street
widths to be determined by the Subdivision Ordinance.
This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication.
Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
Gail Dorfman /s/
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: December 30, 1998
98-32sum/N/res-ord
43
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8c
Meeting of December 21, 1998
8c. Second Reading of the Ordinance Amending the Water & Sewer Utility Rates
for 1999.
This action would increase the water and sewer utility rates by 2% rates effective
January 1, 1999.
Recommended
Action:
Waive second reading, adopt ordinance and approve the
summary of the ordinance for publication
Background:
This action provides for a two percent (2%) rate increase for both water and sewer charges. The
2% increase applies for both the flat service charges as well as the volume charges. The increase
proposed is considered an inflationary increase. No increase in refuse rates is proposed at this
time.
The City has provided for very moderate annual increases in the water and sewer rates. It is the
City’s intent to increase rates at modest levels each year and at the same time provide for
adequate levels of capital reserves. By maintaining adequate levels of capital reserves the need
for extraordinary rate increases is avoided. Maintaining adequate levels of capital reserves also
avoids the need to issue debt or otherwise borrow for necessary improvements to the utilities’
infrastructure systems.
The overall impact of this increase on typical residential customers’ quarterly bills ranges from
1.28 to 3.04%. The proposed increase for 1999 is the same percentage increased approved for
1998.
Attachments:
• Summary notice for publication
• Proposed Ordinance
Prepared by: Kathleen McBride, Director of Finance
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
44
Summary
ORDINANCE NO.______________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATED TO THE WATER RATES, SECTION 9-101, AND
THE SEWER RATES, SECTION 9-231
Summary: This ordinance established the water and sewer rates for all utility bills generated on
or after January 1, 1999. Both water and sewer rates will be increased by 2%.
Effective Date: This ordinance shall be in effect 15 days following its publication.
Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
_________________________________________
Mayor
A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk.
Published in the Sun-Sailor December 23, 1998.
45
ORDINANCE NO. _____________
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATED TO THE 1999 WATER RATES, SECTION 9-101, AND
THE 1999 SEWER RATES, SECTION 9-231
THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN:
Sec. 1. Section 9-101 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Rates. The rate due and payable to the City by each water user with the City for
billings on or after January 1, 1999 for water taken from the City water supply
system shall be $.669 per 100 cubic feet.
All charges for single and multiple-family dwelling users shall be determined and
payable on a quarterly basis, and all charges for commercial, industrial and
institutional users shall be determined and payable on a monthly or quarterly basis
provided, however, that there shall be a service charge to each water user for each
quarter year period during which water service is furnished as follows:
Service Charges - January 1, 1999
Meter Size Monthly Quarterly
5/8 inch 3.49$ 5.38$
3/4 inch 3.92 6.54
1 inch 5.07 9.57
1 and 1/2 inch 7.47 16.17
2 inch 10.83 25.03
3 inch 19.05 47.13
4 inch 32.12 76.29
6 inch 62.07 149.52
8 inch 95.73 236.29
10 inch 131.44 318.51
12 inch 157.01 373.87
In case the meter is found to have stopped or to be operating in a faulty manner,
the amount of water used will be estimated in accordance with the amount
previously used for the comparable period of the last previous year.
Where service is for less than the billing period, the service charge will be
prorated accordingly.”
46
Sec. 2. Section 9-231 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
“Sewer Rental Rates. Charges for sewer service to residential and non-residential
users within the City provided in Section 9-230 hereof for billings on or after
January 1, 1999 shall be: $1.39 per 100 cubic feet of water consumption as
measured during the winter quarter (or otherwise determined in Section 9-231 (1),
and a service charge of $3.48 monthly, or $10.44 quarterly per dwelling or
account.”
Sec. 3. Effective Date. This ordinance shall become effective 15 days after its publication.
Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
Reviewed for Administration
City Manager Mayor
Attest:: Approved as to Form and Execution:
City Clerk City Attorney
47
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8d
Meeting of December 21, 1998
8d. Resolution to Adopt the 1999 Budget
This action is the final step in the budget process for next fiscal year.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the resolution.
Background:
The 1999 Proposed Budget document was presented to the City Council in August of this year.
The budget hearing was held on December 3rd as part of the regular Council meeting. State law
requires adoption of the budget and tax levy at a meeting subsequent to the public hearing on the
budget.
The City Charter was amended earlier this year to allow adoption and amendment of the budget
by resolution rather than by ordinance. This will be the first budget adopted by resolution. There
have not been any changes made to the 1999 Proposed Budget since the time of its presentation
to Council in August.
Approval of the property tax levy is done by a separate Council action and must occur after the
public hearing. A resolution to approve the tax levy is also part of the agenda for this meeting.
Attachment: Proposed resolution
Prepared by: Kathleen McBride, Director of Finance
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
48
RESOLUTION NO. ______________
RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE 1999 BUDGET
WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by Charter and State law to approve an
annual budget for each fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has received the proposed budget document for 1999; and
WHEREAS, City Council has held the required public hearing on the budget and proposed tax
levy for 1999;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park
that the budget for 1999 is hereby approved; and the totals of the budget and the major divisions
thereof are as follows:
AVAILABLE RESOURCES
Revenues:
General Property Taxes 9,116,632
Business License Permits 335,055
Non-Business License Permits 951,396
Intergovernmental 6,836,693
Charges for Services 1,739,724
Fines, Forfeits, and Penalties 387,300
Enterprise 8,117,901
Special Assessments 766,345
Miscellaneous Revenue 1,829,819
Refunds and Reimbursements 5,649,188
Transfers In 384,039
Total Revenues 36,114,092
Less: Interfund Charges &(5,281,390)
Net Revenue 30,832,702
Fund Balance / Reserves-Jan 1 36,453,801
Total Available 67,286,503$
49
REQUIREMENTS
Appropriations:
Personal Services 16,727,174
Supplies, services and other charges 18,122,953
Capital Outlay 1,608,896
Transfers Out 384,039
Total Appropriations 36,843,062
Less: Interfund Charges & Transfers (5,281,390)
Net Appropriations 31,561,672
Fund Balance / Reserves-Dec 31 35,724,831
Total Requirements 67,286,503$
and as supported by the detailed proposed budget document; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager be directed to cause the appropriate
accounting entries to be made in the books of the City.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
City Manager Mayor
Attest::
City Clerk
50
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8e
Meeting of December 21, 1998
8e. Resolution Approving the Property Tax Levy for 1999
Resolution approving the property tax levy for 1999. The total property tax levy
proposed is 3.4% higher than the levy approved for 1998. The increase will
generate an additional $406,678 to help support the City’s operating budget of $32
million next year.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the resolution.
Background:
The Mayor and City Council’s receipt of the 1999 Proposed Budget document in August initiated
a number of events which leads up to the final approval of the budget and tax levy for the new
fiscal year. In September, the City Council approved a preliminary tax levy and budget and set
the public hearing date.
The approval of the tax levy is one of two final actions required. The other action is the adoption
of the 1999 budget which follows the levy approval.
Analysis:
The final levy approved by the Council may not exceed the preliminary levy - the final levy
amount detailed in the resolution is the same as the preliminary levy approved by the Council
in September. The levy is at the levy limit imposed by the 1997 State Legislature for the levies
in 1998 and 1999.
As required by law, the amount specified in the resolution is net of the Homestead and
Agricultural Credit Aid (HACA). The increase in the levy - as detailed in the resolution and net
of HACA - is 4.45%. The percentage increase is higher when compared to the total levy change
because the total levy increased and HACA decreased slightly.
1998/99 Proposed
vs. 1997/98
97/98 98/99 $%
Gross Levy 11,967,209$ 12,373,887$ 406,678$ 3.40%
Less:
HACA (2,854,159) (2,852,708) (1,451) -0.05%
Levy as Reported to
the County 9,113,050$ 9,521,179$ 405,227$ 4.45%
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Kathleen McBride, Director of Finance
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
51
RESOLUTION NO. _______________
Resolution Approving the 1998 Tax Levy, Collectible in 1999
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied in 1998, collectible in 1999 upon the
taxable property in said City of St. Louis Park for the following purposes:
General Fund 7,375,486$
Parks & Recreation Fund 1,832,570
Parks Improvement Fund 51,148
G.O. Debt Service 261,976
Total 9,521,179$
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Director of Finance is hereby authorized and directed
to transmit a copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota, and
to the Local Government Aids/Analysis Division, Department of Revenue, State of Minnesota, as
required by law.
Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
Attest:
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
52
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8f
Meeting of December 21, 1998
8f. Resolution to Amend the 1998 Budget
A revised estimate for the 1998 Budget was completed as part of the 1999 budget
preparation. The revised budget estimate numbers were detailed in the 1999
Proposed Budget document presented to the Council in August.
The changes to the 1998 budget requested in this amendment represent additional
revisions required since early fall. It will be the amounts in this final amendment
that are used to report budget to actual numbers in the year-end financial
statements.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the resolution.
Background: There are a number of adjustments requested for the current year budget as
year-end approaches. One of the purposes of this final budget amendment for 1998 is to account
for changes in operations subsequent to the amendments made in September when the tentative
1999 budget was considered.
Analysis:
The General Fund and the Parks & Recreation Fund are the only two funds being amended at this
time. Specific changes requested are as follows:
General Fund:
Division Amount Reason
General Government:
Human Resources $ 14,305 Severance pay and is offset by transfer from
the Employee Benefits Fund
City Clerk 17,296 Additional costs associated with the fall
election
Assessing 2,500 Additional costs associated with contract
with County for tax court representation.
Accounting 13,800 Increase in professional services of $9,000;
$2,800 for supplies and $2,000 for personal
services.
53
Community Development 19,008 Severance pay of $7,308 - offset by transfer
in; $11,700 for temporary personnel costs.
Public Works
Streets (100,000) Reduction in salaries and other
improvements, $60,000 and $40,000,
respectively.
Lighting & Traffic Control 100,000 Increase in salaries, $60,000 and electric
service of $40,000.
General Fund Total $ 66,909
Parks & Recreation Fund
Grounds & Natural Resources $ 154,600 Overtime $42,300; temporary salaries
$11,000; refuse/waste removal service
$65,000, equipment rental $29,700 and
landscape improvements $7,000.
The increase in professional services costs within Accounting are for new services - a cash
handling study by the City’s auditors and a arbitrage rebate analysis by Deloitte & Touche for the
City’s 1991 refunding mortgage revenue bonds. The annual arbitrage rebate analysis had been
paid through the escrow fund in the past. The Accounting Division is an appropriate “parking
place” for these costs now.
The increase needed in the Lighting & Traffic Control Division of the Public Works Department
is offset by reductions in the Streets Division and is the result of the reorganization in Public
Works.
The increase in the Grounds & Natural Resources division of the Parks & Recreation Fund is due
entirely to the additional costs of summer storm clean-up activities. The City has just been
notified of the award of FEMA funds, so part of these costs will be reimbursed in 1999.
The General Fund amendments were made by making a draw of $191,809 on the fund balance.
We anticipate that the result of 1998 operations will result in unexpended appropriations and
excess revenues that will result in replacing all of the $191,000 so that the 1998 operations will
not result in actually drawing down but rather adding to General Fund fund balance. Using fund
balance at this time avoids making a larger number of balancing entries.
The form of the resolution has been changed to show the net changes requested in the budget
numbers.
