HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018/10/15 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA
OCTOBER 15, 2018
(Council member Hallfin out)
7:20 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – Council chambers
1.Call to order
2.Roll call
3.Approval of minutes -- None
4.Approval of agenda and items on EDA consent calendar -- None
5.Reports -- None
7.New business
7a. Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC
Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution approving the revised Purchase and
Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and SLP Park Ventures, LLC.
7:30 p.m. CITY COUNCIL MEETING – Council chambers
1.Call to order
1a. Pledge of allegiance
1b. Roll call
2. Presentations -- none
3.Approval of minutes
3a. Special study session minutes of September 17, 2018
3b. City council minutes of September 17, 2018
4.Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar
NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no
discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a
member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. The
items for the Consent Calendar are listed on the last page of the Agenda.
Recommended Action: Motion to approve the Agenda as presented and items listed on the Consent
Calendar; and to waive reading of all resolutions and ordinances. (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items
from the agenda, or move items from Consent Calendar to regular agenda for discussion.)
5.Boards and Commissions -- none
6.Public hearings
6a. Rasoi, LLC dba Taste of India – on-sale wine and 3.2% malt liquor license
Recommended Action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close public
hearing. Motion to approve application from Rasoi, LLC dba Taste of India for an on-sale wine
and 3.2% malt liquor license for the premises located at 5617 Wayzata Boulevard.
Meeting of October 15, 2018
City council agenda
6b. Assessment of delinquent charges
Recommended Action: Mayor to open the public hearing, solicit comments, and close the
public hearing. Motion to adopt resolution to assess delinquent water, sewer, storm water,
refuse, abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees and other
miscellaneous charges.
6c. Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Recommended Action: Mayor to open the public hearing, take testimony, and close the
hearing. Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance adopting fees for 2019 and set
Second Reading for November 5, 2018.
7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – None
8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items
8a. Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution accepting the project report, establishing
Improvement Project No. 4019-1100, approving layout 1 and authorizing a contract with
Bolton and Menk, Inc. for the design of final plans.
8b. Gun shows at city facilities
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution banning gun shows at city facilities.
9. Communications – None
St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and regular city council meetings are carried live on civic TV cable channel 17 and
replays are frequent; check www.parktv.org for the schedule. The meetings are also streamed live on the internet at
www.parktv.org, and saved for video on demand replays. The agenda is posted on Fridays on the official city bulletin board in the
lobby of city hall and on the text display on civic TV cable channel 17. The agenda and full packet are available by noon on Friday
on the city’s website.
Meeting of October 15, 2018
City council agenda
Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call
the administration department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting.
Consent calendar
4a. Approve second reading and adopt Ordinance amending the St. Louis Park code of ordinances
relating to the establishment of an affordable housing trust fund and the housing trust fund
policy to guide the use of the fund.
4b. Adopt Resolution setting the 2019 Utility Rates.
4c. Adopt a resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of the water service line
at 8307 Virginia Circle North, P.I.D. 07-117-21-14-0037
4d. Adopt resolution establishing a special assessment for the installation of a fire suppression
sprinkler system at 6516 Walker St., St. Louis Park, MN.
4e. Approve an agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and Methodist Hospital, to lease the
city’s sanitary lift station property at 3901 Edgewood Avenue for hospital parking.
4f. Designate Champion Coatings the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a
contract with the contractor in the amount of $384,000.00 for rehabilitation of Water
Treatment Plant #16, Flag Avenue Reservoir- Project No. 4018-5000.
4g. Adopt Resolution setting liquor license fees for the license term March 1, 2019 – March 1,
2020 pursuant to Minnesota statute 340A.408 and section 3-59 of the St. Louis Park City
Code.
4h. Authorize staff to submit the draft Surface Water Management Plan (SWMP) for agency
review.
4i. Approve for filing Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29,
2018.
4j. Approve for filing Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of February 22,
2018.
4k. Approve for filing Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of May 16, 2018.
4l. Planning commission meeting minutes of August 15, 2018.
4m. Planning commission meeting minutes of September 5, 2018.
Meeting: Economic development authority
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Action agenda item: 7a
Executive summary
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC
Recommended action: Motion to adopt EDA Resolution approving the revised Purchase and
Redevelopment Contract between the EDA and SLP Park Ventures, LLC.
Policy consideration: Does the EDA wish to approve the revised Purchase and Redevelopment
Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC allowing for separate property closings to enable
construction phasing of the Platia Place (apartment building and hotel) projects?
