HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025/04/28 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionAGENDA
APRIL 28, 2025
6:00 p.m. 2025 St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization – Community Room
Action item
1. Reconvene the St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Following LBAE meeting – Study session – Community Room
Written reports
1. Connected infrastructure system wrap-up
2. Development update 2nd quarter 2025
3. Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report
4. Council decisions for development projects
Members of the public can attend St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and city council meetings in person. At regular
city council meetings, members of the public may comment on any item on the agenda by attending the meeting in-person or by
submitting written comments to info@stlouisparkmn.gov by noon the day of the meeting. Official minutes of meetings are
available on the city website once approved.
Watch St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority or regular city council meetings live at bit.ly/watchslpcouncil or at
www.parktv.org, or on local cable (Comcast SD channel 14/HD channel 798). Recordings of the meetings are available to watch on
the city's YouTube channel at www.youtube.com/@slpcable, usually within 24 hours of the meeting’s end.
City council study sessions are not broadcast. Generally, it is not council practice to receive public comment during study sessions.
The council chambers are equipped with Hearing Loop equipment and headsets are available to borrow.
If you need special accommodations or have questions about the meeting, please call 952.924.2505.
Meeting: Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Meeting date: April 28, 2025
Action agenda item: 1
2025 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Reconvene – April 28, 2025
PROPOSED AGENDA
1. Reconvene the St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
2. Roll Call – Declaration of Quorum
3. Acknowledgement of Trained Members (Nadia Mohamed & Sue Budd)
4. Review of Properties in Appeal
A. Board Action – Not resolved, to be heard by the Local Board
B. Board Action – To be sustained, referral to the County Board
C. Board Action – To be sustained, (inspection refusal, non-response or withdrawal)
D. Board Action - Appellant & Assessing Staff are in Mutual Agreement
For appeals in groups a-b-c, it is suggested that the board review each parcel
individually, discuss as you will and make individual board rulings. For the mutual
agreement category, each parcel should be read into the record and the board may take
one group action per DOR direction (April 2016). A reminder is made that the board
packet includes reference to those parcels already read into the record and approved.
5. Instruct Assessor to Complete Record of Changes for Submittal
6. Instruct Assessor to Inform Appellants of Board Action via Mail
7. Complete the Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Certification Form
8. Adjourn if Board business is completed
Reconvene meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: 2025 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
BACKGROUND for the 2025 St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
All property owners are entitled to the right of appeal regarding their classification and market
value. The city is required by statute to conduct a Local Board of Appeal & Equalization meeting
to hear appeals or conduct an open book meeting. Owner options also include the County
Board of Appeal & Equalization and ultimately the Minnesota State Tax Court.
The focus for the board is: the property classification which is determined by use; and the
market value which is based on the characteristics of the real estate and market conditions as
of the date of the assessment (Jan. 2, 2025). Minnesota statute requires all properties to be
assessed at full market value, fee simple. The dominant definitions of market value are:
MN Statute 272.03 – “Market value” means the usual selling price at the place where
the property to which the term is applied shall be at the time of assessment; being the
price which could be obtained at a private sale or an auction sale, if it is determined by
the assessor that the price from the auction sale represents an arm’s length transaction.
The price obtained at a forced sale shall not be considered.
Appraisal Institute – The most probable price, as of a specified date, in cash or in terms
equivalent to cash, or in other precisely revealed terms, for which the specified property
rights should sell after reasonable exposure in a competitive market under all conditions
requisite to a fair sale, with the buyer and seller each acting prudently, knowledgeably,
and for self-interest, and assuming that neither is under undue duress. (The Appraisal of
Real Estate, 13th Edition, Appraisal Institute [2008], page 23)
The Board convened on April 14, 2025 at which meeting a total of seven (7) parcels were
recognized to be under appeal. One walk-in appeal was added to the roster during the meeting.
The Board set the process and scheduled the reconvene meeting as April 28, 2025 to review the
merit of those remaining open and to rule on them.
A few housekeeping observations are made for the reference of the board.
• One trained and certified Board member (Mohamed and/or Budd) must be present at
each meeting the Board is in session. Best practice is for multiple trained members.
• Timeline of the assessment: All valuations are set as of Jan. 2, 2025 relative to market
activity in the preceding year. Value influences due to changing conditions have been
reviewed from the perspective of market reactions in setting the assessment.
• The time window for the board to conclude business is 20 days after convening.
• It is essential that the Board rules on each question before it and likewise that the Board
recognizes that it can reduce, sustain, or increase valuations as deemed necessary.
Reconvene meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: 2025 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
• Important – DOR directive: “It is the board’s responsibility to hear all appeals presented
until the board adjourns. A property owner can present their appeal at the initial
meeting or at any of the reconvene meetings. The board must hear that appeal and
make a decision. The board cannot dismiss the property owner’s appeal, unless the
meeting is adjourned.” The Hennepin County Assessor has reviewed that language and
requested that Local Boards accept appeals until final adjournment.
• At the writing of this Board packet, staff has recognized additional late appeals and is
endeavoring to respond in a timely fashion.
• Prior to adjourning, the board should instruct the assessor to submit a record of their
actions on the Department of Revenue required form.
• Finally, the Local Board of Appeal Certification Form must be signed at each meeting by
all Board members present. The Hennepin delegate takes the form at meeting end.
Background to Valuation Methodologies: The modeling associated with the mass assessment
accommodates variations between neighborhoods, within neighborhoods and includes
consideration of location, age, style, size, finish materials, condition, updating, etc. depending
on the information available. Adjustments and valuation change orders have been made where
necessary during the informal review process prior to the Board.
The Board process differs from mass valuation modeling in that the assessing staff re-appraises
the subject property individually by direct comparison to market transactions. As part of the
review process, staff routinely re-inspects properties to review the accuracy of attributes and
especially current condition which is a highly important variable. Next steps are staff engaging
the property owner in a candid conversation of the assessed value, local transactions and how
the transactions provide a fact-based market indication of the subject property value.
If staff believes a reduction is warranted, this is disclosed to the owner in an attempt to
mutually resolve the valuation question. Likewise, if staff concludes that the valuation is at
market or slightly below, we inform the owner/appellant and discuss the market information.
In cases where staff revaluation does not result in a conclusion satisfactory to the appellant, the
board process is outlined. Additional questions are very common for those owners who desire
to appear before the Board. As such, the Local Board depends on active participation from all
parties involved including the property owner, assessing staff and the board members. All
property owners are requested to state their basis of appeal, their opinion of the market value
and informed that they may present information in written form and by testimony supporting
their opinion of value and/or classification.
Reconvene meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: 2025 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Focal Points for the Board – Agenda as Indicated on Cover Sheet, decisions on:
A. Board Action – Appeals to be heard by the board. As of April 23, when this packet is
being prepared, there are no cases in this category. Rationale for that statement is
dictated by timing for inspection, file work-up and discussion with the appellant. Should
this status change between now and the time for reconvene, it will be requested that the
Board hear and decide the merits of the case. As always, we inform the owner that the
Board allows 5-10 minutes for their presentation followed by a 3–5 minute presentation
by the assessing staff. The Board may adjust these time allowances as needed.
B. Board Action – Appeals moving to County Board. These are commonly a mixture of
scheduling conflicts and timeline to arrange the inspection/re-valuation work-up. The
board took action at the April 14, 2025 meeting to recognize one appeal in this
category appeal and took action to sustain the value … to preserve their right and
eligibility to move onward to the County Board. There is one additional appeal coming in
late with an inspection scheduled for Thursday, April 24, 2025. We will be doing the
value work-up and engaging the owner in discussion. The timing on this property is
problematic and we should have a status update on this appeal by Friday, April 25, 2025.
C. Board Action – Inspection refusal, non-responsive or withdrawal. There are no cases in
this category at the time of report writing. These are cases where staff has engaged with
the owner to re-inspect and re-assess the valuation. The Board is reminded that some
cases end up in this category almost every year.