Attachments: Proposed Resolution to Amend the 1998 Budget
Prepared by: Kathleen McBride, Director of Finance
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
54
RESOLUTION NO. ______________
RESOLUTION AMENDING THE 1998 ADOPTED BUDGET
WHEREAS, The annual budget for 1998 for the City of St. Louis Park was adopted by
Ordinance 2108-97 on December 15, 1997 and subsequently amended on September 22, 1998;
and
WHEREAS, additional modifications to the 1998 are required;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park
that the budget for 1998 shall be amended as follows:
AVAILABLE RESOURCES
Revenues:Current Change Amended
General Property Taxes 9,116,632$ -$ 9,116,632$
Business License Permits 335,055 - 335,055
Non-Business License Permits 951,396 - 951,396
Intergovernmental 6,836,693 - 6,836,693
Charges for Services 1,739,724 - 1,739,724
Fines, Forfeits, and Penalties 387,300 - 387,300
Enterprise 8,117,901 - 8,117,901
Special Assessments 766,345 - 766,345
Miscellaneous Revenue 1,829,819 - 1,829,819
Refunds and Reimbursements 5,649,188 29,700 5,678,888
Transfers In 384,039 21,613 405,652
Total Revenues 36,114,092 51,313 36,165,405
Less: Interfund Charges and Transfers (5,281,390) (51,313) (5,332,703)
Net Revenue 30,832,702 - 30,832,702
Fund Balance / Reserves - Jan 1 36,453,801 - 36,453,801
Total Available 67,286,503$ -$ 67,286,503$
REQUIREMENTS
Appropriations:
Personal Services 16,727,174$ 105,909$ 16,833,083$
Supplies, services and other charges 18,122,953 108,600 18,231,553
Capital Outlay 1,608,896 7,000 1,615,896
Transfers Out 384,039 21,613 405,652
Total Appropriations 36,843,062 243,122 37,086,184
Less: Interfund Charges & Transfers (5,281,390) (51,313) (5,332,703)
Net Appropriations 31,561,672 191,809 31,753,481
Fund Balance / Reserves-Dec 31 35,724,831 (191,809) 35,533,022
Total Requirements 67,286,503$ -$ 67,286,503$
55
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Manager be directed to cause the appropriate
accounting entries to be made in the books of the City.
Attest: Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
56
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8g*
Meeting of December 21, 1998
*8g. Resolution authorizing payment of State funds to the City for landscape
materials along TH 169.
The City recently entered into an agreement with MNDot to provide landscape
buffering materials along Trunk Highway No. 169 from 16th Street West to 400
feet north of 16th Street West. The State is now requesting that Council adopt the
attached resolution which authorizes the State to make payments to the City for the
acquisition of landscape materials in accordance with that agreement.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt resolution.
Background:
In February of 1998 Council entered into an agreement with the Minnesota Department of
Transportation to participate in the Commuity Roadside Landscaping Partnership program which
fosters partnerships with municipalities and promotes volunteerism to help beautify areas
adjacent to state highways.
Staff has been working with residents from the Crestview neighborhood on a plan to beautify and
buffer MnDOT property along the east side of Highway 169 with landscape materials which
would help to screen the residential properties from the sights and sounds of highway traffic.
The State is now requesting that Council adopt the attached resolution authorizing the State to
reimburse the City for the cost of trees, shrubs and other landscape materials to be used in this
beautification project.
Attachments: Resolution
Prepared by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
57
RESOLUTION NO. _________
Resolution Authorizing Payment by the State
to the City for Landscape Materials regarding TH 169
WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park has agreed to work in conjunction with the State of
Minnesota, Department of Transportation, to provide landscape improvements along Trunk
Highway No. 169 from 16th Street West to 400 feet north of 16th Street West, under State
Project No. 2772-969 (TH 169=383); and
WHEREAS, the State of Minnesota has offered to provide funding for the acquisition of
landscape materials to be used for this project:
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of St. Louis Park enter into Agreement
No. 77259 with the State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation for the following
purposes:
To provide for payment by the State to the City for the cost of the acquisition of
the landscape materials to be placed along Trunk Highway No. 169 from 16th
Street West to 400 feet north of 16th Street West within the corporate City limits
under State Project No. 2772-969 (TH 169=383); and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the appropriate City officials are hereby authorized
and directed to execute such agreement.
Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
Attest:
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
58
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8h*
Meeting of December 21, 1998
8h* Change Order No. 3 to Contract No. 4066 with Howard R. Green Company
for Professional Engineering Services
This report considers a request for Change Order No. 3 to Contract No. 4066 with
Howard R. Green Company for professional engineering services on the Excelsior
Boulevard Streetscape project.
Recommended
Action:
Motion 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.
Background: The City entered into Contract No. 4066 with the Howard R. Green Company for
professional engineering services for the Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape project between France
Avenue and Monterey Drive. The professional engineering services include: preliminary design,
final design and specifications, and construction inspection services. Construction work on the
Streetscape project is completed for the 1998 construction season. Milling and overlay work
along with landscaping will be completed in the Spring of 1999.
As outlined in the attached letter from Howard R. Green, the project started two (2) weeks early
and extended nearly five (5) weeks later this fall than planned. The staff of Howard R. Green has
provided satisfactory engineering services and has reached the maximum fee per their contract.
The firm has requested the contract be modified with Change Order No. 3 in the amount of
$65,125.00. This will increase their contract amount for inspection, contract administration and
public relations from $104,200 to $169,325. It is anticipated that Change Order No. 3 will cover
these services through the completion of the project.
It should also be noted that the Contractor on this project, Hardrives, Inc. has incurred
approximately $24,000 in liquidated damages due to failure to complete specified portions of the
work this year. It is reasonable to suggest that these costs will somewhat offset the increased
costs for professional engineering services.
A representative from the Howard R. Green Company will be at the Council meeting to respond
if there are questions from the Council. Staff recommends that Change Order No. 3 be approved
and that Contract No. 4066 be increased by $65,125.00.
Attachments: Howard R. Green Letter (on file with City Clerk)
Change Order No. 3
Resolution
Prepared by: Carlton Moore, Superintendent of Engineering
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
59
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION PERTAINING TO CHANGE ORDER NO. 3
CONTRACT NO. 4066
WHEREAS, the City Council entered into Contract No. 4066 with Howard R. Green
Company for Professional Engineering Services, Contract No. 4066; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that certain modifications be made to the contract
to facilitate the completion of the project; and
WHEREAS, the Howard R. Green Company has agreed to the prices for the
modification noted above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that Change Order No. 3, in the amount of $65,125.00 to Contract No.
4066 with Howard R. Green Company for professional engineering services on Excelsior
Boulevard is hereby approved.
Attest: Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
60
Contract No.: 4066
Change Order No.: 3 Date: December 14, 1998
Project Name: Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape - design and inspection
Project Location: Excelsior Boulevard from France Avenue to Monterey Drive
Contractor: Howard R. Green Company 1326 Energy Park Drive
St. Paul, MN 55108 Phone No. 644-4389
Type o f Work: Engineering design and construction inspection
Amount of Original Contract: $381,360.00
Description of Work to be Added : See attached letter
________________________________________________________________________________________
Unit Contract As Revised by C.O.
Contract Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount
________________________________________________________________________________________
Total Amount: $ 65,125.00
Funds Encumbered to date from Change Order No. 3: 478,583.00
Difference between Contract Amount and C.O. Amount (Add): $ 65,125.00
Total Funds Encumbered per this Change Order: $ 543,708.00
Above additional work to be performed under same conditions as specified in original
contract unless otherwise stipulated herein.
Approved: _________________________________ _______________________________________
Project Inspector Date Superintendent of Engineering Date
________________________________ ______________________________________
Director of Public Works Date City Manager Date
We hereby agree to furnish labor and materials complete in accordance with the contract
specifications at the above stated price.
Approved: __________________________________ ___________________________________________
Date Authorized Contractor Signature
NOTE: This Revision becomes part of and in conformance with the existing contract.
61
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8i*
Meeting of December 21, 1998
* 8i. Change Order No. 2 to Contract No. 14-98 with Hardrives, Inc. for the
Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape
This report considers Change Order No. 2 to Contract No. 14-98 with Hardrives,
Inc. for work on the Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape project.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing execution of
Change Order 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.
Background: The City entered into Contract No. 14-98 with Hardrives, Inc. for the construction
of the Streetscape project on Excelsior Boulevard from France Avenue to Monterey Drive.
During the course of construction a number of construction items needed to be addressed and are
summarized in this change order. The construction items have been grouped into five sections to
more easily identify what they were for and why the change occured. The details of each section
are identified on the attached letter from H.R. Green Co.
1. Work nessecitated by field conditions that were not discernable prior to construction or
that changed during construction.
Hennepin County requirement to remove concrete panels
to the nearest joint. $63,238.23
Buried stump removal $1,800.00
Rebuild sanitary sewer manholes $12,325.00
Additional handrails to meet building code $14,875.00
TOTAL: $92,238.23
2. Work needed by the City that was not included in the original bid.
Install new manhole castings $3,750.00
Install new hydrant leads to main $24,838.50
Install new water service valve covers $4,840.00
TOTAL: $33,428.50 *
62
* Note: This additional cost will be recovered by a transfer from the Water Utility Fund.
3. Work needed to make better linkage with public construction and private facilities.
Additional quantities for driveway connections $7,116.00
Additional concrete curb connections $3,146.00
Additional retaining walls to match private property grades $10,200.00
TOTAL: $20,462.00
4. Work needed to facilitate construction sequencing and constructability.
Additional traffic management and bituminous
patching and gravel $34,444.20
TOTAL: $34,444.20
5. Selection of alternatives built into the Contract documents.
Use of high early concrete $7,740.00
Topsoil cost reduction ($10,332.00)
Eliminate bituminous stamped pattern with
polypreformed crosswalks ($14,640.30)
TOTAL: ($17,232.30)
Total of items 1 through 5 = $163,340.63
Staff recommends that Change Order No. 2 be approved and that Contract No. 14-98 with
Hardrives, Inc. be increased by $163,340.63. A representative of Howard R. Green will be at the
City Council meeting to respond to any questions from the Council.
Attachment: Resolution
Change Order No. 2
H.R. Green Letter (on file with City Clerk)
Prepared by: Carlton B. Moore, Superintendent of Engineering
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
63
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOULTION PERTAINING TO CHANGE ORDER NO. 2
CONTRACT NO. 14-98
WHEREAS, the City Council entered into Contract No. 14-98 with Hardrives, Inc. for
construction of Streetscape improvements on Excelsior Boulevard; and
WHEREAS¸ the City has determined that certain modifications be made to the contract to
facilitate the construction of the project; and
WHEREAS, the contractor, Hardrives, Inc. has agreed to the prices for the modifications
noted above.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of St.
Louis Park, Minnesota, that Change Order No. 2, in the amount of $163,340.63, to Contract No.
14-98 with Hardrives, Inc. for construction of streetscape improvements on Excelsior Boulevard
from France Avenue to Monterey Drive is hereby approved.
Attest: Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
64
Contract No.: 14-98
Change Order No.: 2 Date: December 21, 1998
Project Name: Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape
Project Location: Excelsior Boulevard from France Avenue to Monterey Drive
Contractor: Hardrives, Inc 14475 Quiram Drive
Rogers MN 55374 Phone No. 428-8886
Type of Work: Construction of Excelsior Boulevard / Phase II
Amount of Original Contract: $2,089,174.50
Description of Work to be Added : See attached letter
________________________________________________________________________________________
Unit Contract As Revised by C.O.
Contract Item Unit Price Quantity Amount Quantity Amount
________________________________________________________________________________________
Total Amount: $163,340.63
Funds Encumbered to date from Change Order No. 2: $2,115,845.91
Difference between Contract Amount and C.O. Amount (Add): $163,340.63
Total Funds Encumbered per this Change Order: $2,279,186.54
Above additional work to be performed under same conditions as specified in original
contract unless otherwise stipulated herein.
Approved: _________________________________ _______________________________________
Project Inspector Date Superintendent of Engineering Date
________________________________ ______________________________________
Director of Public Works Date City Manager Date
We hereby agree to furnish labor and materials complete in accordance with the contract
specifications at the above stated price.
Approved: __________________________________ ___________________________________________
Date Authorized Contractor Signature
NOTE: This Revision becomes part of and in conformance with the existing contract.
65
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8j*
Meeting of December 21, 1998
* 8j. Right of way acquisition of trail easement on Smith property located at 7500
W. 27th Street.
This report considers the acquisition of a 14 foot wide easement for trail purposes
along the southerly edge of 7500 W. 27th Street to accommodate the Hutchinson
Spur Regional Trail.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached 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.
Background: The City Council has directed staff and its consultant to proceed with the plans
and specifications and acquisition of right of way for the Hutchinson Spur Regional Trail. To
facilitate the construction in 1999 all right of way must be obtained before the project can be
awarded. The City’s right of way consultant has contacted all the property owners from whom
the City will require permanent and temporary easements. It appears that all but one of the
property owners are going to reach agreement with the City on the value of the easements.
Although negotiations continue, they have not progressed satisfactorily on the easements at 7500
W. 27th Street. It is critical that the City be assured that these easements will be acquired in time
to facilitate trail construction in 1999. An April letting for this project is being planned. Failure
to acquire this right of way will jeopardize the Federal ISTEA Funding allocated for the trail.