Summary: On August 6, 2018, the EDA approved a Purchase and Redevelopment Contract
(Contract) with SLP Park Ventures, LLC. Under the Contract, the redeveloper agreed to purchase
former right-of-way (ROW) from the EDA and concurrently construct a 149-unit apartment
building and a 100-room hotel, together called Platia Place. Per the Contract, the redeveloper is
to close on the former ROW property by October 31, 2018, and to commence construction by
July 1, 2019. The redeveloper subsequently informed staff that closing on project financing will
not occur until next year, and not necessarily at the same time for the two components. The
redeveloper therefore has requested the following revisions to the Purchase and
Redevelopment Contract:
1. The option to split the ROW conveyance to correlate with the construction timing of the
two components, thereby potentially resulting in two separate property closings.
2. Extension of the final property closing date to no later than June 30, 2019.
3. The option for the redeveloper to submit a binding commitment letter from its lender
stating its intention to provide financing sufficient for construction of the applicable
component in lieu of requiring the redeveloper to close on each component’s
permanent financing at or prior to closing on the property.
4. Updates to the property legal descriptions in the Contract.
A further revision, recommended by staff, is that the redeveloper must remove all billboards
from both project sites prior to the first property closing. The Contract as originally approved,
has not been fully executed, so the requested changes, if approved, constitute a revised
Contract rather than a formal amendment.
Financial or budget considerations: Allowing for the phasing of the Platia Place projects could
result in separate property closings, in which case the EDA would split the total purchase price
of the former ROW ($73,772) evenly between the two conveyances.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: EDA Resolution
Purchase and redevelopment contract
Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, EDA Executive Director and City Manager
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a) Page 2
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC
EDA Resolution No. 18- ___
Resolution approving a revised purchase and
redevelopment contract between the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority and SLP Park
Ventures LLC
Be it resolved by the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority, St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "Authority") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals.
Pursuant to its authority under Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.090 to 469.1082, as
amended, the Authority administers its Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the “Project”), for the
purpose of facilitating the redevelopment of certain substandard property within the Project.
The Authority owns certain property (the “Authority Parcels”) within the Project, which
the Authority proposes to convey to SLP Park Ventures LLC (the “Redeveloper”) for purposes of
constructing a mixed-use (multi-family residential and hotel) development on the Authority
Parcels and certain other property owned by the Redeveloper (together with the Authority
Parcels, the “Redevelopment Property”), and to that end the parties negotiated a Purchase and
Redevelopment Contract (the “Contract”). The Authority Parcels are described on Exhibit A
attached hereto.
1.03. On August 6, 2018, the Authority approved the Contract and the sale of the
Authority Parcels thereunder, and authorized the issuance of certain tax increment revenue
notes (the “TIF Notes”) pursuant to its Resolution No. 18-07 (the “Prior Resolution”). The
Contract has not been fully executed.
1.04. The parties have now negotiated various modifications to the Contract, pursuant
to which (a) the Redeveloper may opt for separate dates of closing on the Authority Parcels to
coincide with phased construction of the two components of the Development; (b) the closing
on the Authority Parcels must take place by June 30, 2019; (c) the Redeveloper must provide
evidence of a binding title commitment sufficient for construction of the applicable component
of the Development prior to closing on that component, but is not required to close on the
construction financing at or prior to closing; and (d) the Redeveloper must remove all billboards
from the Redevelopment Property prior to any closing on the Authority Parcels (incorporation
of such revisions constituting the “Revised Contract”).
Section 2. Revised Contract Approved.
2.01. The Revised Contract as presented to the Board is hereby in all respects
approved, subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that
are approved by the President and Executive Director, provided that execution of the Revised
Contract by such officials shall be conclusive evidence of approval.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a) Page 3
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC
2.02. The approvals contained in the Prior Resolution, approving the conveyance of
the Authority Parcels and authorizing issuance of the TIF Notes, are ratified and confirmed in all
respects.
2.03. The President and Executive Director are hereby authorized to execute on behalf
of the Authority the Revised Contract and any documents referenced therein requiring
execution by the Authority, including without limitation any deed, and to carry out, on behalf of
the Authority, its obligations thereunder.