D. Board Action – Resolved, board approval. As a reminder the board already took action on
appeals in mutual agreement at the time of the April 14, 2025 meeting. Since then, two
(2) additional appeals have been reviewed with the property owner and assessing staff
reaching a mutually acceptable valuation (no classifications were appealed). It is
requested that staff read each parcel action into the meeting record after which the
Board may take one group action to affirm the mutually agreements.
Per the DOR direction to accept appeals made after the notification date which has been
published and posted per legal requirements… they are highlighted in yellow on the reconvene
roster. Should there be additional late appeals in the time between this board packet and the
date of reconvene, we will be requesting their addition to the roster with proviso that we may
not have completed the review due to time constraints
Following your decision, each property owner will be notified via letter of the Board action and
remind them that they are eligible to appeal to the County Board. The Hennepin County Board
of Appeal and Equalization begins June 16, 2025. An application is requested by the County no
later than May 21. To appear before the County Board, all appellants must first have appealed
to the St. Louis Park Board of Appeal and Equalization. Property owners may also appeal
directly to the Minnesota State Tax Court.
Thank you for serving on the Board. Prepared by: St. Louis Park Assessing Staff
Reconvene meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: 2025 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization
Tab Summary
Background & Focal Points for the Board
Tab 1: Roster of All Appeals for Board Action – At Time of Packet Assembly
(the final roster update will be handed out to the Board at the meeting)
Appeals AFTER the April 14 Convene was recessed Reference 2025 Appealed Assessing Owner Board
Name Property Address Property ID #2024 Value Classification 2025 Value Revaluation Indicated Action
Patricia Maguire 4525 Park Commons Dr 221 06-028-24-43-0213 $266,900 X-Condominium $279,600 $265,600 Mutually Agreed $265,600
Patricia Maguire 4525 Park Commons Dr G22 06-028-24-43-0298 $8,800 XM- Condo-Garage $9,000 n/a Mutually Agreed $9,000
Claire Lawler 2210 Pennsylvania Ave S 08-117-21-22-0013 $446,300 R - Residential $432,600 $419,900 Mutually Agreed $419,900
Saiko McIvor & Riley McIvor 2916 Hampshire Ave S 08-117-21-43-0163 $447,200 R - Residential $472,300 $452,600 Mutually Agreed $452,600
Andrea Perea Clavijo & Druvier Pretel Rojas 2621 Zarthan Ave S 09-117-21-31-0222 $353,600 RZ- Res-Zero Lot $338,500 $314,000 Mutually Agreed $314,000
Yana Roytburg & Slava Slobodyanyuk 2919 Ottawa Ave S 31-029-24-34-0085 $839,000 R - Residential $914,200 $830,000 Mutually Agreed $830,000
Virgil Voeller II 2809 Joppa Ave S 31-029-24-44-0065 $575,100 R - Residential $605,300 Inspect? To County Board Sustain
Walk-In - April 14 Convene Meeting
Daniel Lindgren 2810 Ottawa Ave S 31-029-24-34-0020 $566,900 R - Residential $617,900 $567,900 Mutually Agreed
Daniel Luby 2948 Alabama 09-117-21-33-0121 $325,500 R - Residential $340,000 $325,500 Mutually Agreed
David Hartwell 3990 Wooddale Ave #201 07-028-24-23-0171 $991,700 X - Condominium $1,029,700 Inspect?
Roster - City of St. Louis Park Local Board of Appeal & Equalization - Reconvene April 28, 2025
Reconvene meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1)
Title: 2025 Local Board of Appeal and Equalization Page 6
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: April 28, 2025
Written report: 1
Executive summary
Title: Connected infrastructure system wrap-up
Recommended action: None
Policy consideration: The purpose of this report is to summarize the outcomes of the recent
discussions within the connected infrastructure system study sessions.
Summary: On April 21, 2025, the council completed a series of discussions focused on
advancing the city's strategic priority related to connected infrastructure. These discussions
primarily focused on public policy, construction, operations and maintenance of connected
infrastructure.
The study session system started on March 3, 2025. Since then, staff have provided the council
with information, and there have been several policy discussions on topics related to connected
infrastructure. This report serves as a summary of all the discussions and includes the council
direction provided.
Financial or budget considerations: Funds are budgeted in the capital improvement plan (CIP)
for connected infrastructure projects. The additional funds to implement the changes discussed
during this system will be brought forward to the council as a part of the 2026 budget
discussions.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a variety of options for
people to make their way around the city comfortably, safely and reliably.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Debra Heiser, engineering director
Reviewed by: Jay Hall, public works director;
Jack Sullivan, assistant city engineer;
Jason West, park and recreation director
Approved by: Cindy Walsh, deputy city manager
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 2
Title: Connected infrastructure system wrap-up
Discussion
Background: This system included study sessions covering a range of topics relating to
infrastructure. They were all centered on policy and offered opportunities to consider how
infrastructure is planned for, constructed and maintained in the city.
Topics had self-contained outcomes based on various policy and practice questions. Reports on
these topics were considered and discussed by the city council, and where appropriate,
direction on future expectations and outcomes was provided to staff for implementation. A
summary of the topics covered in this system includes:
Report: Connected infrastructure system introduction
Date: 3/3/2025
Overview: Staff introduced the system, including an overview of the connected
infrastructure capital planning process and guiding documents. The proposed topics
included in the system all center on connected infrastructure policy and provide
opportunities to consider how connected infrastructure is planned for, constructed and
maintained in the city. The topics examined current programs and offered opportunities,
identified by both council and staff, for expansion or adjustment where applicable.
Outcomes: The council generally approved of the topics included in the system.
Discussion: Right of way acquisition
Date: 3/3/2025
Overview: This discussion was informational with the intent of providing the council with an
overview of the right of way (ROW) acquisition process and challenges. The city attorney
presented information about the ROW acquisition process, covering key concepts, legal
requirements and best practices. His presentation walked through the steps involved in
acquiring ROW for public projects, including property valuation, negotiation strategies,
eminent domain procedures, and federal and state compliance considerations. In addition,
he highlighted common challenges and strategies for success.
Outcomes: The council asked questions and appreciated the education on the ROW
acquisition process.
Discussion: Municipal building planning process: educational session
Date: 3/17/2025
Overview: Staff provided the city council with an educational overview of the building
design and construction process prior to making any decisions. This initiative aims to equip
the city council with a deeper understanding of how facilities are planned, designed and
constructed, ensuring alignment between infrastructure investments and community
needs.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 3
Title: Connected infrastructure system wrap-up
Outcomes: The council asked questions and appreciated the education on the design and
construction process of a building.
Discussion: Whistle Quiet zone
Date: 3/17/2025
Overview: This discussion focused on the SRF Consulting Group to provide the council with
a presentation and overview of the process necessary to create whistle quiet zones (WQZ).
The presentation included federal regulations governing quiet zones, necessary
infrastructure, and the process for coordination with railroads and regulatory agencies
Outcomes: The council directed engineering staff to move forward with the completion of a
safety study for the CPKC railroad. The study is necessary to identify the infrastructure
improvement costs needed to implement a WQZ. Once the study is complete, staff will
share the results with the city council.
Report: Recreation Outdoor Center (ROC) acoustics
Date: 3/17/2025
Overview: Staff included a report for the March 17 study session about the results of the
feasibility study for the possibility of improving the acoustics at the ROC. Staff then engaged
a consultant to conduct a feasibility study on the impact of installing acoustic improvement
measures. The recommendation coming out of the study was that the cost/benefit does not
lend itself to pursuing additional sound improvements. The addition of sound panels would
not noticeably improve the sound quality. In addition to the cost of adding the panels, there
were structural integrity concerns about installing them; the facility was not designed to
accommodate the additional weight of the sound panels. Further study (including additional
cost) would be necessary to assess if that was even a possibility. Due to these findings, staff
do not recommend moving forward with the installation of acoustic materials at the ROC.