The City Attorney is prepared to file the court documents starting the 90 day “Quick Take”
eminent domain proceedings within the next few weeks. This should allow access to the
property sometime in April. It is anticipated that Mn/DOT will award a contract for the trail
construction in April or May, but they will not do so until we have acquired all of the necessary
right of way.
Attached to this report is a resolution prepared by the City Attorney authorizing acquisition of the
required right of way by use of the eminent domain process (permanent and temporary
easements), authorizing City staff, its agents, and attorneys to negotiate for the property prior to
commencing and throughout the eminent domain proceedings.
Attachments: Resolution
Exhibit “A” (on file in City Clerk’s office)
Prepared by: Carlton B. Moore, Superintendent of Engineering
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
66
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CONDEMNATION
OF PROPERTY FOR TRAIL PURPOSES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park does hereby determine that it
is necessary and for a public use and purpose to acquire the property described on the attached
Exhibit “A” for public trail purposes; and
WHEREAS, the City has been unable to acquire the property through negotiation with
the landowner; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that a 14 foot wide trail easement and a temporary
construction easement at 7500 W. 27th Street is required to accommodate the Hutchinson Spur
Regional Trail; and
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota:
1. That the City Attorney is authorized to commence eminent domain proceedings pursuant
to Minnesota Statute Chapter 117 to acquire title to the property described on the attached
Exhibit “A”:
2. That the City Attorney is authorized to acquire the property interests pursuant to the
“quick take” provisions of Minnesota Statute §117.042.
3. That the Mayor and the City Clerk are authorized to execute all documents necessary, in
the opinion of the City Attorney, to effect the acquisition of the necessary property
interests.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 7, 1998
City Manager Mayor
Attest:
67
City Clerk
68
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8k*
Meeting of December 21, 1998
* 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. 16th Street Improvements - Project
No(s) 90-54 and 96-19.
This report considers addendum No. 2 to an Agreement with BRAA for
professional engineering services on the Park Place Boulevard/W. 16th Street
Improvements - Project No(s) 90-54 and 96-19.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt the attached 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.
Background: The City entered into a professional services agreement with BRAA on April 15,
1996 to provide preliminary traffic and engineering services for public improvements
necessitated by the Ryan Development on the old Honeywell site. On October 14, 1996 the
original Agreement was amended to provide a larger scope of engineering design and
construction services. The compensation was set at $66,100.00. During the course of
construction a number of changes and issues arose which required additional services from
BRAA.
This addendum is late in being presented to the City Council as staff has been negotiating with
BRAA over the amount and justification of the additional fees that were requested. Staff and
BRAA have reached an Agreement on the costs as presented herein.
1. Field design changes due to poor soils and existing utility conflicts. $13,950.00
2. Storm sewer and watermain field design changes & survey work. $4,852.50
3. Driveway, sidewalk and retaining wall design changes and survey work. $18,079.00
4. Traffic signal and turn lane changes. $10,239.00
5. Redesign of street lighting. $2,095.00
6. Additional field inspection. $17,228.37
TOTAL $66,443.87
Financial Considerations: The City executed special assessment agreements with all the
benefiting property owner’s to pay 100 percent of the project costs, including engineering fees.
The first special assessment was in 1996 with another special assessment in 1997. The 1997
69
special assessment included $100,000.00 for engineering fees. This leaves a balance of
$31,449.28 to be assessed in 1999. This will final out all costs for the improvement project.
Following is a summary of the project costs and revenue source:
Project Costs: Construction $982,588.08
Engineering Consultant $132,543.87
Total Cost $1,115,131.95
Revenue Sources: Special Assessments
1996 and 1997 $1,008,641.40
Total Assessed $1,008,641.40
Remaining Balance $106,490.40
City Utility Fund (Construction Costs - Paid) -$67,001.00
Balance $39,489.40
City Share of Engineering Fees $8,040.12
(To be paid by Utility Fund)
Balance to be assessed in 1999 $31,449.28
Although the original project contemplated the entire cost of the project being funded through
special assessments, the City encountered City owned utilities that needed repair/upgrading or
replacement during construction. These costs ($67,001.00) were paid by the sewer utility fund.
The engineering fees for these changes are also to be paid for by the sewer utility fund as noted
above.
Staff recommends that addendum No. 2 to the Professional Services Agreement with BRAA be
approved. No other conditions or terms of the Contract are changed.
Attachments: Resolutions
Prepared by: Carlton B. Moore, Superintendent of Engineering
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
70
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION ADOPTING ADDENDUM NO. 2
TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH
BONESTROO ROSENE ANDERLIK AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
FOR WORK ON PROJECT NO(S). 90-54 AND 96-19
WHEREAS, the City Council entered into a professional services agreement with
Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates, Inc. for professional engineering services on the
Park Place Boulevard/W. 16th Street Improvements - Project No(s). 90-54 and 96-19; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined that certain modifications be made to the scope of
services in the contract to facilitate the construction of the project; and
WHEREAS, the contractor, Bonestroo, Inc. has agreed to the costs for the additional
services;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of
St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that Addendum No. 2, to professional services agreement with
Bonestroo Rosene Anderlik and Associates, Inc. in the amount of $66,443.87, for professional
engineering services on the Park Place Boulevard/W. 16th Street Improvements, Project No(s).
90-54 and 96, is hereby approved.
Attest: Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
71
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 8l*
Meeting of December 21, 1998
*8l. Approval of lease agreement for a communications antenna with Bellsouth Wireless
Data, L.P. (Bellsouth).
Authorization to enter into a lease agreement between the City and Bellsouth for space on the
water tower at 5100 Park Glen Road for a public safety communications antenna for an initial
lease term of three (3) years with option for three (3) additional three (3) year renewal terms.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the attached resolution authorizing execution of lease
agreement.
Background: The City has negotiated five (5) leases with four (4) vendors regarding use of the
City’s water towers for placement of antenna for the transmission and reception of radio
communication signals. These past agreements have been with for profit companies providing
cellular and PCS communication services. In this instance, Bellsouth provides the radio
communications net utilized by St. Louis Park for public safety purposes. Their current net has a
weak spot in its coverage and the installation of an antenna on this tower will rectify that
situation.
This agreement is based on our standard antenna lease developed by the City Attorney. Our City
Attorney has assisted in the preparation and review of this particular agreement. The agreement,
which is on file in the Clerk’s office, provides for the following:
• Three (3) year initial lease term with three (3) additional three (3) year renewals.
• Rent of $300.00 per year.
• Communications equipment to be installed in the tower on the main floor.
• Right of pre-emption by the City if necessary for some public safety communication needs.
• Non-exclusive use allowing the City to lease to other users.
• Appropriate termination provisions, insurances and protections.
Based on earlier leases with for profit firms, this lease has a low annual rent. However, since the
services provided by Bellsouth are for us, nothing is to be gained by charging a higher rent.
The antenna will be a small whip type placed on the top handrail of the water tower and painted
to match the color of the tower. While the antenna may be visible, it should not be obtrusive and
will not generally be noticeable.
Staff recommends that Council authorize this agreement with Bellsouth.
Attachments: Resolution
Summary of current and proposed leases
Prepared by: Mike Rardin, Director of Public Works
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
72
RESOLUTION NO. _____
RESOLUTION APPROVING LEASE AGREEMENT
FOR COMMUNICATION ANTENNA
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, wishes to enter into a non-
exclusive lease agreement with Bellsouth Wireless Data, L.P. (Bellsouth) for the use of space at
the City water tower at 5100 Park Glen Road; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has negotiated a lease agreement with terms
acceptable to the City Council;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager be and
hereby are authorized to enter into a lease agreement with Bellsouth for the leasing of space at
the City water tower site located at 5100 Park Glen Road for the purposes of a communication
antenna and related base equipment; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that such lease term shall be for a period of three (3) years
commencing immediately with the right of Bellsouth to extend the initial term for three (3)
additional three (3) year terms with an annual rent amount of $300.00.
Attest: Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
City Clerk Mayor
Reviewed for Administration:
City Manager
73
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item #8m*
Meeting of December 21, 1998
*8m. Resolution of Approval for Special Laws enacted in the 1998 Legislative
Session related to “This Old Apartment”
Request from the Office of the Secretary of State for Approval by Local
Governmental Units of Chapter 389, Article 3, Section 3.4 of the 1998 Session
Laws
Recommended
Action:
Motion to adopt a resolution approving Chapter 389, Article 3,
Section 3.4 of the 1998 Session laws and directing staff to
complete the Certificate of Approval to be filed with the Office
of the Secretary of State
Background:
The Secretary of State’s office is requesting that Council pass a resolution of approval for special
laws enacted relating to a program for rental housing rehabilitation called “This Old Apartment”.
Original terms of the program are as follows:
• Cost of improvements are deducted from the property’s increased market value for the
first five years following improvements. During each of the next five years 20% of the
value will be added back for tax assessment.
• Each building must contain four or more residential units and be at least 30 years old.
• Total cost of the improvements must be at least $5,000 per unit.
Changes enacted during the 1998 legislative session extend the time period for making the
qualifying improvements from January 1, 1999 to January 1, 2000 and decrease the total cost of
qualifying improvements from $5, 000 to $2,500. These changes will allow properties to more
easily qualify for the program.
Recommendation:
Staff recommends that Council adopt a resolution approving Chapter 389, Article 3, Section 3.4
of the 1998 Session laws and direct staff to complete the Certificate of Approval to be filed with
the Office of the Secretary of State.