2.04. Authority staff and consultants are authorized to take any actions necessary to
carry out the intent of this resolution.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening,
Executive Director
Steve Hallfin, President
Attest:
Secretary
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a) Page 4
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC
Exhibit A
Authority Parcels
Authority Parcel A:
That part of Trunk Highway No. 12 as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 27-23 described as follows:
Beginning at right of way Boundary corner B3; thence on an assumed azimuth of 1 degree 05
minutes 15 seconds along the boundary line of said plat a distance of 86.85 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Corner B4; thence deflect to the right 83.74 feet along a non-tangential curve
concave to the northwest and passing through Right of Way Boundary Corner B5, having a
radius of 2083.24 feet, central angle of 2 degrees 18 minutes 11 seconds, chord azimuth of 48
degrees 18 minutes 24 seconds and chord distance of 83.73 feet; thence on an azimuth of 91
degrees 27 minutes 32 seconds a distance of 98.89 feet; thence southwesterly deflecting to the
right on a non- tangential curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 788.53 feet, delta
angle of 15 degrees 42 minutes 58 seconds, and a chord azimuth of 229 degrees 07 minutes 59
seconds and chord distance of 215.62 feet to the East line of parcel 44 as shown on said plat 27-
23; thence north along said East line of Parcel 44 to the point of beginning.
and
Authority Parcel B:
That part of Trunk Highway No. 12 as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 27-23 which lies southwesterly and southerly of
Line 1, said Line 1 being described as follows:
Line 1:
Commencing at Right of Way Boundary Corner B212 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23; thence
Northerly on an azimuth of 00 degrees 13 minutes 27 seconds along the West line of the
boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of 484.26 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner
B211 and the point of beginning of the line being described; thence Easterly on an azimuth of
101 degrees 20 minutes 23 seconds along the boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of
214.28 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B1; thence continue on an azimuth of 101
degrees 20 minutes 23 seconds 93.00 feet; thence deflect to the left 350.87 feet on a non-
tangential curve, concave to the North and passing through Right of Way Boundary Corner B2
as shown on said Plat No. 27-23, having a radius of 763.94 feet, a delta angle of 26 degrees 18
minutes 56 seconds, and a chord azimuth of 70 degrees 47 minutes 34 seconds to the Easterly
line of said Parcel 44; thence on an azimuth of 01 degree 05 minutes 15 seconds 7.37 feet to
Right of Way Boundary Corner B3 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23 and there terminating.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a) Page 5
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC
And northerly of the following described line and its easterly extension:
Commencing at the point of intersection of the West line of the Southeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter of said Section 1 with the most southerly line of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD
PARK; thence on an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 39 minutes 11 seconds West along
said West line a distance of 187.99 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described;
thence along a non-tangential curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 788.53 feet,
central angle of 7 degrees 43 minutes 57 seconds, chord bearing of South 78 degrees 42
minutes 56 seconds East to its intersection with the most westerly extension of the southerly
line of said Parcel 44; thence easterly along said extension of the most southerly line of said
Parcel 44 to its intersection with Line 1 described above, and said line there ending.
518115v6 MNI SA285-100
Eighth draft, October 9, 2018
PURCHASE AND REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
By and Between
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
and
SLP PARK VENTURES LLC
Dated as of: _____________, 2018
This document was drafted by:
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, Chartered (MNI)
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
(612) 337-9300
http://www.kennedy-graven.com
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 6
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREAMBLE ......................................................................................................................................... 1
ARTICLE I
Definitions
Section 1.1. Definitions .................................................................................................................... 2
ARTICLE II
Representations and Warranties
Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority ................................................................................. 6
Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper ................................................... 6
ARTICLE III
Property Acquisition; Public Redevelopment Costs
Section 3.1. Conveyance of the Property ......................................................................................... 8
Section 3.2. Purchase Price; Provisions for Payment ....................................................................... 8
Section 3.3. Conditions of Conveyance ........................................................................................... 8
Section 3.4. Place of Document Execution, Delivery and Recording ............................................. 9
Section 3.5. Title ............................................................................................................................... 9
Section 3.6. Environmental Conditions .......................................................................................... 10
Section 3.7. Issuance of Notes ........................................................................................................ 11
Section 3.8. TIF Lookback ............................................................................................................. 12
Section 3.9. Business Subsidy ........................................................................................................ 14
Section 3.10. Payment of Authority Costs ....................................................................................... 15
ARTICLE IV
Construction of Minimum Improvements
Section 4.1. Construction of Improvements ................................................................................... 16
Section 4.2. Construction Plans ...................................................................................................... 16
Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction ..................................................... 17
Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion ........................................................................................... 18
Section 4.5. Records ....................................................................................................................... 18
Section 4.6. Management ............................................................................................................... 18
Section 4.7. Inclusionary Housing Policy ...................................................................................... 19
Section 4.8. Conformity to Planning Development Contract ........................................................ 19
ARTICLE V
Insurance
Section 5.1. Insurance ..................................................................................................................... 21
Section 5.2. Subordination .............................................................................................................. 22