Staff will, however, initiate some alternative measures.
At the meeting, a question was asked by council if the sound improvement that was studied
included muffled sound as well as decibel levels. Staff confirmed with the sound engineer
from ESI engineering that muffled or hard to understand sounds as well as the decibel levels
were studied as well. The sound quality at the ROC is caused by the echo that occurs at the
facility. As mentioned in the report, staff will educate and guide users of the facility on how
to use the audio system and ensure that potential users are clear about the limitations.
Outcomes: The council generally supported staff's approach to this topic.
Discussion: Public parking areas
Date: 3/24/2025
Overview: In 2022, during the connected infrastructure study session system, city council
provided staff with direction to evaluate the use of the existing municipal parking lots and
provide a recommendation regarding the need for the individual lots prior to moving
forward with reconstructing them. This parking study was completed in 2024. Staff
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 4
Title: Connected infrastructure system wrap-up
presented an overview of the parking study as well as an analysis of what a “municipal
parking lot” is and what a “public parking area” is, based on past council action and
direction.
Outcomes: The council supported the following staff conclusions, recommendations and
next steps.
Conclusions:
1. Based on the new definitions, the city has two municipal parking lots and a number of
additional public parking areas in the city.
2. Past council direction and past practice have guided the city to fund the reconstruction
of parking areas that do not qualify as a municipal parking lot.
3. The city's assessment policy requires that 100% of the cost to construct or reconstruct
municipal parking lots be paid for by the property owners who use the lots.
Recommendations and next steps:
1. Incorporate the following parking areas into the city's 10-year CIP based on
condition, available funding, coordination with other projects and staff workload:
• Alabama Avenue and Excelsior Boulevard - 6000 Excelsior Boulevard
• Louisiana Park and Ride (N) - 7201 Minnetonka Boulevard
• Louisiana Park and Ride (S) - 3016 Louisiana Avenue
• Lake Street businesses' parking areas
2. Continue to monitor the following area:
• 27th Street and Louisiana Avenue - 2701 Louisiana Avenue
3. Renew the lease for the municipal parking lot at 2914 Inglewood Avenue with the
adjacent property owner in 2026.
Discussion: Facility Assessment
Date: 4/14/2025
Overview: The current police department facility was built in 1993. Since then, operational
needs have changed, including a shift in officers’ gender-specific needs within facilities,
training requirements and a 40% increase in staff. Additionally, several large infrastructure
items are due for replacement or enhancement, such as air conditioning, roof, shooting
range targeting systems and windows/glass. Both the operational and functional needs led
to requesting a facility assessment of the police department, which was included in the
2024 Capital Improvement Plan.
Staff hired BKV Group to perform a facility and space needs assessment of the current
police department facility. The resulting assessment showed the facility is not viable for
long-term operations and department goals, identifying deficiencies such as a shortage of
operational space, inequitable facilities for officers depending on gender, and a lack of
space for health/wellness, inclusivity and training.
Outcomes: The council was presented with the three options to consider regarding next
steps in the design process to address the facility challenges identified in the assessment
performed by BKV.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 5
Title: Connected infrastructure system wrap-up
Option 1: Maintain existing facility; no expansion or rebuild
Option 2: Remodel and expansion of the existing facility
Option 3: New build
The council provided staff with directions to move forward with conducting a feasibility
study for options 2 and 3.
Report: Aquatic park
Date: 4/14/2025
Overview: The Aquatic Park is currently 28 years old, with an expected life span of 25-30
years. It is in good condition due in large part to ongoing, regular maintenance. If the
community wants to continue to provide an aquatic park, the city needs to make
improvements now, as well as plan a complete replacement in the future. In 2024, a facility
assessment was performed for the aquatics park. With findings from the assessment, staff
provided the council with three options regarding the near and longer-term needs
necessary to preserve pool operation:
Option 1: Repairing and remodeling: $2.6 million
Option 2: Repairing, remodeling and enhancing: $3.8 million
Option 3: Complete replacement and rebuild: $15–$20 million
Outcomes: Since staff didn’t hear any feedback from council members, we will proceed with
the staff-recommended Option 1. This includes repair and remodel to prolong the lifespan
of the Aquatic Park, while also planning for a complete replacement and rebuild in 10 years.
The estimate for the repair and remodel option is $2.6 million. The CIP includes a combined
$375,000 for Aquatic Park maintenance: $275,000 in 2025 for gutter replacement and
$100,000 in 2027 for repairs. Staff will submit an additional $2,225,000 proposal for the
2026 CIP, bringing the total CIP amount requested to $2.6 million over three years. Since
this option only extends the lifespan of the Aquatic Park, discussion should continue to
include $20 million in the 2035 CIP for a complete replacement.
Discussion: Utility asset management
Date: 4/21/2025
Overview: In 2024, HDR Engineering, Inc. completed a risk assessment study of the sanitary
sewer and water systems. The purpose of the study was to review the city's water and
sanitary sewer pipe networks and evaluate risk.
The study showed that high-risk sections of pipes are interspersed throughout the city and
are not continuous. This creates challenges for replacement planning. To address these
challenges, staff reviewed additional utility replacement information to develop an overall
replacement approach. This was done by completing a lifecycle analysis for the overall
sanitary sewer and watermain network to identify the optimal time for replacement. This
overall replacement approach, combined with risk-based planning, will be used by staff for
capital planning in 2027 and beyond.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 1) Page 6
Title: Connected infrastructure system wrap-up
Outcomes: The council supported staff’s recommendations for the overall replacement
approach:
Approach for watermain:
• Review staff capacity for project delivery
• Utilize the capital budget process to identify funding for the recommended
replacements and repairs.
• To select specific areas of work:
o Overlay watermain risk score, pipe age and pavement condition
o Group the work by neighborhood
o Rotate work around the city by using the existing eight (8) pavement
management areas for bundling segments for replacement to coincide
with pavement management construction.
Using this approach, the goal is to replace 2 miles/year of watermain, on average. Budget
decisions will impact the actual miles that are replaced each year.
Approach for sanitary sewer:
• Repair/replace problems that are identified
• Use pipe lining to extend the life of sanitary sewer pipe, where appropriate
• Replace smaller pipes with larger ones in areas that require additional capacity
based on the sewer model
• Review staff capacity for project delivery
• Utilize the capital budget process to identify funding for the recommended
replacements and repairs.
Approach for future budget cycles: Staff will use this overall replacement approach
combined with the risk-based planning to inform staff’s updates to the capital improvement
plan starting in the 2026 budget process and 2027 construction season.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: April 28, 2025
Written report: 2
Executive summary
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Recommended action: None. The attached report summarizes the status of major
development projects occurring in St. Louis Park.
Policy consideration: Not applicable. Contact staff with any questions.
Summary: The attached report is meant to keep the EDA/city council informed on a quarterly
basis as to the metrics, construction status, and tentative schedule of major development
projects in the city. For clarity:
• Proposed developments: are those that are working through the planning entitlement
process such as platting, PUDs, variances and have not yet been approved.
• Approved developments: are those whose planning applications have been approved
by the city council and have not yet commenced construction (but whose financial
assistance agreements may or may not yet have been approved).
• Under construction: are those that just started or are actively being constructed.
• Completed developments: are those that have received their final certificates of
occupancy.
More detailed information can be found on the interactive development dashboard on the
city’s website. The dashboard provides project metrics for all major developments or additions
that have been approved, under construction, or completed within the city since 2010. The
dashboard includes website links, market rate and affordable unit counts by bedroom size,
parking information, bike facilities, electric vehicle charging stations and more.
Additionally, developments receiving financial assistance from the EDA/city are required to
track Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) goals related to business enterprises and workforce
hiring goals. The current goal status for projects under construction and for recently completed
developments is also included in the update.