Attachment: Resolution
Prepared by: Cindy Larsen, City Clerk
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
74
RESOLUTION NO. __________
RESOLUTION APPROVING
CHAPTER 389, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 3.4
OF THE 1998 SESSION LAW
THIS OLD APARTMENT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has determined that they wish
to participate in the rental housing rehabilitation program entitled “This Old Apartment”; and
WHEREAS, special laws related to this program were enacted during the 1998
legislative session; and
WHEREAS, the Office of the Secretary of State has requested that the all local
governmental units affected by this legislation approve a resolution of support for these special
laws.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota that the City hereby approves and endorses changes made to Chapter 389, Article 3,
Section 3.4 of the 1998 Session Laws relating to the program entitled “This Old Apartment”.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council December 21, 1998
City Manager Mayor
Attest::
City Clerk
75
City Council
Item #9a*
December 9,
1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE
PRODUCT
LANDSCAPING SERVICE 194.37
ADVANCED STATE SECURITY GENERAL SUPPLIES 194.36
AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 1,376.89
ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE
ACCT
GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,570.31
ASPLUND COFFEE COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 120.00
AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES 18.79
AUNE, KIM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 9.66
AUTOMATED ENTRANCE PRODUCTS
IN
BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 91.91
BCA/FORENSIC SCIENCE
LABORATOR
TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 200.00
BEEKS PIZZA OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 59.80
BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 320.92
BOBS PERSONAL COFFEE SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 323.88
BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 40.27
BOYER TRUCK PARTS EQUIPMENT PARTS 167.08
BRO TEX INC CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL
SERVICE
575.10
BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66)
BURMEISTER, TODD INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
BYERLYS TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 438.78
CAPITOL COMMUNICATIONS RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 67.41
CAREER TRACK MS2 TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 79.00
CATCO PARTS SERVICE EQUIPMENT PARTS 198.77
CENTURY FENCE BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 140.00
CERES ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES I CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL
SERVICE
17,423.75
CLOSE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 3,601.65
COLICH & ASSOCIATES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 12,026.13
COLLINS COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 403.62
COLLISYS ELECTRIC CO BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 298.00
CRILEY, KATHI L MOTOR FUELS 92.21
CRYSTEEL DIST INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 70.34
DANKO EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT
CO
GENERAL SUPPLIES 18.03
DAVIES WATER EQUIPMENT
COMPANY
OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 40.92
DAYTON'S/TARGET GENERAL SUPPLIES 75.55
DCA INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 303.97
DELEGARD TOOL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES (65.54)
EDELMANN & ASSOCIATES INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 55.00
76
FAIRMONT FIRE SYSTEMS BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 66.78
FLIKEID, TERRY GENERAL SUPPLIES 3.64
FORCE AMERICA INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 196.03
GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT CORP EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.44)
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS 536.87
GIEBEL, JOHN TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 234.13
GRAINGER INC, W W BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 435.78
HENN CO ACCOUNTING SERVICES DEPOSITS PAYABLE 3,927.00
HENN CO TREASURER SUBSISTENCE SERVICE 15,517.73
HENNEPIN COUNTY SHERIFFS DEPT RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 5,324.21
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER POSTAGE 329.04
HOME DEPOT/GECF EQUIPMENT PARTS 196.54
HOME HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES 724.43
HUGHES, CARRIE MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 62.40
HYDRO SUPPLY COMPANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 2,408.19
ICI DELUX PAINT CENTERS GENERAL SUPPLIES 588.20
IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS RENTAL EQUIPMENT 50.00
INACOM INFORMATION SYSTEMS COMPUTER SUPPLIES 334.38
INST. FOR FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 650.00
INTERSTATE BEARING COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (166.20)
IOS CAPITAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT 826.44
J H LARSON COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 10.10
JEWISH COMMUNITY CTR OF
GREATE
OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,500.00
JOHN HENRY FOSTER MINNESOTA OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 208.50
KANSAS STATE BANK OF
MANHATTAN
NOTES PAYABLE 1,994.31
KILBY, PAT GENERAL SUPPLIES 170.08
KNOX LUMBER COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 21.44
KOEHNEN, LEONARD J OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 4,806.90
KRAEMER & SONS INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 577.43
L M C INSURANCE TRUST OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 129.54
LAKELAND ENGINEERING
EQUIPMENT
EQUIPMENT PARTS 161.35
LASER QUIPT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 859.76
LATHROP PAINT SUPPLY COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 1,756.57
LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC LUBRICANTS/ADDITIVES (300.00)
M G F O A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 150.00
M I A M A SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 150.00
MACQUEEN EQUIP CO MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 7,009.83
MANAGED SERVICES INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 3,643.58
MARKING, KIM OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 171.50
MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 600.00
MC CROSSAN INC, C S OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 89.74
MENARDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 15.91
MERTZ INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 94.64
METRO SYSTEMS NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 1,178.88
MIDWEST CHILDRENS RESOURCE
CTR
GENERAL SUPPLIES 20.00
77
MINN SUN PUBLICATIONS LEGAL NOTICES 109.12
MINNEAPOLIS EQUIPMENT CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 57.83
MINNETONKA ORCHARDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 36.95
MN DEPT OF HEALTH OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 17,619.00
MN/S C I A TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 360.00
MUNICILITE EQUIPMENT PARTS 42.49
NORTHLAND ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 73.68
NSP CO NOTES PAYABLE 23,459.73
OESTREICH, MARK MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 94.90
OFFICE MAX GENERAL SUPPLIES 84.41
OLSEN CHAIN & CABLE CO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 562.80
ORKIN PEST CONTROL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 60.92
PALMS BAKERY MEETING EXPENSE 40.20
PARTNERS IN PERSONNEL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 1,134.00
PARTS PLUS EQUIPMENT PARTS 143.47
PIRTEK PLYMOUTH EQUIPMENT PARTS 223.65
PRAXAIR DISTRIBUTION INC. GENERAL SUPPLIES 183.08
PRESTIGE LINCOLN MERCURY EQUIPMENT PARTS 134.07
PROCESS MEASUREMENT CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 272.65
QUANTERRA INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 16,290.00
R & R SPECIALTIES EQUIPMENT PARTS 96.70
RAINBOW FOODS SUBSISTENCE SUPPLIES 153.66
RANDY'S SANITATION INC GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 2,779.16
SA-AG INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,140.52
SCHWANTZ, LARRY GENERAL SUPPLIES 74.94
SILVER CREEK SLED DOGS OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00
SONUS INTERIORS INC BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 1,442.00
SPS COMPANIES INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 14.39
ST JOSEPH'S EQUIPMENT INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 34.63
ST LOUIS PARK TRUE VALUE EQUIPMENT PARTS 5.73
STEPHENS BUICK-JEEP-EAGLE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 600.00
SUBURBAN FEED & SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 93.90
SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 245.74
SUBURBAN TIRE CO TIRES 150.02
SURVIVALINK GENERAL SUPPLIES 65.00
SYSTEMS SUPPLY INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 34.25
TAKUMI, VERNICE MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 19.18
TENNANT EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 187.73
TERRY, JILL OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 57.02
THOMAS, ERNEST GENERAL SUPPLIES 54.47
THYMES TWO CATERING MEETING EXPENSE 171.47
TWIN CITY WATER CLINIC INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 350.00
VICKERMAN INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 365.50
VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 192.00
WALDOR PUMP COMPANY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,012.00
WILLIAMS, TIM GENERAL SUPPLIES 250.00
ZEE MEDICAL SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 39.14
ZEP MANUFACTURING GENERAL SUPPLIES 782.03
ZIP SORT POSTAGE 55.39
78
170,839.00
December 18,
1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
AAA LAMBERTS LANDSCAPE
PRODUCT
OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 316.30
ADVANTA BUSINESS SERVICES
CORP
OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 97.45
AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 370.85
ALMSTEAD'S SUPERVALU MEETING EXPENSE 135.38
AMERICAN PLANNING
ASSOCIATION
SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 173.00
AMERIPRIDE LINEN AND APPAREL
S
CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL
SERVICE
132.46
ANCHOR PAPER CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 764.07
ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE
ACCT
GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,902.03
AT&T WIRELESS SERVICES TELEPHONE 214.71
AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR CO BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 78.00
AUTOMOBILE SERVICE COMPANY EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 43.15
AWD COOLERS OF MINNESOTA CONCESSION SUPPLIES 86.27
BACHMANS BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 107.57
BENTZ-THOMPSON-RIETOW INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,298.00
BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,465.02
BOBS PERSONAL COFFEE SERVICE GENERAL SUPPLIES 27.59
BORDER STATES ELECTRIC SUPPLY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 285.05
BRAUN INTERTEC CORPORATION SOIL TESTING SERVICES 3,210.83
BRO TEX INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 532.50
BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66)
BUSKEY, JENNIFER MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 111.15
CAREER TRACK MS2 TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 149.00
CARTEGRAPH SYSTEMS INC. EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 395.00
CASPER ESTATE, ADELAIDE INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
CASSITY, STEPHEN L GAS FITTER 62.50
CATCO PARTS SERVICE EQUIPMENT PARTS (142.35)
COUNTRY VILLAGE MN FABRICS
#60
GENERAL SUPPLIES 20.85
CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIP INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 97.02
CULLIGAN BOTTLED WATER GENERAL SUPPLIES 40.86
DAY-TIMERS INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 17.99
DEGIDIO, LOUIS BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 669.41
DELEGARD TOOL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES (65.54)
DOUD, KEVIN GENERAL SUPPLIES 140.05
DRYWALL SUPPLY INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 306.92
EMERGENCY MEDICAL PRODUCTS GENERAL SUPPLIES 317.58
ENGINEERING REPRO SYSTEMS OFFICE SUPPLIES 15.98
ERV'S LAWN MOWER REPAIR GENERAL SUPPLIES 659.24
79
ETIENNE, TONY ELECTRICAL 16.80
EVERGREEN LAND SERVICES CO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 4,436.60
EXPRESS COMPOSITES INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 13.33
FEDERAL EXPRESS CORP PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 833.60
FILTRATION SYSTEMS INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 426.85
FORCE AMERICA INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 77.92
FRANK, MARK INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
FREEWAY RADIATOR SERVICE EQUIPMENT PARTS 477.12
G & K SERVICES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL
SUPPLY
37.12
GARDEN & ASSOCIATES INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 90.00
GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT
CORP
EQUIPMENT PARTS (30.44)
GENUINE PARTS COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 389.99
GOLDEN VALLEY SUPPLY
COMPANY
BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 102.19
GOLDMAN, WILLIAM S TREE MAINTENANCE 108.67
GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL INC RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 308.17
GREEN TREE VENDOR SERVICES
COR
OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 751.89
HAAGENSON, DANA YOUTH ATHLETICS 22.00
HANSEN, MARTIN GENERAL SUPPLIES 129.62
HARMENING, TOM MEETING EXPENSE 18.18
HENN CO INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
COMPUTER SERVICES 107.57
HENNEPIN COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS
D
CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL
SERVICE
7,605.63
HENNEPIN COUNTY TREASURER OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 252.00
HENNESSY, C. GENERAL SUPPLIES 195.04
HILL, HAROLD INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
HOFFER, CHUCK GENERAL SUPPLIES 180.01
HOME DEPOT/GECF GENERAL SUPPLIES 195.25
HOME HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES 103.13
HPI INTERNATIONAL INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 359.80
ICI DELUX PAINT CENTERS BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 75.67
IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,175.42
INDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,929.50
INGRAHAM & ASSOCIATES INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 677.00
INTERSTATE BEARING COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (166.20)
INTERSTATE DETROIT DIESEL EQUIPMENT PARTS 543.16
INTL CONF BLDG OFFIC GENERAL SUPPLIES 37.50
J H LARSON COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 1,272.76
JOLLEY, PETER A GENERAL SUPPLIES 165.01
KANSAS STATE BANK OF
MANHATTAN
CAPITALIZED INTEREST 642.43
KENNEDY & GRAVEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 495.50
KNOX LUMBER COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 321.69
KONICA BUSINESS MACHINES RENTAL EQUIPMENT 39.41
KOVAL APPLIANCE CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,375.99
80
KRAEMER & SONS INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,152.04
LARSEN, CYNTHIA MEETING EXPENSE 89.38
LATHROP PAINT SUPPLY COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 228.47
LEARNING INNOVATIONS INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 5,853.00
LINHOFF PHOTO & DIGITAL IMAGIN GENERAL SUPPLIES 11.48
LOFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 314.18
LUBRICATION TECHNOLOGIES INC LUBRICANTS/ADDITIVES (300.00)
MACQUEEN EQUIP CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 282.42
MAIL BOXES ETC # 1236 GENERAL SUPPLIES 551.14
MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 2,061.37
MAUMA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 30.00
MC CROSSAN INC, C S OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 268.55
MECA SPORTSWEAR GENERAL SUPPLIES 597.50
MENARDS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 124.31
METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 51.07
METRO COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL
SE
CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL
SERVICE
287,400.92
METRO ELECTROSTATIC PAINTING EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,765.00
METRO SYSTEMS NON-CAPITAL EQUIPMENT 3,094.81
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL SEWER AVAILABILITY CHARGE 900.00
MEYERS & CO INC, B E EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 98.65
MIDWEST MAILING SYSTEMS INC OFFICE SUPPLIES 31.16
MILLERBERND, DENNIS EQUIPMENT PARTS 187.32
MINN CHIEFS POLICE ASSOCIATION SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 180.00
MINN RECREATION & PARK ASSN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 3,612.00
MINN SUN PUBLICATIONS LEGAL NOTICES 469.04
MINNEAPOLIS EQUIPMENT CO MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 2,279.11
MINNESOTA PRIMA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 20.00
MINUTEMAN PRESS PRINTING & PUBLISHING 42.00
MN DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 1,593.08
MN PIPE & EQUIPMENT OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 794.03
MNA TREASURER SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 140.00
MSSA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 25.00
MUNSTERMAN, KEVIN GENERAL SUPPLIES 64.98