Financial or budget considerations: Development activity affects the city’s total tax capacity as
reflected in the city’s annual budget and long-range financial plan. It also plays a significant role
in the retention of the city’s AAA bond rating.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Major developments in St. Louis Park – 2nd Quarter 2025
DEI goal summary
Prepared by: Dean Porter-Nelson, redevelopment administrator
Reviewed by: Greg Hunt, economic development manager
Karen Barton, community development director, EDA executive director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 2
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Major Developments in St. Louis Park
2nd Quarter 2025
Multifamily housing development summary Total Market rate Affordable
Proposed units 271 206 65
Approved units 830 703 127
Units under construction 0 0 0
Recently completed units (last two years) 1,645 1,113 532
All units 2,746 2,022 724
Total Development Costs (TDC)* $808.5 million
*TDC includes all developments in the above categories to the extent known
For additional information please see Development Projects on the city’s web site.
Proposed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Minnetonka Blvd
redevelopment
5707 – 5639
Minnetonka Blvd.
GMHC (Greater
Metropolitan Housing
Corporation) & Homes
Within Reach
Affordable Housing
Land Trust
Proposed is the removal of four modest single-family houses
and construction of four twin homes (eight-units), providing
eight affordable home-ownership opportunities.
Estimated total development cost $3.7 million
Received pandemic
relief grant funding
from Hennepin
County.
Concept plans
presented to
council in June
2024; developer
and staff continue
to work together
on next steps.
Wooddale Station
Redevelopment
5950 36th Street W
Roers Companies
Proposed is the redevelopment of the EDA-owned Wooddale
Station redevelopment site into a six story, mixed-use, mixed-
Initial concept
plans presented to
council Dec 2024.
Developer
continues to fine
tune site and
building plans.
Developer is
assembling
financing and is
preparing financial
assistance request.
Construction
commencement
TBD.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 3
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Proposed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
income transit oriented development with approximately 263
residential units and 7,000-9,000 SF ground floor commercial.
The development would include approximately 57 units
offered to income qualified households at affordable rents.
Estimated total development cost: TBD.
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Terasa
5401 Gamble Drive
Hempel Real Estate
Proposed is the redevelopment of the northwest office tower
located within the West End Office Towers complex, and
construction of a new six story, 223-unit mixed-use building
with 21,000 square feet of commercial space, potentially
including a grocer, restaurant, and coffee shop. The
development will include 45 affordable housing units (20% of
the total) which will be made available to households earning
up to 50% of area median income (AMI).
Estimated total development cost: $93.7 million.
Concept plans
approved.
EDA approved
redevelopment
contract
2/18/2025.
Construction
commencement
Q3 2025 with
completion
anticipated
6/2028.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 4
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Park Place East
5775 Wayzata Blvd.
GW Properties
Proposed is the construction of two retail buildings in the
southeast corner of the parking lot at 5775 Wayzata Blvd. The
new buildings will contain four fast-casual restaurants.
Estimated total development cost: TBD.
Planning
entitlements
approved in
Dec. 2023 and
June 2024.
Building permits
are submitted and
construction
commencement is
TBD.
2625 Louisiana Avenue
2625 Louisiana Ave.
Web Development LLC
Largely vacant parcel adjacent to North Cedar Lake Regional
Trail to be redeveloped with a 57-unit, four-story, mixed-use
market-rate building with approximately 4,000 square feet of
ground floor commercial space along with underground and
surface parking. Project includes a public path connecting
Louisiana Avenue to the Regional Trail.
Estimated total development cost: TBD.
Planning
entitlements
approved 2022 and
reapproved 2024.
Construction
commencement
TBD.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 5
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Achromatic 6013
6013 and 6019 Cedar
Lake Rd.
Joshua Aaron Proposed is the redevelopment of two single-family homes
and the construction of a 36 unit, three-story building with
one level of below grade parking.
Estimated total construction costs: TBD.
Planning
entitlements
approved
March 2024
Construction
commencement
TBD.
Arlington Row
East & West
7705 Wayzata Blvd. &
7905 Wayzata Blvd.
Melrose Company
Two development sites:
• 7905 Wayzata includes two three-story apartment
buildings with 34 units total and off-street parking
covered by a solar power carport.
• 7705 Wayzata includes a three-story apartment building
with 27 units and surface parking.
Estimated construction cost: TBD.
Planning
applications
approved.
Construction
commencement
TBD.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 6
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Beltline Blvd Station
Site
SE quadrant of CSAH 25
& Beltline Blvd.
Sherman Associates
Major mixed-use, mixed income, transit-oriented,
multi-phase development adjacent to
SWLRT Beltline Blvd. Station.
Building 1 includes:
• Seven-story mixed-use building with six levels of market
rate housing (152 units) and 20,000 square feet of
neighborhood commercial space.
• A 592-stall parking ramp, which would include 268 park
& ride stalls, 326 residential stalls and approximately
1,850 square feet of commercial space.
Estimated development cost: $55.7 million.
Estimated development cost of public ramp:
$11.1 million.
Building 2 includes:
• Four-story all affordable apartment building with 82
units, including 77 units that will be made available to
households earning up to 60% of area median income
(AMI) and five units that will be made available to
households earning up to 30% AMI. 22 units will have
three bedrooms.
Estimated development cost: $28.4 million.
Building 3 includes:
• Five-story market rate apartment building with 146 units.
Estimated development cost: $53.5 million.
Altogether, the multi-phase redevelopment will have
380 apartment units of which 82 (21%) would be affordable.
Estimated total development cost: $148.7 million.
Awarded $13.7
million in LIHTC
bonds January
2022 for affordable
component.
Planning
applications
approved
April 18, 2022.
Financial
assistance
agreements
approved
June 20, 2022, and
July 24, 2023.
Amendments to
financial assistance
agreements
scheduled for
consideration on
5/19/2025.
Anticipated
construction:
• Grading Q2 2025
• Building 1 -
Q3 2025
• Building 2 - TBD
• Building 3 -
Q3 2025
• Parking Ramp -
Q3 2025
Construction
completion
Q1, 2027.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 7
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Approved developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Parkway Residences
W 31st St. between
Inglewood Ave. &
Glenhurst Ave.
Sela Group & Affiliates
Multi-phase redevelopment includes four, multi-family
buildings with 211 units. The affordable housing includes 24
rehabilitated units which will be made available to
households earning up to 50% of area median income (AMI),
and six new units which will be made available to households
earning up to 60% AMI.
Phase III: Eleven-story, 73-unit apartment building.
Estimated development cost: $36.2 million.
Estimated total development cost (all phases): $91.4 million.
EDA approved an
extension to the
development
contract February
2024.
Phase III
commencement
TBD.
Under construction
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
There are no projects currently under construction.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 8
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Union Park Flats
3700 Alabama Ave. &
6027 37th St. W.
PPL (Project for Pride in
Living)
Redevelopment of the north portion of the Union
Congregational Church property with a three story, 60-unit
affordable apartment building on the north half of the
property. All unit rents have limits ranging between 30%-60%
of area median income (AMI). Union Congregational Church
plans to remain on the south portion of the property.
Estimated total development cost: $28.6 million.
Received
Certificate of
Occupancy
December 2024.
Mera
(formerly 9920
Wayzata)
9808 & 9920 Wayzata
Blvd.
Bigos Management
Redevelopment of former Santorini’s restaurant property at
northwest quadrant of I-394 & US 169.
Six-story, 233-unit, mixed income apartment building with
20% (47) of the units available to households earning up to
50% of area median income (AMI).
Estimated total development cost: $68.6 million.
Completed
August 2024.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 9
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Zelia on Seven
(formerly Via Sol)
SE quadrant Hwy. 7 &
Wooddale Ave.