NALPAK GENERAL SUPPLIES 206.63
NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE GENERAL SUPPLIES 117.10
NATL NOTARY ASSOCIATION SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 34.00
NSP CO ELECTRIC SERVICE 176.21
OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 96.08
OFFICE MAX COMPUTER SUPPLIES 150.14
P & H WAREHOUSE SALES INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 20.93
PAPER WAREHOUSE-GENERAL
OFFICE
GENERAL SUPPLIES 218.61
PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER PROF/CONSULT SERVICES 79.60
PARTS PLUS EQUIPMENT PARTS 46.88
PETERSON, D R CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL
SUPPLY
250.00
PIRES, CLINTON E COMPUTER SUPPLIES 196.99
POSTMASTER POSTAGE 5,150.00
81
PRESTIGE LINCOLN MERCURY EQUIPMENT PARTS 114.44
PRINTERS SERVICE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 14.00
PRO APPLIANCE SERVICE EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 94.95
QEC-MN POSTAGE 786.99
QUILL CORPORATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 158.76
RAFOWITZ, TINA C SKATING LESSONS 50.00
RAINBOW FOODS CONCESSION SUPPLIES 144.54
RELIABLE OFFICE SUPPLIES 78.27
REYNOLDS WELDING SUPPLY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 43.83
RUDDLE, MARJEAN OFFICE SUPPLIES 387.82
SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC. SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 75.00
SCHEAR, MORRIS INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00
SEARS & ROEBUCK CO SMALL TOOLS 46.83
SENIOR COMMUNITY SERVICES OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 8,378.82
SEVEN CORNERS ACE HDWE SMALL TOOLS 1,565.98
SHORT-ELLIOTT-HENDRICKSON PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,562.31
SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 1,257.02
ST LOUIS PARK TRUE VALUE OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 8.35
STAR TRIBUNE OTHER ADVERTISING 1,167.75
STAT MEDICAL GENERAL SUPPLIES 328.01
SUBURBAN TIRE CO TIRES 930.38
SWANSON HARDWARE CO OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 126.47
TAUTGES REDPATH & CO LTD PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 217.25
TRACY/TRIPP FUELS MOTOR FUELS 6,440.27
TUCKER, MICHAEL GENERAL SUPPLIES 240.00
TWIN CITY OPTICAL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 56.37
TWIN CITY OXYGEN CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 4.80
U S WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 4,222.94
UNIFORMS UNLIMITED GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,967.51
UNITOG RENTAL GENERAL SUPPLIES 45.07
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOOLS 260.00
VERMEER OF MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT PARTS 154.41
VESSCO INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 582.34
WALDOR PUMP COMPANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERVICE 5,185.27
WARNING LITES OF MN INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 7,776.11
WASTE MANAGEMENT-SAVAGE CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL
SERVICE
139,843.12
WATSON CO INC CONCESSION SUPPLIES 1,401.30
WAYTEK EQUIPMENT PARTS 117.05
WILLIAMS STEEL & HDWE EQUIPMENT PARTS 39.21
WOLF CAMERA INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 12.35
ZIEMER, MIKE GENERAL SUPPLIES 125.00
ZIP PRINTING OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 97.71
ZIP SORT POSTAGE 132.92
548,923.81
December 17, 1998
82
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
GREAT WEST LIFE & ANNUITY
INS
DENTAL
INSURANCE
301.64
301.64
December 17,
1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
ANESTHESIOLOGY PA WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
464.75
COPYMED INC WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
8.76
INST. FOR ATHLETIC MEDICINE WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
12.30
JOINT ACTIVE SYSTEMS WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
692.75
NOVACARE O&P INC. WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
493.48
OTOLARYNGOLOGY & HEAD & WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
144.10
PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL
CENTER
WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
1,087.08
SEDGEWICK MANAGED CARE WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
9.50
SUHL, JOEL WORKERS COMPENSATION
INSURANCE
63.59
THOMPSON, JIM INJURY PAY 858.98
3,835.29
December 17, 1998
VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
AETNA LIFE INSURANCE &
ANNUITY
DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,433.38
ALLINA DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 27,886.15
COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 203.00
FORTIS BENEFITS DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 2,051.47
GREAT-WEST LIFE & ANNUITY DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 4,321.00
HARDRIVES INC OTHER
IMPROVEMENTS
128,537.86
HEALTHPARTNERS DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 50,786.17
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-401 DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 236.44
ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 9,527.61
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 645.00
KASSA CONSTRUCTION, RON OTHER
IMPROVEMENTS
84,452.17
LEAD CON INC OTHER 57,000.00
83
IMPROVEMENTS
MIDWEST ASPHALT CORP OTHER
IMPROVEMENTS
42,792.91
MINN COMM OF REVENUE SEASON TICKETS 11,494.00
MINNESOTA BENEFIT ASSOCIATION DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 739.80
MINNESOTA MUTUAL LIFE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 551.00
MINNESOTA NCPERS LIFE
INSURANC
DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 105.00
MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT
CENTE
DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,288.32
MN DEPT OF REVENUE MOTOR FUELS 156.68
MN STATE RETIREMENT SYSTEM DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 945.00
PARK NATIONAL BANK DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 102,837.81
PERA DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 43,880.10
PERA FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT ASSO DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 3,202.73
PERA POLICE RETIREMENT ASSOC DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 8,235.02
SLP CREDIT UNION DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 30,544.51
THOMAS & SONS CONST OTHER
IMPROVEMENTS
20,116.25
UNITED WAY OF MINNEAPOLIS
AREA
DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 157.00
UNUM LIFE INSURANCE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 3,532.52
USCM / MIDWEST DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 6,077.06
VISU-SEWER CLEAN & SEAL INC OTHER
IMPROVEMENTS
68,600.00
WESTBRIDGE CAPITAL CORP
INSURA
DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 68.12
712,404.08
84
Item #9b*
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
NOVEMBER 18, 1998 --7:00 P.M.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Paul Carver, Dennis Morris, Michael Garelick
Ken Gothberg, Jerry Timian (arrived at 7:05 p.m.), Sally Velick
MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Bissonnette
STAFF PRESENT: Janet Jeremiah, Janice Loftus
1. Call to Order - Roll Call
Chair Morris called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.
2. Approval of Minutes of November 4, 1998
Mr. Garelick moved approval of the minutes of November 4, 1998 and the motion passed
on a vote of 4-0-1 with Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, and Velick voting in favor and
Carver abstaining.
3. Public Hearings
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.
Janet Jeremiah, Planning Manager, presented the staff report and recommended that the
City Council adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan trail designation to
move the trail onto the Phillips Parkway right of way for a distance of approximately 600
feet south of 36th Street in accordance with the trail study recommendation.
Mr. Gothberg asked if he could assume by going on the right of way that it would mean
that there would be approximately 2 feet from the curb before you hit the trail and another
2 feet on the other side of the 10 foot trail.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the detailed construction drawings are still being completed, but
she believes that the minimum boulevard standard that the City generally requires is 3
feet. She said the City does not like to see less than that because of mowing purposes and
85
some snow storage space on the side of the road. She said that the right of way in that
area is probably 15 feet, so there is enough space to add more width in the boulevard.
Mr. Garelick asked if this was tied in as a side issue to the proposed construction of the
office buildings adjacent to the trail or is this a separate issue.
Ms. Jeremiah stated there is a separate issue tied into the platting of that development, but
obviously the knowledge that the property owner is coming forward with development
plans is one reason why the City is looking at alternatives to the trail alignment through
that property. She said that, at one point, the City considered purchasing the entire
Hutchinson Spur corridor, but the cost was rather absorbitant so the City started looking
at options of where they could give a little and still accommodate the regional trail needs
because there is adjacent public property. The City went through this process earlier
where the realignment was to take place on the Aquila Park and Aquila School property
because obviously those were public properties that could accommodate the trail. She
said this is a similar situation where alternatives are acceptable to the City, but less costly
than outright purchasing easements across the entire property. This was deemed viable
through the trail study.
Ms. Velick asked what the purchase price was for the easements that were already
purchased in this area.
Ms. Jeremiah stated she did not know if the price of the various easements was actually
separated from the overall price for the purchase of the Hutchinson Spur properties and
other easements that were purchased further north. She said the total purchase price was
approximately $500,000 and the award through condemnation for the entire property was
closer to 1.8 million so there were some compromises made to accommodate part of the
trail on adjacent properties.
Chair Morris questioned what should be decided first, the plat or the trail designation. He
said he could not help thinking in looking at the plat item on the agenda which has maps
and drawings showing the proposed plat, and then considering what our proposal is as to
the feasibility of maintaining the trail easement within the area that is being platted, if that
had been looked at or discussed.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that when the City went through the process of looking at purchasing
portions of the Hutchinson Spur and the easements on the remaining portions, there was
already a preliminary development proposal that had not been through a substantial
review, but it was similar to what is being proposed now, except that there were 6
buildings. She said that she recalls that this proposal was somewhat considered in that
staff took a cursory look at it with regard to it meeting zoning code requirements,
subdivision requirements, and lot size access, and found that that it seemed to meet those
requirements, except that the number of lots and buildings needed to be reduced to 5 as is
currently proposed. It was feasible to work a trail easement through the development,
however the result would have been having bicyclists and pedestrians trying to go through
86
parking lots. She said that it was deemed less desirable to try to coordinate the trail with
the development than to move the trail onto the public right of way.
Chair Morris stated he is trying to visualize what he sees in the street today, as to where
the new trail designation would be.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the trail would be primarily where the sidewalk is located. The
sidewalk is not 10 feet in width so it would expand further to the east closer to Target and
that is where you start cutting into the berm area resulting in some flattening near the
street where it currently slopes up into the berm.
Chair Morris asked if the proposed office complex would require demolishing the berm
resulting in leaving the trail designation at a higher elevation.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that there is some slope down into the buildings from Phillips
Parkway so the trail would be a little higher than the office buildings. She suggested that
the developer speak to the issue of grading around the office buildings.
Chair Morris asked if the trail designation is moved, would there be a buffered green
space between the recreational trail and the office complex.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that there is some buffering along Phillips Parkway and some
distance between the trail and the parking lot that would be green space. She said that
this is one of the tradeoffs that was considered, because if you try to locate the trail on the
development parcels, you lose a lot of buffering and the trail is really going through an
office park. She indicated that Phillips Parkway does end with a culdesac near Lot 4 and
you will notice that Lot 5 is accessed from a common driveway that goes into Lot 4 so at
this point there is no longer street or existing sidewalk there. The proposal for that area is
to bring the trail back onto the Hutchinson Spur property keeping it close to the western
property line, rather than developing it on the adjacent property
Mr. Garelick stated he is confused on how the Commission can actually separate the two
issues of the building and the trail. He said he would have difficulty voting on the trail if
he doesn’t understand what is happening with the development next to it.
Chair Morris stated that he understands Mr. Garelick’s concern and asked which of the
two issues comes first. He questioned if we do not move the trail designation, do we
even look at the plat, but if we took the plat first, we can not really approve the plat
because there is a trail designation. It is all one issue, but two separate zoning and
planning entities, so we almost have to take them individually, but they are part and
parcel.
The Commission discussed options for discussing and voting on these two issues.
87
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the reason that the items were put in this order initially is
because with the preliminary plat, the Commission needs to make a finding that it is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and obviously without showing the trail
completely on this property, it would be difficult to make that finding unless you
recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan first. She said if the Commission decided
not to recommend amending the Comprehensive Plan, for consistency, you should put a
condition in the preliminary plat that shows the trail on the property, and the City could
move forward to obtain the appropriate easements to locate it there.
With no objections or questions from the Commissioners, Chair Morris proceeded to
open the public hearing.
Greg Frank, McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc., stated that in respect to the trail, the
trail alignment and the trail grades were developed by the City’s consultant after some
review with them as they started the initial concept for the development of the site. He
said that the consultant took them through a process that the City’s planner has touched
on, came up with an alignment along that parkway that would be principally in the
existing right of way. Once it gets to the back of the culdesac continuing to the south, it
would go on the former railroad property and those easements have already been deeded
to the City as part of land acquisition. The easement was reviewed by the consultant for
needs of ongoing maintenance of that easement for trail purposes along the entire
corridor.
Herbert Schechter, 8621 W. 29th Street, stated that he agrees that it is very difficult to
deal with these issues in pieces and was not sure how to address the Commission,
because some of the concerns about the trail are amplified when you put the development
with that. He provided some background about his service on City Boards and
Commissions and noted he is Vice President of the Sholom Community Alliance. He
said he believes that it is ironic that we are talking about this trail, because it was Sholom
Home that owned the land, put in Phillips Parkway, built the sidewalks and berms,
planted the trees, put in the park benches and dedicated all that to the City. This is an
important aspect to the Sholom community because we have seniors in which a
significant part of the recreational activity of these people is just walking on the sidewalk
and moving around in the community. He said it was an incompatible activity to try to
take bicycles and rollerbladers, etc. and mix them together on one sidewalk with senior
citizens, some of whom may be in walkers and can not maneuver very well. He referred
to the death of a pedestrian by a bicyclist on a Minneapolis mixed use trail. He does not
want to eliminate a city sidewalk and run this trail down the sidewalk. He said this
development is incompatible with the sidewalk and trail system and development in the
area already and the challenge is to come up with a solution so that ultimately the
property owner can have some use of his property, that the City can have a trail system
and the people can have a safe sidewalk to walk on and do all of this without causing a
nuisance to the people in the community.