5855 Hwy. 7
Originally developed by
PLACE
now owned by
Bigos Management
Mixed-income, transit-oriented development including a five-
story, 217-unit apartment building (130 market rate units, 22
units affordable to households earning up to 50% of area
median income (AMI), and 65 units affordable to households
earning up to 60% AMI, solar panels which will be installed
spring 2025 (producing 220AC kW, 275 DC kW and 300,000
KwH total generation), and one-acre urban forest.
Estimated total development cost: $88.4 million.
Received final
Certificate of
Occupancy
May 23, 2024.
Arbor Court
3801 Wooddale Ave. S.
Real Estate Equities LLC
Redevelopment of former Aldersgate Church property
adjacent to Burlington Coat/Micro Center and Highway 100.
All affordable housing development includes 114-units, with
205 parking stalls, of which 117 stalls would be underground.
• 5 units affordable to households earning up to 30% AMI
• 5 units affordable to households earning up to 50% AMI
• 104 units affordable to households earning up to 60%
AMI
Estimated total development cost $30.1 million.
Completed
March 2024.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 10
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Risor
3510 Beltline Blvd.
Roers Company Six-story, 170-unit apartment building with 4,100 square feet
of ground floor commercial space and 14 ground floor live-
work units. The development is an age restricted (55+)
community with 10% (18) of the units affordable to
households earning up to 50% of area median income (AMI).
Estimated construction cost: $56.5 million.
Completed
November 2023.
Rise on 7
8115 Hwy. 7
CommonBond
Redevelopment of former Prince of Peace church property
across from Shops at Knollwood. Includes a four-story,
120-unit, all affordable apartment building with rent and
income restrictions ranging between 30%-60% of AMI along
with a 6,600 square foot “affordable” early childhood center.
Estimated total development cost: $40.7 million.
Completed
November 2023.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 11
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Corsa
(formerly Beltline
Residences)
3440 Beltline Blvd.
Opus Group
Five-story, 250-unit mixed-use, mixed income development
with two retail spaces totaling 7,445 square feet and
six live/work units. 10% of the units (25) are affordable to and
made available to households earning up to 50% of area
median income (AMI).
Estimated total development cost: $78.1 million.
Completed
October 2023.
Bremer Bank
7924 Hwy. 7
Frauenshuh The retail building containing Knollwood Liquor and Papa
Murphy’s Pizza was removed and replaced with a two-story,
5,850 square foot office building and is occupied by Bremer
Bank.
Completed
October 2023.
Caraway
(formerly Luxe
Residential)
5235 Wayzata Blvd.
(Phase VI of
Central Park West)
Greystar Real Estate
Partners
Completed
October 2023.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 12
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Redevelopment of former Olive Garden property in The West
End area.
Luxe Residential is a six-story, 207-unit, apartment building
(including eight units affordable to households earning up to
60% of AMI) along with two levels of underground parking.
The development also includes a new pocket park along 16th
Street and pedestrian improvements connecting the
apartment building to the rest of The West End area.
Estimated construction cost: $51.8 million
Volo at Texa-Tonka
NE corner Texas Ave. &
Minnetonka Blvd.
Paster Development
Mixed income redevelopment includes 101 apartment units
in a three- to four-story building, and 11 walk-up style
townhome units located in two two-story buildings on the
northern end of the site. Twenty percent (23) of the units
would be affordable to households earning up to 50% AMI.
Estimated total development cost: $26.6 million.
Completed 11
townhome units
December 2022.
Completed 101
multifamily units
May 2023.
Nordic Ware
expansions
Buildings 8 & 9
5005 CSAH 25
Dalquist Properties LLC 21,853-square-foot warehouse and loading dock addition to
Building 8. 45,000 square foot warehouse and loading dock
addition to Building 9 along with a small café and outdoor
patio on the property’s south side facing the regional trail.
Completed
Q2, 2022.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 13
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Recently completed developments
Project, location &
developer Project Description Tentative
Schedule
Estimated construction cost: $11.6 million
Parkway Residences
W 31st St. between
Inglewood Ave. &
Glenhurst Ave.
Sela Group & Affiliates
Multi-phase redevelopment includes four, multi-family
buildings with 211 units. The affordable housing includes 24
rehabilitated units available to households earning up to 50%
of area median income (AMI), and six new units available to
households earning up to 60% AMI.
Phase I:
• Parkway Place: Four-story, 95-unit apartment building.
• Parkway Flats: Six-unit apartment building.
• Rehab of 24 NOAH apartment units.
Estimated development cost: $40.6 million
Phase II: Parkway Commons: Four-story, 37-unit apartment
building.
Estimated development cost: $14.6 million
Parkway Place &
rehab completed
April 30, 2022.
Parkway Flats
completed
October 2022.
Parkway Commons
completed
March 2023.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 2) Page 14
Title: Development update 2nd quarter 2025
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion Hiring Goals
Current as of January 1, 2025
DEI goals for Union Park Flats
Union Park Flats
QUARTERLY COMPLINANCE SUMMARY ACTUAL GOALS
Total number of business enterprises
contracted in development 47
Percentage of women-owned business
enterprises in development 21.28% 6%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI owned business
enterprises in development 4.26% 13%
Percentage of total development dollars
paid to women-owned business
enterprises in development
20.34% 6%
Percentage of total development dollars
paid to BIPOC/AAPI owned business
enterprises in development
2.48% 13%
Total number of construction workers
contracted in development 1017
Percentage of women workforce in
development 3.24% 20%
Percentage of BIPOC/AAPI workforce* in
development 19.96% 32%
Percentage of total construction hours for
women workforce in development 4.52% 20%
Percentage of total construction hours for
BIPOC/AAPI workforce* in development 27.34% 32%
*The BIPOC/AAPI workforce demographic data is self-reported, and likely does not fully capture
Hispanic/Latinx individuals.
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: April 28, 2025
Written report: 3
Executive summary
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report
Recommended action: This report is intended to provide the council with a summary of
activities undertaken by the city in 2024 to meet the city’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer
System (MS4) permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) requirements.
Policy consideration: None
Summary: The City of St. Louis Park is permitted by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
(MPCA) for the discharge of stormwater from the city’s storm sewer system into waters of the
state, such as Minnehaha Creek. This permit is required based on an amendment to the
Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Water Act (CWA) and the creation of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). St Louis Park, along with over 200
other Minnesota cities, is permitted as an MS4 community.
Each year, as a condition of the permit, the city conducts a review of its SWPPP to determine
program compliance, the appropriateness of best management practices (BMPs) and progress
toward achieving the identified goals. City staff completed an annual review of the activities to
ensure compliance. However, the MPCA is in the process of updating their electronic reporting
platform; due to this, MS4 permittees covered by the 2020 MS4 general permit are not
required to submit an annual report for the calendar year 2024 by June 30, 2025. When MPCA
releases its new e-service submittal program, sometime in 2025, the city will report MS4
activities for the previous years (e.g., calendar years 2022, 2023 and 2024).
To provide the public with opportunities to offer input on the adequacy of the SWPPP, the
program and the annual report are located on the city’s stormwater management webpage,
along with a link to submit questions or add comments about the program. Staff also held a
public open house to share the city’s stormwater program activities on April 8, 2025 in the
council chambers. Thirty-two community members attended the open house.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable at this time.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in
environmental stewardship.
Supporting documents: Discussion
2024 NPDES SWPPP activity highlights
2024 NPDES MS4 SWPPP activities completed
2025 NPDES MS4 SWPPP initiatives
Prepared by: Erick Francis, water resources manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, engineering director
Sarah Schweiger, engineering services manager
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3) Page 2
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report
Discussion
Background: The National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit establishes conditions for discharging stormwater and other
related discharges into the waters of the state. Operators of regulated small MS4s are required
to design their Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) to:
• Reduce the discharge of pollutants to the “maximum extent practicable” (MEP)
• Protect water quality
• Satisfy the appropriate water quality requirements of the Clean Water Act
The EPA's Phase II Rule defines a small MS4 stormwater management program as a program
comprising six elements that, when implemented in concert, are expected to result in
significant reductions of pollutants discharged into receiving water bodies. The SWPPP is
broken out into six program elements, termed Minimum Control Measures (MCMs). These are:
MCM 1 Public education and outreach
Distributing educational materials and performing outreach to inform citizens about the
impacts that polluted stormwater runoff discharges can have on water quality.
MCM 2 Public participation/ involvement
Providing opportunities for citizens to participate in program development and
implementation, including effectively publicizing public hearings and/or encouraging citizen
representatives on a stormwater management panel.
MCM3 Illicit discharge detection and elimination
Developing and implementing a plan to detect and eliminate illicit discharges to the storm
sewer system (including developing a system map and informing the community about hazards
associated with illegal discharges and improper disposal of waste).
MCM 4 Construction site runoff control
Developing, implementing and enforcing an erosion and sediment control program for
construction activities that disturb one or more acres of land (controls could include silt fences
and temporary stormwater detention ponds).
MCM 5 Post-construction runoff control
Developing, implementing and enforcing a program to address discharges of post-construction
stormwater runoff from new development and redevelopment areas. Applicable controls could
include preventative actions such as protecting sensitive areas (e.g., wetlands) or the use of
structural BMPs.
MCM 6 Pollution prevention/ good housekeeping
Developing and implementing a program with the goal of preventing or reducing pollutant
runoff from municipal operations. The program must include municipal staff training on
pollution prevention measures and techniques (e.g., regular street sweeping, reduction in the
use of pesticides or street salt, or frequent catch-basin cleaning).
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3) Page 3
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report
Implementation of the MEP standard will typically require the development and
implementation of best management practices (BMPs) and the achievement of measurable
goals to satisfy each of the six MCMs.
BMPs are practices, techniques and measures that prevent or reduce water pollution from
nonpoint sources by using the most effective and practicable means of achieving water quality
goals. BMPs include but are not limited to official controls, structural and nonstructural
controls, and operation and maintenance procedures.
Each year, as a condition of the permit, the city conducts a review of its SWPPP to determine
program compliance, the appropriateness of BMPs and progress toward achieving the
identified goals. To achieve this, staff perform an annual review of the activities completed to
ensure compliance.
Updates to the MS4 annual report process: The MPCA is in the process of developing a new e-
service for the MS4 annual report. In addition, the MPCA is revising/ updating many annual
report questions to align with the requirements in the 2020 MS4 general permit and meet the
requirements of the federal National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Electronic
Reporting Rule. This means MS4 permittees that have coverage under the 2020 MS4 general
permit do not need to submit an annual report for the calendar year 2024 by June 30, 2025.
Instead, when the e-service is released, MS4 permittees will be expected to report MS4
activities for each previous reporting year (e.g., calendar years 2022, 2023 and 2024). The
MPCA will communicate to MS4 permittees when the new e-service becomes available but
tentatively anticipates the e-service will be released in 2025.
SWPPP review: St. Louis Park is covered by the 2020 MS4 general permit and is therefore not
required to submit an annual report for the calendar year 2024 by June 30, 2025. However,
staff completed its assessment of St. Louis Park’s SWPPP to stay on top of progress. The city’s
SWPPP is located on the city’s stormwater management webpage.
The information requested by the MPCA in the report is meant to provide the basis for an
assessment of the appropriateness of the BMPs and the progress that has been made toward
achieving the identified goals for each of the MCMs. This assessment is based on results
collected and analyzed from inspection findings and public input received during the reporting
period.
The city provides the public with opportunities to offer input on the adequacy of the SWPPP. In
addition to providing this report to the council, staff actively promotes the stormwater
management program using city publications, social media and events, as well as having a
dedicated public meeting each year, which was held in the council chambers on April 8, 2025,
from 6:00 to 8:30 p.m. Thirty-two community members attended the open house.
Staff is committed to implementing the SWPPP and maintaining a high level of compliance with
our MS4 permit. This includes continuing to review and refine the city’s process to reduce
pollutants from entering surface waters and record-keeping procedures.
Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Program
2024 Activities
St. Louis Park Engineering Department • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416
www.stlouisparkmn.gov • Phone: 952.924.2656 • Fax: 952.924.2662 • TTY: 952.924.2518
The MS4 General permit (Permit) is designed to reduce the amount of sediment and other
pollutants that enter state waters from stormwater systems. Entities regulated by the MS4
general permit must develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP or Program)
and adopt best management practices (BMPs).
In compliance with Permit requirements, the City of St. Louis Park has developed Standard
Operating Procedures (SOPs) for each of the six minimum control measures (MCM), Emergency
Response Procedures (ERPs), and supplemental documentation. These documents are available
upon request. The items documented below serve as the 2024 annual assessment of MCM
activities completed.
MCM‐1: Public education and outreach activities
Permit requirement: Permittees shall develop and implement a public education program and
distribute educational materials that inform the public of the impact stormwater discharges
have on water bodies and that include actions citizens, businesses, and other local
organizations can take to reduce the discharge of pollutants to stormwater.
The following are activities completed in compliance with the Permit and the city’s Program:
•Distributed educational materials on two stormwater-related issues (permit
requirement 16.3), including:
o Rainwater Rewards Program:
▪The rainwater rewards program installed 44 rain gardens and received
$32,000 in grant funding from the Clean Water, Land, and Legacy
amendment.
▪Reimbursed residents for 18 rain barrels.
o The effects of yard waste on water quality.
•Organized and facilitated the Metro Blooms Resilient Yard Workshop, Turf Alternative
Workshop, Resilient Shorelines, and Healthy Soils Workshop, part of the Rainwater
Rewards Program, with a total of 63 attendees.
•Distributed various stormwater management-related educational materials (permit
requirements 16.4-16.6), including two postings on pet waste, four on smart salting, and
one on illicit discharges.
o Circulated stormwater and environmental educational materials at Westwood Hills
Nature Center, which receives over 34,500 visitors annually.
o Published 11 stormwater articles in Park Perspective, Park and Recreation Guide,
Star Tribune, and Sun Sailor with distribution methods of newspapers and online
website postings. Topics included the Rainwater Rewards Program, Yard Waste
Management, Winter Maintenance, Pet Waste, and the Adopt-a-Drain program.
o Received approximately 4,148 clicks on the city’s website about Program
information.
o Published 26 social media posts about stormwater management topics, including
the Rainwater Rewards Program, Yard Waste Management, Winter Maintenance,
Pet Waste, and the Adopt-a-Drain program that targeted residents, businesses,
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 4
commercial facilities, and institutions, and had over 20,590 clicks and over 2,349,100
views.
MCM‐2: Public involvement and participation
Permit requirement: Permittees shall implement a public participation/involvement program
to solicit public input on the Program.
The following are activities completed (see Table 1) in compliance with the Permit sections
17.3-17.7 and the city’s Program:
Table 1 Public Events and Meetings Held (2024)
Activities Date Quantity/ Units
Adopt-a-Drain Open throughout the year
315 Participants
537 Drains adopted
Steering Committee for the
Minnesota Cities Stormwater
Coalition
Monthly 200+ Member Cities
Metro Watershed Partners Quarterly meetings 50+ Partners
Metro Blooms workshops March 14, April 11, 7, 25 63 Attendees
City Council S.S. Report
Stormwater 101 report May 28, 2024 10 Attendees
Ecotacular June 15, 2024 50+ Attendees
The Program materials are posted on the city’s website here; comments are welcome at any
time, and the comments received are available upon request.
MCM‐3: Illicit discharge detection and elimination (IDDE)
Permit requirement: Permittees shall implement and enforce a program to detect and
eliminate illicit discharges into the city’s storm sewer system.