88
Bruce Kahn, 2206 Sherwood Court, Chief Executive Officer of Sholom Community
Alliance, stated that he has the same dilemma of what goes first. He said it is important
to note that of the 400 residents in the community, the youngest resident is 72 years old
and the average age is 85 years old. He is concerned about the safety of senior residents
and stated that Phillips Parkway is busy already and he would be unhappy with additional
traffic in that area.
Fanny Shanfield, 3630 Phillips Parkway, Knollwood Place, stated that she walks the
sidewalks and grounds and she cannot see where there can be cars coming two ways,
bicycles, and the proposed buildings. She suggested facing the buildings toward Target
to eliminate traffic congestion. She said that residents who walk on the sidewalk need
benches to rest on. The situation is difficult now. She said they had hoped for a pathway
across the berm.
Bob Kanter, 3630 Phillips Parkway, Knollwood Place, stated that he walks every morning
per doctors orders and is concerned where he and his wife would walk if the sidewalk
was eliminated. He is also concerned about the idea of using the same trail for bicyclists
and rollerbladers. He thought it is incomprehensible to see what was being done here in
regards to consideration of the elderly
Rita Greenberg, 3600 Phillips Parkway, Menorah West, explained that residents use the
sidewalks and asked that the City not to take away the sidewalk because they would not
have another safe place to walk, and deprive them of walking at all. She also
recommended that the City plow the sidewalk adjacent to the car wash for the
convenience of area residents so they can have access to area businesses.
Steven Steuck, 8812 W. 36th Street, Apt 2 asked what the plans were for the trees along
the western edge of the proposed project.
Ms. Jeremiah indicated that a master plan is being developed for the trail and the
landscaping plan would be part of that project. There are preliminatry plans to relocate
trees.
Helen Frank, Knollwood Place, stated that walking is the only exercise she could do and
she uses Phillips Parkway. She is concerned about the elimination of sidewalk and
removal of trees.
There being no one else wishing to speak, Chair Morris closed the public hearing.
Mr. Garelick emphasized the importance of the neighborhood as you drive by this plot of
land that houses several hundred people and is called the Ackerberg Campus. He said
that St. Louis Park is going through a stage of aging and with the uniqueness of this
Sholom community he is concerned for their safety after completing the Commission bus
tour. He feels it is a bad idea to take away the safety barrier to stop them from walking
into adjacent parking lots. It will destroy the integrity of the little neighborhood and if
89
you mix older people with new development, something is going to happen if there isn’t
the safety factor in a place where they can walk. He stated he is very pro-business in St.
Louis Park, and wants to see new development, but this is flashing a red light that is
nothing but a problem that will happen to someone walking on the street. The trail must
be maintained, but where it is going to be placed so it doesn’t interfere with a lifestyle of
these people so other people’s lifestyles could override their own lifestyle needs to be
considered. He recommended that this go back for study to evaluate if there is a way to
move the buildings around and come up with solution that all people are taken care of
instead of this vital small link that will deprive these people of the safety link to the
shopping and businesses they are using.
Mr. Gothberg stated he understands the safety issues of walking on a sidewalk. He said
one of the things that will happen if you leave the sidewalk in place, irrespective of where
you put the trail, is that pedestrians, bicyclers and rollerbladers would be using a narrow
sidewalk. He suggested the City consider constructing a sidewalk on the west side of the
parkway which could be clearly marked for walkers only. He said he believes the City is
responsible for maintaining sidewalks in St. Louis Park and good access for residents to
area businesses.
Ms. Velick stated that although the Commission desires to see a continuous bike trail,
these plans are a recipe for disaster considering all the safety issues raised and she would
like to see this issue to go back to staff for further study and revision.
Chair Morris stated that the Commission could not just table the motion, but could defer
the issue back to staff to prepare a more detailed presentation considering the discussion
items that have been raised regarding the trail section, since the the Commission felt that
this item was not clearly identified enough to make a decision.
Ms. Velick asked for clarification of the Commission’s options.
Chair Morris stated that we have a recommendation to amend the Comprehensive Plan.
He said it is his understanding that the Commission can either recommend that no action
be taken, that the Commission can forward with opinions, or the Commission can table or
hold the item over to another date. He said that there is not a design phase at this point,
but just an idea of taking the trail out of the designated comprehensive plan trail
alignment, but not how it is going to be built once it is out of that alignment.
Mr. Garelick asked if the Commission could recommend that the trail not interfere with
the existing sidewalk and revise it from there. He would like to see some type of
compromise between the developer and staff that takes in all the considerations of safety.
Mr. Carver moved to table the Comprehensive Plan amendment at this point and the
motion passed on a vote of 6-0 with Carver, Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Timian and
Velick voting in favor.
90
(This item was removed from the table later in the meeting for further discussion and a
motion to continue.)
B. Case No. 98-35-S -- Request by McCullough Companies for preliminary plat
approval for Minnehaha Trails Office Park.
Janet Jeremiah, Planning Manager, presented a staff report and recommended that the
City Council adopt a resolution approving the preliminary plat subject to the 14
conditions in the staff report. She reviewed the sidewalk issue and specifics of the plan.
She stated that this plan is for the private development parcel and does not include the
plans that the City’s consultant is working on for the trail along Phillip’s Parkway. If this
is something that the Commission would like to see, then we need to bring in our
consultant to review the detailed trail plans.
Mr. Gothberg asked if someone wanted to do something different with lot lines, would
they have to come back with another preliminary plat.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that this is correct.
Mr. Gothberg asked if the developer decided to put in some high density residential
housing on the site, could they also do this within the zoning ordinance.
Ms. Jeremiah stated they could do this, but there would need to be a reconfiguration and
the parking requirements would need to be revisited. If the proposal turns into residential
development a conditional use permit would be required and it would come back before
the Commission for a recommendation and City Council for a public hearing.
Ms. Velick asked for clarification of height limitations.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that there is a fairly substantial height allowance in that district.
However, taller buildings require larger setbacks from the property lines and there is little
room to accommodate taller buildings.
Chair Morris said he is confused as to why this development only requires a sidewalk on
36th and no sidewalk anywhere else, and asked how the office workers that want to
commute to work by bus are going to get from Lot 4 up to 36th street. He asked if the
assumption is that they are going to use the City’s recreational trail as the City’s sidewalk.
Ms. Jeremiah said she believes that Chair Morris’ assumption is correct and that the
recreational trail is suppose to be a multi-use trail accommodating both bicycles and
pedestrians. The reason why a sidewalk was not a recommended part of this development
along Phillips Parkway is the City’s interest in improving that to a full multi-use trail.
She said the issue that has been raised that there be a dedicated sidewalk on the west side
of Phillips Parkway is a good one and something that could be part of the Commission’s
recommendation.
91
Chair Morris quoted a portion of the subdivision ordinance as to design standards
“sidewalks or multi-purpose trailways shall be provided on both sides of all public streets
whether existing or new.” He said sidewalks should be required on both sides if there is
not a separate sidewalk on the east side.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that there is an assumption that both sides of the street are being
platted together, and of course that is not happening here. The west side of the street was
platted and developed a long time ago before we required the sidewalk and now the east
side is coming in and rather than a sidewalk, the trail is being taken to fulfill that
requirement. She said she could get the City Attorney’s interpretation on whether he
believes it would be feasible to require this development to provide a sidewalk on the
other side of the street.
Ms. Garelick said he is concerned about crossovers where the snow piles would be so
high that the visibility will be restricted.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the private development would not be allowed to stockpile snow
in the public right of way. She stated that the City does not generally get involved with
specifying how snow is stockpiled on private properties. However, a concern with the
effects of future snow stockpiling from this property has been brought to staff’s attention.
It seems reasonable that the City take some responsibility up front and try to avoid future
problems between the different property owners and ensure that our interest in keeping
the trail safe is not hindered by the private development. Therefore, staff has included a
condition of approval to ensure that future snow stockpiling does not create a negative
effect on adjacent properties or the public trail.
Mr. Timian asked if having four entries was setting the bicyclists up for a dangerous
situation.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the trail will have to go through many different environments
and will be different in character in this commercial area. She noted that there will likely
be some signage on the public right of way at these public entrances as well as where the
trail crosses public streets.
Mr. Timian asked what the reason is for not putting a trail on west side of Phillips
Parkway.
Ms. Jeremiah believed that the concerns of the Sholom residents would be exacerbated by
that idea because they would absolutely have to cross it. She said now they can stay on
property to the west and not cross Phillips Parkway or a trail.
Mr. Carver asked a question about the fire department’s concern about access to all five
buildings. He said if there were also requirements for the other four buildings to be
sprinklered would that elevate the fire department’s concern about access.
92
Ms. Jeremiah didn’t believe this would elevate their concern, because there are still limits
if the building is sprinklered. She said one of the issues is the actual distance and the
other issue is the provision of a full turnaround for emergency vehicles.
Mr. Carver asked if a secondary emergency only access was feasible.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the fire department generally does not like to see those fire
department or emergency vehicle only accesses because they create the issue of needing a
gate across the access with a keyed access to the gates, or anyone can use them.
Mr. Carver asked at which intersection with 36th Street was there a potential concern
about.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that due to the narrow width of this property, trying to get a driveway
from 36th into this development would be less than 100 feet from the Phillips Parkway
main right of way and that would be the conflict point.
Ms. Garelick observed that the City is trying to put a square peg in a round hole with all
the emergency concerns raised and believes this is a bad idea and asked if there was a
way to table this until a solution could be worked out.
Chair Morris stated options and asked staff what the time limits are.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the City has 60 days from the time the City receives the
completed application. The Commission could request an extension, but would need to
state reasons for requesting that and it would still have to be decided upon within 120
days total.
Chair Morris stated that the Commission has to examine whether the proposed platting
and subdivision use is compatible within the zoning and comprehensive plan and then
whether we need to fine tune what is being proposed. In his opinion in terms of usage, he
thinks the office is going to be a less dense usage than R-50 residential and if we are not
opposed to the concept of an office complex being built, then what we are dealing with is
if the preliminary plat is suitable for the design that is desired.
Mr. Garelick stated that at this point he would vote for a very strong denial unless he
could see a compromise.
Mr. Gothberg said that it is important to continue with the public hearing to get the rest of
the input from those present.
Chair Morris stated that the Commission should have the public hearing, but continue it,
because between the continuation tonight and what new information may become
93
available, there is still a public hearing format in two weeks to discuss what changes have
been proposed and hear from the public again.
Chair Morris opened the public hearing with the intent to continue the public hearing
after the Commission heard some input from the residents in the neighborhood.
Greg Frank, McCombs Frank Roos Associates, noted how thorough the staff report was.
He stated that the reason why access on the east side is not viable is that there is a 25 foot
building set back from the east property line. That is a rear lot by the City’s definition and
if a roadway is built there it would effectively be right up against the building and the
property line and not meet setback requirement and impact potential business sizing.
Secondly, the grades on the site fall from the west to the east approximately 8-10 feet. He
pointed out that this is a preliminary plat and not a site plan and they are not showing that
these buildings are going to be built this way. There are ways to mitigate the impact and
he suggested that as those buildings are sited, they can investigate alternatives for fewer
accesses into property and possibly rotate buildings 1 and 2.
Steven Steuck, 8812 West 36th Street, Apt 2, asked what size the buildings were going to
be.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the “footprints” of the 2-story buildings on Lots 1-4 are to be
approximately 3,000 square feet and the building on lot 5 is one story with 6,000 square
feet.
Mr. Steuck asked if any leveling would be done or would the building go into the slope.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the proposal involves regrading to minimize some of the slope
and the flat areas can be created for the parking lot and building pads.
Mr. Steuck asked how many parking stalls were proposed for site.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that she did not recall the exact number of parking stalls, but it did
meet the requirements for parking.
Herbert Schechter, 8621 W. 29th Street, stated that it is obvious that this proposal is
challenging and the design is not compatible with the adjoining property, needs for trail
system, fire requirements and believes it could probably be fixed, but would take time.