The following are activities completed in compliance with the Permit sections 18.8 -18.17 and the
city’s Program:
•Observed ten illicit discharges and responded with verbal warnings and letters of
warning. ERPs and response documentation are available upon request (Permit
Requirement 18.13-18.14 and 18.17).
•Identified and inspected areas within the city with elevated potential for illicit
stormwater discharges or high-priority areas as described in Permit Requirement 18.10.
Maps of the high-priority areas are available upon request.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 5
•Implemented a comprehensive training program through NeoGov (Permit Requirement
18.8-18.9) for city field staff, including:
o Park and Recreation staff and Public Works
o Engineering
o Firefighters
o Police Officers
o Building and Energy
•Distributed illicit discharge detection and elimination information on social media
focused on reaching target audiences, including residents, businesses, institutions, and
commercial facilities.
•Developed an Illicit discharge inspection and tracking mapping database using
cartograph (Permit Requirement 18.10-18.12). Inspection reports and maps are
available upon request.
MCM‐4: Construction site stormwater runoff control
Permit requirement: Permittees shall implement and enforce a construction site stormwater
runoff control program that reduces pollutants in stormwater runoff related to construction
activity.
The following are activities completed in compliance with the Permit sections 19.3-19.15 and
the city’s Program:
•Reviewed 26 construction plans and issued 26 erosion control permits (Permit
Requirement 19.3-10).
•Performed 335 construction site inspections (Permit Requirement 19.7-19.9).
•Collected damage deposits for erosion control permits to aid in maintaining compliance.
•Issued two written notices of violation for noncompliance for projects greater than one
acre (Permit Requirement 19.12 and 19.15), to which the contractor responded to our
violation notification.
•Provided training to Engineering staff through NeoGov (Permit Requirement 19.11)
MCM‐5: Post-construction runoff control
Permit requirement: Permittees shall implement and enforce a post-construction stormwater
management program that prevents or reduces water pollution after construction activity is
completed.
The following are activities completed in compliance with the Permit sections 20.3-20.17 and
the city’s Program:
•Completed stormwater management plan reviews for five projects (Permit Requirement
20.3-20.14).
•Maintained mapped GIS inventory of structural stormwater BMPs not owned or
operated by the permittee (Permit Requirement 20.16). Maps are available upon
request.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 6
•Engineering and Community Development staff received training through NeoGov
(Permit Requirement 20.18).
MCM‐6: Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations
Permit requirement: Permittees shall develop and implement an operations and maintenance
program that prevents or reduces the discharge of pollutants from permittee -owned and
operated facilities.
The following are activities completed in compliance (Table 2) with the Permit sections 21.3-
21.14 and the city’s Program:
Table 2 Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping Practices Completed (2023)
Maintenance or operational
activity
Location/Element Quantity
Inspected
Storm sewer outfalls 182
Stormwater ponds 60
Stormwater management
best practices (underground
vaults, tree trenches,
pervious pavers, rain
gardens)
54
Maintained
Storm sewer outfalls, sump
manholes, grit pit, and
underground vault
19 outfalls, nine sump
manholes, two grit pits, one
underground vault
Removed sediment Lamplighter Pond Unable to maintain due to
the lack of winter conditions
Swept Streets and alleys
1,431 miles and 6,114 cubic
yards of material removed
Planned weather postponed
maintenance for 2025
Storm sewer outfall
replacements Two
Lamplighter Pond
5,500 cubic yards of
accumulated sediment
Carp harvest
Canoe landing Install Minnehaha Creek in
the Knollwood area
In addition to the information presented in the table above, the city tallied 220 tons of
chlorides used; provided Program-specific training to city staff, which are responsible for winter
maintenance activities, via in-house training and Smart Salting Training; and worked with
Operations to evaluate existing policies and practices to improve the process and reduce
pollution potential.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 7
2024
MCM
Installed 44 rain gardens and received
$32,000 in Clean Water Grant Funding
Sold 18 rain barrels
537 drains and 315 participants
Hosted 34,507 students at Westwood Hills
Nature Center
Maintained level 4 Green Step City Inspected 187 storm outfalls
61 ponds, & 34 stormwater BMPs
Public outreach: held annual SWPPP
meeting, reported activities completed to city
council, and attended the Ecotacular event.
The following outlines the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Minimum Control Measure (MCM)
assessment of the activities that have been completed in 2024. These MCMs are included in the Municipal Separate
Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit issued by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
MCM ACTIVITIES COMPLETED
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 8
2024
MCM
Provided Smart Salt training to city staff Performed 335
construction site inspections
Installed stormwater filter system and
infiltration chambers as part of city projects
Held Blue Thumb Resilient Yard, Turf
Alternative, and Rain Garden Maintenance
workshops with 63 attendees
34 social media posts with over 20,000
reactions and 12 articles on stormwater
Monitored five lakes within the city as part
of the Citizens-Assisted Monitoring Program
(CAMP)
1,871 miles of streets and alleys swept
with 5,911 cubic yards of material removed
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 9
Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Program
2025 Activities
St. Louis Park Engineering Department • 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416
www.stlouisparkmn.gov • Phone: 952.924.2656 • Fax: 952.924.2662 • TTY: 952.924.2518
The following outlines the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) Minimum
Control Measure (MCM) planned activities for 2025. These MCMs are included in the City of St.
Louis Park’s Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit issued by the Minnesota
Pollution Control Agency (MPCA).
MCM‐1: Public education and outreach activities
Permit requirement:
Permittees shall develop and implement a public education program and distribute educational
materials that inform the public of the impact of stormwater. The program shall include the
following:
Activities to initiate:
•Select two high-priority stormwater-related issues:
o Rainwater Rewards Program
o Promote city yard waste programs, management, the importance of mulching and
its effects of yard waste on water quality.
•Continue Adopt-a-Drain program in collaboration Clean Water Minnesota.
•Hold Metro Blooms Resilient Yards workshops.
•Continue to be a part of the Minnesota Cities Stormwater Coalition.
•Continue to promote stormwater pollution prevention throughout the city, including:
o Partner with Clean Water Minnesota Outreach Program.
o City publications and social media.
o Partner with other cities, watershed and/or other organization’s activities and
workshops.
o Continue Westwood Hills Nature Center educational programs.
MCM‐2: Public involvement and participation
Permit requirement:
Permittees shall implement a public participation/involvement program to solicit public input
on the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP).
Activities to initiate:
•Hold public open house to receive comments on SWPPP.
•Ecotacular and other public events to provide stormwater outreach .
•Rainwater Rewards Program Plant Pickup Event at the nature center.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 10
MCM‐3: Illicit discharge detection and elimination
Permit requirement:
Permittees shall implement and enforce a program to detect and eliminate illicit discharges into
the city’s storm sewer system.
Activities to initiate:
•Continue illicit discharge detection and elimination program:
o Continue inspections.
o Update mapping and roll out new ArcGIS online tracking app.
o Provide city field staff training for illicit discharges in NeoGov.
o Continue to educate the public about illicit discharges.
MCM‐4: Construction site stormwater runoff control
Permit requirement:
Permittees shall implement and enforce a construction site stormwater runoff control program
that reduces pollutants in stormwater runoff related to construction activity.
Activities to initiate:
•Continue erosion control site plan review, site inspection and enforcement .
•Continue to educate city staff and the public about the importance of construction
stormwater management and erosion and sediment control .
MCM‐5: Post-construction runoff control
Permit requirement:
Permittees shall implement and enforce a post-construction stormwater management program
that prevents or reduces water pollution after construction activity is completed.
Activities to initiate:
•Continue to review plans and work with local watersheds to maintain compliance .
MCM‐6: Pollution prevention/good housekeeping for municipal operations
Permit requirement:
Permittees shall develop and implement an operations and maintenance program that prevents
or reduces the discharge of pollutants from permittee-owned and operated facilities.
Activities to initiate:
•Repair storm sewer outfalls and maintain storm sewer underground vaults and other
practices.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 11
•Review future projects and identify potential stormwater best management practices
that would reduce runoff and improve water quality on local street projects.