He is concerned about safety with the four intersections on Phillips Parkway and believes
it is clear that the alignment, as present, is dangerous. In his review of the proposal, he
believes it is clear that the developer did not take into account a variety of the ordinances,
and staff has picked up on a number of things. He is interested in having a safe
development. He said if you put this whole project together and do an access from 36th it
would be preferable for everyone. He indicated that Sholom Alliance would consider a
realignment of Phillips Parkway to have a safe and compatible type of development. He
does not believe it is his place to do a development plan or the Commission’s place, but it
94
demonstrates that this is a rather shallow approach to do a preliminary plat and as a result
end up with these four or five lots which we do not know what they really are going to do
with.
Bruce Kahn, 2206 Shorewood Court, stated that there are an excessive amount of
driveways on a very small piece of land and he is concerned about the potential danger
for citizens safety who are using walkways and noted impaired reflexes of seniors as a
factor. He noted the need for a walk through to the Target area. He stated he wanted to
continue to be good neighbors and work with developer, but believes that there is a lot of
work to do.
Fanny Shanfield, 3630 Phillips Parkway, stated that Lot 5 is too close to the culdesac
where residents turn into their garages and the street is not wide enough.
Bob Kanter, 3630 Phillips Parkway, said he is concerned about paramedic and ambulance
access being hindered by increased traffic and asked if the sidewalk is serviced by the
City. He does not think there would be a problem with putting in a sidewalk on the other
side.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that the existing sidewalk is serviced by the City.
Mr. Timian asked where ambulances enter the property.
Chair Morris stated they turn in off 36th Street.
Rita Greenberg, 3600 Phillips Parkway, stated that the proposed plan is very dangerous
for residents and hoped professional people could find a solution.
Helene Frank, Knollwood Place, said she believes the tranquility of the area would be
lost.
Susan Farr, Administrator of Knollwood Place, stated that when elderly people walk they
look down and this will be problem with increased amount of activity.
Chair Morris closed the public hearing.
Mr. Garelick reiterated that the argument of safety and integrity of the neighborhood are
the main two factors. He believed the Commission wants to see some kind of
development, but it has to be compatible with specific housing and the people who live in
the area or they may leave. He suggested that this issue be tabled until all parties have
reviewed recommendations and then the issue can be revisited again.
Chair Morris stated that he anticipated what the Commission should do was to make two
motions, the first to move to continue the public hearing of the preliminary plat and
95
secondly to move to bring Comprehensive Plan amendment off the table for further
discussion.
Mr. Gothberg moved to continue public hearing on the preliminary plat to the next
Planning Commission of December 2, 1998 and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0 with
Carver, Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Timian and Velick voting in favor.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that staff would like any additional direction that the Commission
can provide on their preference. She noted 2 alternatives would be to reconfigure the
development and keep the existing sidewalk, or building a new sidewalk on the west side
of Phillips Parkway and keep the trail as is currently proposed.
Mr. Garelick indicated that he preferred to have a sidewalk on one side of Phillips
Parkway and trail on the other side.
Ms. Velick moved to remove Case No. 98-30-CP from table for discussion and the
motion passed on a vote of 6-0 with Carver, Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Timian and
Velick voting in favor.
Chair Morris recommended that the Commission prioritize issues for staff.
Ms. Velick asked staff to look at the trail reconfiguration on the east side of property.
Mr. Timian asked staff to look at extending the sidewalk on the west side of Phillips
Parkway.
Chair Morris summarized the Commission’s preference.
Alternative A: Staff look at separating the sidewalk from the trail with a preference that
the sidewalk be to the west of Phillips Parkway and the trail being east of Phillips
Parkway.
Alternative B: Staff look at retaining the sidewalk on the east side of Phillips Parkway
and move the trail designation to the east side of the preliminary plat.
The Commission directed staff to keep in mind the undesirability of intermingling the
recreational trail and pedestrian usage for the residents of the neighborhood.
The Commission directed staff to examine accessibility into the site off of Phillips
Parkway to diminish the amount of traffic using Phillips Parkway that is currently being
projected both because of trail designation and intermingling of traffic. Also, focus on
emergency vehicles access to residents and proposed site.
Chair Morris asked staff if a traffic study was conducted on this site.
96
Ms. Jeremiah stated that there was a cursory look at traffic based on the standard of what
you would anticipate from offices of this size and there were no concerns raised from
public works or the fire department.
Mr. Garelick stated there should be adequate passage for any fire trucks that go in and out
of the adjoining properties because it is an area that is so highly used for emergency
vehicles at this point.
Chair Morris indicated that Phillips Parkway is unique in that it has less traffic than any
typical street because residents are not vehicle users.
Mr. Timian stated that no matter how the property is developed, given the nature of
community, there still needs to be sidewalk on the west side of Phillips Parkway.
Mr. Gothberg stated that the idea of the trail and sidewalk task force was to look at the
entire community and prioritize things and targeted them for inclusion of the
Comprehensive Plan update. He stated that in this instance, since the developer does not
have to put in a sidewalk on their side of the development, maybe they should put in a
sidewalk on the west side of Phillips Parkway.
Ms. Jeremiah asked for clarification of limiting conflict between emergency vehicles and
limiting the driveways. She asked if the Commission is mainly interested in looking at
the consolidation of the driveways on Phillips Parkway or strongly considering the access
from 36th Street.
Mr. Garelick stated that he believes the access off 36th going into the Phillips Parkway
meets the needs of the residents, but asked if there is enough room for fire trucks and
emergency vehicles to go into the small area that is projected as a development.
Ms. Jeremiah stated that this issue was reviewed by the fire department and they are
comfortable with access as it is shown on this plan. She indicated the bigger question is
what happens if we reduce or change the design of access points and at that point the fire
department will need to revisit the issue.
Mr. Gothberg recommended having the person who worked on the design of the trail
attend the next meeting to explain reasons for trail placement.
Mr. Garelick moved that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment be referred back to staff
with the recommendations of the Commission and the motion passed on a vote of6-0 with
Carver, Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Timian and Velick voting in favor.
4. Old Business - None
5. New Business
97
A. Consent Agenda - None
B. Other New Business
i. Case No. 98-40-CUP -- Amendment to Official Map - Move trail
designation off of a portion of the Hutchinson Spur railroad right-or-
way south of 36th Street.
Mr. Garelick moved to continue Case No. 98-40-CUP to the next Planning
Commission meeting on December 2, 1998 and the motion passed on a vote of 6-
0 with Carver, Garelick, Gothberg, Morris, Timian and Velick voting in favor.
6. Communications
A. Recent City Council Action - November 16, 1998
B. Other
7. Miscellaneous
On behalf of the Commission, Mr. Garelick commended staff on how professional and
thorough their work has been and noted that it made their work much easier.
8. Adjournment
Chair Morris adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Janice Loftus
Administrative Secretary
Prepared by:
Shirley Olson
Recording Secretary
98
Item #9c*
City of St. Louis Park
Human Rights Commission
Meeting Minutes - November 18, 1998
First Floor Community Room - City Hall
______________________________________________________________________________
Present
Commission: John Archbold, Marc Berg, Barry Dunayer, Laurel Higgins, Herb Isbin
and Judith Moore.
Staff: Martha McDonell, Staff Liaison, and Lynn Schwartz, Recording Secretary
Chairperson Laurel Higgins called the meeting called to order at 7:04 p.m.
Approval of Minutes
Moved by Herb Isbin and seconded by Barry Dunayer to approve the October minutes with the
following corrections:
• The minutes should read that the School Board should appoint--rather than nominate--a
representative to the Human Rights Commission.
• The minutes should read that commission members should ask students from the Human
Mosaic Project to apply to the Human Rights Commission.
Agenda
Members agreed to add a discussion of affirmative action to the agenda.
1. Old Businesses
Human Rights Award: Eileen Soderberg will be presented the Human Rights Award at the
December 7 City Council meeting. Higgins urged commission members to come to the City
Council meeting to show their appreciation for Ms. Soderberg’s work. Laurel Higgins shared the
wording for the plaque that will be presented to Soderberg. Martha McDonell reported that she
will have flowers sent to Soderberg on December 4. Lynn Schwartz reported that the news
release on the award has been distributed to School District publications as well as the St. Louis
Park Sun-Sailor and the Park Perspective.
Martha McDonell reported on her research of other individuals who may have received the
Human Rights award but whose names don’t appear on the City Hall plaque. McDonell found
that Gloria Segal’s name should be added; she is still looking for one other person who may have
been an award recipient. McDonell will contact past commission members to see if they recall
any other award recipients.
99
Bias/Hate Crime Response Plan: Laurel Higgins reported that the Commission’s revised
Bias/Hate Crime Response Plan will be on the consent agenda at the City Council’s December 7
meeting. Members may wish to remain at the meeting in case there is any discussion of the plan.
Phone Line: Barry Dunayer reported that one call was made to the Human Rights Phone Line.
The caller’s message did not specify what type of help she was seeking. Dunayer reported that
he phoned the caller’s number on three separate occasions but was unable to reach the caller.
Despite leaving his number, the caller never returned any of Dunayer’s phone calls.
Herb Isbin noted that he called the phone line and found the system’s menu selections somewhat
cumbersome. Isbin wondered whether the system could be streamlined. After a general
discussion on the phone line’s goals, Judith Moore suggested that Isbin research how to make the
menu less cumbersome without removing any of the current topics from the menu.
Martha McDonell added that the phone line could be changed to allow callers to opt out of the
voicemail program and speak with a staff person during regular business hours. Judith Moore
stated that she prefers that callers leave messages so commissioners can respond to callers.
December Celebration: Martha McDonell asked members if they wished to have some kind of
celebration to mark the term endings for Barry Dunayer and Michael Brandt as well as celebrate
the commission’s accomplishments over the past year. The group decided to order food and
combine a celebration with a short meeting. McDonell will take care of the arrangements.
Strategic Plan: Herb Isbin asked whether commission members knew if City ordinance or
policy includes an affirmative action requirement. Martha McDonell responded that the City
follows State of Minnesota guidelines and requires an affirmative action plan for companies
seeking large City contracts. Contractors provide certification to the City; however, the City
does not check these claims or certify companies. Isbin then asked whether the Human Rights
Commission ought to make affirmative action part of its strategic plan: either to be a strong
advocate of affirmation action or to educate the community about affirmative action.
John Archbold cautioned that affirmation action issues can be extremely complex and time
consuming. Marc Berg felt it would be appropriate for the Commission to monitor whether the
City follows its affirmative action policy for large contracts. Berg added that he felt the Human
Rights Commission has no affirmative action role in dealing with companies that simply happen
to be located in St. Louis Park. Berg also thought it might be appropriate to examine the City’s
practices and recommend a policy for consideration by the City Council. Barry Dunayer
suggested that the commission might also offer seminars on the topic. Members agreed to place
the issue on the work plan in case any commission members wish to work on this topic.
Strategic Plan: Members then discussed possible projects for inclusion in its 1999-2001
Strategic Plan. Herb suggested that the plan reflect the goals outlined in the commission’s
bylaws. Once the commission agrees on a plan, action items would be detailed in a report that
will be submitted to the City Council for authorization. The following projects were then
discussed.
100
1. Report and Refer
• Maintain phone line
• Review process and recommend improvements
2. Public Awareness
• Educate citizens about their rights and what constitutes a human rights violation
• Present an annual Human Rights Award
• Sponsor a Martin Luther King Day event and guest speaker
• Create or obtain programs for cable TV on human rights topics
• Update the commission’s brochure and distribute remaining copies as needed
• Contact the library, community education and other St. Louis Park entities about including
human rights information in their programs
• Promote the Human Rights Commission’s phone line
• Promote diversity by writing features for the Sun-Sailor about individual St. Louis Park
residents to show the diversity of the community
• Promote affirmative action
3. School Involvement
• Attend school board meetings
• Advocate that diversity issues be included in the School District’s Strategic Plan
• Support initiatives such as the Human Mosaic Project
• Direct students seeking community service projects to human rights projects
4. Review and Update Bylaws
5. Solicit Members for Human Rights Commission
6. Continue New Member Orientation
• Update materials, add new census data and provide the work plan to new members along
with a project sign-up form
2. New Business
Bias Complaints: Martha McDonell reported that there were no bias complaints received on the
phone line or reported to the Police Department during the past month.
School Board Appointee: Members asked McDonell to write a letter to the St. Louis Park
School Board asking them to appoint a representative to the Human Rights Commission.
Announcements: Barry Dunayer said he appreciated the recognition and certificates presented
to outgoing commission members at the recent City Council meeting.
101
Martha McDonell handed out a survey from the Friends of the Arts and asked commission
members to complete and return the survey.
December Agenda: Commission members agreed to add the following items to the December
agenda:
• Review commission history book
• Review work plan
3. Adjournment
A motion to adjourn was made by Judith Moore and seconded by John Archbold. Motion passed
unanimously. With no further business, the commission adjourned at 9:03 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lynn Schwartz
Recording Secretary
102
Item # 9d*
MINUTES
POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
DECEMBER 2, 1998 - 8:00 AM
THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM AT CITY HALL
1) The meeting was called to order at 8:07 a.m. The following were present:
Commissioners Jim Lanenberg and Bryan Leary. Also present was Staff Liaison Nancy
Gohman.
2) A motion was made by Commissioner Leary , seconded by Commissioner Lanenberg, to
approve the minutes of November 16, 1998. The motion carried.
.
3) The Commission discussed and reviewed scores from the Lieutenant process. A motion
was made by Commissioner Leary, seconded by Commissioner Lanenberg, to certify
four candidates to fill two vacancies for Police Lieutenant as requested by the City
Manager in a letter to the Commissioners. The motion carried. The four certified are:
Kirk DiLorenzo
Mark Ortner
Lorin Kramer
Phil Stuemke
4) A motion was made by Commissioner Leary, seconded by Commissioner Lanenberg, to
remove Jennifer Wolter and Doug Whittaker from the Police Officer Eligibility List. The
motion carried.
5) The Commission discussed selection of a Chair due to the resignation of past Chair
Darcel Lewis. A motion was made by Commissioner Leary, seconded by Commissioner
Lanenberg, to appoint Jim Lanenberg as Chair of the Police Civil Service Commission.
The motion carried.
6) The meeting adjourned at 8:25 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Gohman
City Staff Liaison to the Police Civil Service Commission
103
City of St. Louis Park
City Council Agenda Item # 11a
Meeting of December 21, 1998
11a. Golden Valley Dispatch Contract
Approval of agreement between St. Louis Park and Golden Valley for provision of
dispatch services and operation and maintenance of the Emergency
Communications Center.
Recommended
Action:
Motion to approve the contract to provide dispatching services
for the City of Golden Valley and authorize the Mayor and City
Manager to execute contract.
Background:
During the first quarter of 1998, staff members of the St. Louis Park Police Department began a
budget analysis in preparation for 1999 budget discussions. At the time of the analysis, the St.
Louis Park Police Communications Center did not have a separate operating budget, and all
operating costs were merged within the general operating budget of the police department,
making it difficult to accurately analyze the contract for dispatch services with the City of Golden
Valley.
During the 1999 budget process, operating costs attached to the Communications Center were
identified and placed in a separate stand-alone budget, and several meetings were held with
Director Mooney and members of the Golden Valley Public Safety staff. As a result of these
actions, the following conclusions were reached:
1. Workload distribution and calls for service activity support a 64% St. Louis Park and 36%
Golden Valley distribution of the operating budget of the Communications Center.
2. The current contract does not accurately reflect this cost distribution and, therefore, should
not be renewed.
3. The 1999 estimated operating budget for the Communications Center is $634,101. Golden
Valley’s share at 36% would be $228,276.
Because the negotiated formula increases the Communications Center costs paid by the City of
Golden Valley from approximately $180,000 to $228,000, it was agreed that 1999 would be a
transitional year in the adoption of this formula. In 1999, the City of Golden Valley will pay
$205,602.21, representing 32% of the Communications Center operating budget. In the year
2000 and beyond, the City of Golden Valley will pay 36% of the operating budget of the
Communications Center.
104
It should be noted that the Golden Valley Department of Public Safety has been and continues to
be an outstanding partner and customer.
Attachments: Agreement between St. Louis Park and Golden Valley for provision of
dispatch services and operation and maintenance of the Emergency
Communications Center.
Prepared by: John Luse, Chief of Police
Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager
105
AGREEMENT BETWEEN ST. LOUIS PARK AND
GOLDEN VALLEY FOR PROVISION OF DISPATCH
SERVICES AND OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF
THE EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS CENTER
AGREEMENT, made this _______ day of_______________, 1998, by and between
the City of SLP, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("St. Louis Park") and the City of
Golden Valley, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("Golden Valley").
WHEREAS, the governmental units signatory hereto are empowered by law to
provide and to contract for police, fire and emergency dispatch services, and, by virtue of
their respective needs and geographic proximity, find it in their common interest and for
their common benefit and the benefit of their citizens for St. Louis Park to provide
dispatch services to Golden Valley utilizing the St. Louis Park Emergency
Communications Center ("E.C.C."); and
WHEREAS, Golden Valley desires that St. Louis Park receive and dispatch Golden
Valley police, fire and emergency radio calls; and
WHEREAS, St. Louis Park desires to handle such police, fire and emergency
dispatch calls for Golden Valley; and
WHEREAS, this Agreement is made pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 436.05, and whereas
this Agreement is not made pursuant to Minn. State §§ 471.59 or 436.06 and should not
be construed as creating a joint powers entity or a joint municipal police department; and
WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to establish an annual fee be paid by Golden
Valley to compensate St. Louis Park for the provision of dispatch services:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein,
the parties agree as follows:
I. Dispatch Services and Operation and Maintenance of the E.C.C. St. Louis Park
shall operate the E.C.C. for its own use and shall provide dispatch services to Golden
valley as follows:
A. St. Louis Park, by utilizing its personnel and facilities, will
handle the receiving and dispatching of all police, fire and
emergency calls for Golden Valley and St. Louis Park.
B. St. Louis Park will supply police radio dispatch equipment and
personnel to operate and maintain said radio dispatch equipment
for the E.C.C.
On termination of this Agreement, all equipment shall be the
property of St. Louis Park, except equipment originally
106
purchased by Golden Valley, and currently used in the E.C.C.,
which shall remain the property of Golden Valley.
C. Personnel. The E.C.C. shall be operated by dispatchers who
shall be employees of St. Louis Park. The dispatchers shall be
supervised by a P.S.A.P. Manager. Community service officers
trained to provide back-up relief may be used to supplement
dispatchers. All dispatch personnel needed to staff the E.C.C.
shall be hired by St. Louis Park through its normal hiring
procedures.
The Police Chiefs for Golden Valley and St. Louis Park or their
designees shall meet as needed to address issues concerning
provision of dispatch services or operation of the E.C.C.
D. Insurance. St. Louis Park and Golden Valley shall each maintain
insurance coverage or equivalent pooled self-insurance coverage
in the minimum amount of the liability limits established in
Minn. Stat. Ch. 466, which shall protect both Cities from any
and all claims that might be made against either or both Cities as
a result of the operations or the services set forth herein.
E. Holding Facility. St. Louis Park shall provide booking of
prisoners for Golden Valley without additional charge. Golden
Valley represents it will continue its current practice with regard
to booking prisoners and represents it does not intend to modify
its booking policy. If bookings in 1999 or subsequent years
exceed 1998 bookings by 50% or more, St. Louis Park may
implement a fee for booking prisoners. The fee shall be as
mutually agreed by the parties.
II. Annual Budget. St. Louis Park shall establish an annual operating budget for
dispatch services and operation and maintenance of the E.C.C. (the "Annual
Budget"). St. Louis Park shall provide the preliminary Annual Budget for the next
calendar year to Golden Valley on or about August 1st of each year. St. Louis Park
may amend the preliminary Annual Budget from time to time. The Annual Budget
shall be adopted by the St. Louis Park City Council (the "Approved Annual Budget").
III. Payment for Dispatch Services and Operation and Maintenance of the E.C.C. for
1999. For calendar year 1999 only, Golden Valley shall pay St. Louis Park the
amount of Two Hundred Five Thousand Six Hundred Two and 21/100 ($205,602.21)
per year; Seventeen Thousand One Hundred Thirty Three and 52/100 ($17,133.52)
per month for services provided to Golden Valley pursuant to this Agreement. St.
Louis Park shall send a monthly invoice to Golden Valley. Golden Valley shall make
payment to St. Louis Park within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice.
107
IV. Payment for Dispatch Services and Operation and Maintenance of the E.C.C. for
2000 and Subsequent years. For calendar year 2000, and subsequent years, Golden
Valley shall pay St. Louis Park, on an annual basis, an amount equal to thirty-six
percent (36%) of the Approved Annual Budget. St. Louis Park shall send a monthly
invoice for one-twelfth of the Approved Annual Budget to Golden Valley. Golden
Valley shall make payment to St. Louis Park within thirty (30) days of receipt of the
invoice.
V. 9-1-1 Funds. As additional compensation for services provided hereunder, Golden
Valley shall assign to St. Louis Park all 9-1-1 funds it is entitled to receive pursuant
to Minn. Stat. § 403.11. Golden Valley's 9-1-1 funds now come directly from
Hennepin County to St. Louis Park. Golden Valley agrees and consents to the
continuation of this arrangement. St. Louis Park shall deposit the 9-1-1 funds
received from Hennepin county on behalf of Golden Valley in a separate account
established for that purpose. The 9-1-1 funds so deposited shall be the sole property
of St. Louis Park, and shall be used at the sole discretion of St. Louis Park, subject
only to the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 403.113. The 9-1-1 funds shall not be credited
towards amounts owed by Golden Valley pursuant to Section III and IV of this
Agreement.
VI. Unbudgeted Expenses. St. Louis Park will use its best efforts to prepare the Annual
Budget to include all reasonably foreseeable expenses for provision of dispatch
services and operation and maintenance of the E.C.C. Certain expenses are not
reasonably foreseeable, such as capital expenditures due to equipment failure,
unexpected need for overtime hours, implementation of recommendations made by
consultants for needs which are immediate and unbudgeted, changes in required
services due to new legislation, and the like. This listing is for illustrative purposes
only, and not intended as a limitation on reimbursement for unforeseen expenses.
Golden Valley acknowledges the difficulty of anticipating all true operating expenses
of the E.C.C. Therefore, Golden Valley shall reimburse St. Louis Park in the amount
of thirty-six percent (36%) of all expenses actually incurred by St. Louis Park for
provision of dispatch services, and operation and maintenance of the E.C.C., which
are not included in the Approved Annual Budget. St. Louis Park shall use its best
efforts to minimize unbudgeted expenses.
VII. F.C.C. Licenses. Current F.C.C. licenses held by Golden Valley and St. Louis Park
shall remain the property of the license-holder. Golden Valley and St. Louis Park
will fully cooperate with each other as necessary for providing for the joint use and
sharing of radio frequencies.
VIII. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be for an initial term of five (5) years,
commencing upon January 1, 1999, with automatic one-year renewals thereafter
unless a written termination notice is delivered by either party one year in advance of
the effective date of the termination.
108
IX. Indemnity. Each City shall defend and hold harmless the other City from any claims
arising from any act or omission on the part of its own officers, employees, agents,
contractors or representatives, including any attorney's fees and expenses incurred in
defending any such claim. Nothing herein shall change or waive liability limits
established under Minn. Stat. Ch. 466.
X. Assignment. Neither party to this Agreement may assign its interest in the
Agreement without prior written approval of the other party and subject to such
conditions and provisions as the other party may deem necessary.
XI. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended from time to time as the parties
deem necessary. No amendment shall be effective unless agreed to in writing by the
parties.
XII. Entire Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the entire Agreement of the
parties is contained herein and that this Agreement supersedes all oral Agreements
and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as
any previous Agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the
subject matter hereof.
XIII. Severability. If any term of this Agreement is found to be void or invalid, such
invalidity shall not affect the remaining terms of this Agreement, which shall
continue in full force and effect.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement the day and year
first above written.
CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK
By: ___________________________________
Gail Dorfman
Its: Mayor
Attest: _________________________ By: __________________________________
City Clerk Charles W. Meyer
Its: City Manager
CITY OF GOLDEN VALLEY
By: ___________________________________
Its: Mayor
Attest: _________________________ By: __________________________________
City Clerk Its: City Manager