•Continue routine inspections and maintenance practices (i.e., street sweeping, storm
sewer inspection, and maintenance work) in 2025.
•Continue the use of Cartegraph and GIS mapping in 2025 to assist with tracking
inspections, findings, and recommendations.
•Roll out new online staff training platform and modules in NeoGov.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 3)
Title: Annual Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program report Page 12
Meeting: Study session
Meeting date: April 28, 2025
Written report: 4
Executive summary
Title: Council decisions for development projects
Recommended action: None, this report is for informational purposes only.
Policy consideration: None.
Summary: In response to council members’ desire to better understand the flexibility and
boundaries in the formal decision-making processes in relation to development projects, staff
prepared a decision matrix detailing council’s role when presented with certain land use and
financial assistance decisions. This matrix is intended to provide a framework for council to
better understand their role in the decision making process when development projects come
before them for consideration.
A more comprehensive discussion with council surrounding these decisions, developer business
practices, and avenues to address council concerns relating to proposed development projects
will occur during the housing + neighborhood-oriented development system later this year.
Financial or budget considerations: Not applicable
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Decision nodes and guardrails document
Prepared by: Karen Barton, community development director
Approved by: Kim Keller, city manager
DECISION NODES AND GUARDRAILS
To assist council members in understanding flexibility and boundaries in formal decision-making processes, specifically related to
development projects, staff has compiled the following matrix as a guide. A more detailed and comprehensive discussion
surrounding these decisions will occur later this year during the housing + neighborhood-oriented development system.
AcƟon Item Role of Council/EDA Decision-making factors AddiƟonal consideraƟons Guardrails
Land use decisions
CondiƟonal
use permit,
variance,
subdivision
Determine whether the
city code has been met.
Has the applicant met the city
code/zoning ordinance?
This is a quasi-judicial role. The
council/EDA is limited to making a
decision based on whether or not
the proposal meets the applicable
city codes/ordinances.
The council has limited
authority. When the council
acts on a request, it must be
based on findings of fact.
Zoning or
subdivision
ordinance,
planned unit
development
LegislaƟve decision where the
council has a high degree of
discreƟon to determine whether
the proposed PUD conforms to
the city’s comp plan and
ordinance and to determine
whether the proposed zoning
ordinance amendment
conforms to the city’s
Comprehensive Plan.
A simple majority of four (4)
affirmaƟve votes is required.
ExcepƟon: when rezoning a
residenƟal property to
commercial or industrial use,
five (5) affirmaƟve votes are
required.
Is the project in alignment with
city code? (staff detail this in
staff report)
Does the project saƟsfy the city’s
established policy goals? (ie:
inclusionary housing,
sustainability) (staff detail this in
staff report)
Are the objecƟons to the project
based on relevant land use or
zoning criteria?
Does the proposed project
advance the city’s adopted
strategic prioriƟes? (staff detail
this in staff report)
By design, the PUD process gives
the city a great deal of discreƟon
(the PUD process is a
rezoning). The PUD process has
been used primarily (if not
exclusively) for redevelopment
projects where straight zoning
would not work as well. However,
the council’s discreƟon should be
uƟlized in determining whether
the intent of zoning codes are
being met.
The council is not expected to be
experts in land use and zoning; it
is staff's job to provide them with
the informaƟon to make
informed decisions.
Staff provides a thorough and
comprehensive evaluaƟon of each
project which is detailed in the
staff report to the council/EDA
with supporƟng documentaƟon
to provide council with a solid
foundaƟon to make
determinaƟons based on the
criteria noted.
The council should be cognizant
of treaƟng similar
applicaƟons/requests similarly.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 4)
Title: Council decisions for development projects Page 2
AcƟon Item Role of Council/EDA Decision-making factors AddiƟonal consideraƟons Guardrails
If the council wishes to impose
certain condiƟons or refuse a
project, the condiƟons/refusal
should be clearly stated, rooted in
the decision-making factors
outlined, and based on
established facts, not allegaƟons,
neighborhood senƟment or
unverified informaƟon.
Comprehens-
ive
Plan
Amendments
Policy decision with wide
discreƟon.
4/5 majority of five (5)
affirmaƟve votes are required.
Is the decision jusƟfied according
to procedures, rules and laws?
Does the decision promote public
health, safety and general
welfare?
Does it provide a posiƟve result?
Is it consistent with other
provisions of the city’s
Comprehensive Plan?
Ensure a safer, more pleasant, and
more economical environment for
residenƟal, commercial, industrial
and public acƟviƟes.
Prepare the community for
anƟcipated desirable change.
Reduce private and public
expenditures.
Planning commission must hold a
public hearing on an amendment
and make a recommendaƟon in a
Ɵmely manner to city council.
Must conform to Met Council
regional system plans.
City must obtain authorizaƟon
from Met Council to place the
plan amendment into effect.
Decisions cannot be arbitrary or
capricious.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 4)
Title: Council decisions for development projects Page 3
AcƟon Item Role of Council/EDA Decision-making factors AddiƟonal consideraƟons Guardrails
Financial assistance decisions
TIF awards Decision-maker on whether
awarding TIF is in the best
interest of the city.
Does the request adhere to the
adopted TIF policy and other city
policies (i.e., inclusionary housing
policy, green building policy, DEI
policy) and legal constraints?
(staff detail this in staff report)
Does the council wish to expand
the city’s TIF porƞolio?
Does the proposed project
advance the city’s strategic
prioriƟes?
Is the applicant being treated
similarly to other projects
regarding TIF award decisions? If
differently, is there a factual
reason for the acƟons (facts; not
feelings)
If the council wishes to impose
restricƟons or requirements that
are not currently in the TIF policy,
the policy should be amended.
The council should be cognizant
of treaƟng similar
applicaƟons/requests differently.
If the council wishes to impose
certain condiƟons or refuse a
project, the condiƟons/refusal
should be clearly stated, rooted
in the decision-making factors
outlined, and based on
established facts, not allegaƟons,
neighborhood senƟment or
unverified informaƟon.
The TIF policy can be amended
to include new restricƟons or
requirements – that said, each
policy consideraƟon must be
veƩed.
Affordable
housing trust
fund (AHTF)
Decision-maker on whether
awarding AHTF funding is in
the best interest of the city.
Does the request adhere to the
adopted AHTF policy and other
city policies (i.e., inclusionary
housing, green building, DEI) and
legal constraints? (staff detail this
in the staff report)
Is there adequate funding
available in the AHTF? (staff detail
this in staff report)
If the council wishes to impose
restricƟons or requirements that
are not currently in the AHTF
policy, the policy should be
amended.
The council should be cognizant
of treaƟng similar applicaƟons/
requests differently. If council
wishes to impose certain
condiƟons or refuse a project,
the condiƟons/refusal should be
clearly stated, rooted in the
decision-making factors
outlined, and based on
established facts, not
allegaƟons, neighborhood
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 4)
Title: Council decisions for development projects Page 4
Does the proposed project
advance the city’s adopted
strategic prioriƟes?
Is the applicant being treaƟng
similarly to other projects
regarding AHTF award decisions?
If differently, is there a factual
reason for the acƟons (facts; not
feelings)
senƟment or unverified
informaƟon.
The AHTF policy can be amended
to include new restricƟons or
requirements – that said, each
policy consideraƟon must be
veƩed.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 4)
Title: Council decisions for development projects Page 5
Staff analyze and vet projects for compliance with city codes, policies and strategic prioriƟes
prior to bringing them to council. The council has varying levels of discreƟon and authority as
described in the table above and depicted in the image below.
Source: League of Minnesota CiƟes webpage. hƩps://www.lmc.org/resources/planning-and-
zoning-101/. Accessed March 5, 2025.
Study session meeting of April 28, 2025 (Item No. 4)
Title: Council decisions for development projects Page 6