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 7
ii
ARTICLE VI
Tax Increment; Taxes
Section 6.1. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes ............................................................................. 23
Section 6.2. Review of Taxes ......................................................................................................... 23
Section 6.3. Assessment Agreement .............................................................................................. 23
ARTICLE VII
Other Financing
Section 7.1. Generally ..................................................................................................................... 25
Section 7.2. Authority’s Option to Cure Default on Mortgage ...................................................... 25
Section 7.3. Modification; Subordination ...................................................................................... 25
ARTICLE VIII
Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer; Indemnification
Section 8.1. Representation as to Development ............................................................................. 26
Section 8.2. Prohibition Against Redeveloper’s Transfer of Property and
Assignment of Agreement .......................................................................................... 26
Section 8.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants .................................................................... 27
ARTICLE IX
Events of Default
Section 9.1. Events of Default Defined .......................................................................................... 29
Section 9.2. Remedies on Default .................................................................................................. 29
Section 9.3. Revesting Title in Authority Upon Happening of Event Subsequent to
Conveyance to Redeveloper ....................................................................................... 30
Section 9.4. Resale of Reacquired Property; Disposition of Proceeds .......................................... 31
Section 9.5. No Remedy Exclusive ................................................................................................ 31
Section 9.6. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver ........................................................ 32
Section 9.7. Attorney Fees .............................................................................................................. 32
ARTICLE X
Additional Provisions
Section 10.1. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable ................................. 33
Section 10.2. Equal Employment Opportunity ................................................................................ 33
Section 10.3. Restrictions on Use ..................................................................................................... 33
Section 10.4. Provisions Not Merged With Deed ............................................................................ 33
Section 10.5. Titles of Articles and Sections .................................................................................... 33
Section 10.6. Notices and Demands ................................................................................................. 33
Section 10.7. Counterparts ................................................................................................................ 34
Section 10.8. Recording .................................................................................................................... 34
Section 10.9. Amendment ................................................................................................................ 34
Section 10.10. Authority Approvals ................................................................................................... 34
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 8
iii
TESTIMONIUM ................................................................................................................................ 35
SIGNATURES ................................................................................................................................... 35
SCHEDULE A Redevelopment Property
SCHEDULE B Form of Quitclaim Deed
SCHEDULE C Authorizing Resolution
SCHEDULE D Projected Public Redevelopment Costs
SCHEDULE E Certificate of Completion
SCHEDULE F Assessment Agreement
SCHEDULE G Form of Subordination Agreement
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 9
1
PURCHASE AND REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT
THIS AGREEMENT, made as of the __ day of __________, 2018, by and between the St.
Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the “Authority”), a public body corporate and politic
under the laws of Minnesota, and SLP Park Ventures LLC (the “Redeveloper”), a Minnesota
limited liability company.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Authority was created pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090 to
469.1081 (the “Act”) and was authorized to transact business and exercise its powers by a resolution
of the City Council of the City; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has undertaken a program to promote the development and
redevelopment of land which is underutilized within the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the
“City”), and in this connection created the Redevelopment Project No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as
the “Project”) in an area (hereinafter referred to as the “Project Area”) located in the City pursuant
to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the “HRA Act”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Act and the HRA Act, the Authority is authorized to acquire
real property, or interests therein, and to undertake certain activities to facilitate the
redevelopment of real property by private enterprise; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has acquired certain property described in Schedule A (the
“Authority Parcels”) within the Project, and intends to convey that property to the Redeveloper,
who intends to construct certain improvements described herein on the Authority Parcels as well
as certain other property owned by the Redeveloper (together, the Redevelopment Property”).
WHEREAS, the Authority and City have previously established the Wayzata Boulevard
Tax Increment Financing District (“TIF District”) pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.174
to 469.1794, as amended (the “TIF Act”), made up of property in the Project Area including the
Redevelopment Property; and
WHEREAS, the Authority believes that the redevelopment of the Redevelopment
Property pursuant to this Agreement, and fulfillment generally of this Agreement, are in the vital
and best interests of the City and the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its residents, and in
accord with the public purposes and provisions of the applicable State and local laws and
requirements under which the Project has been undertaken and is being assisted.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and the mutual obligations of the
parties hereto, each of them does hereby covenant and agree with the other as follows:
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 10
2
ARTICLE I
Definitions
Section 1.1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless a different meaning clearly appears
from the context:
“Act” means Minnesota Statutes Sections 469.090 to 469.1081, as amended.
“Affiliate” means with respect to any entity (a) any corporation, partnership, limited
liability company or other business entity or person controlling, controlled by or under common
control with the entity, and (b) any successor to such party by merger, acquisition, reorganization
or similar transaction involving all or substantially all of the assets of such party (or such
Affiliate). For the purpose hereof the words “controlling”, “controlled by” and “under common
control with” shall mean, with respect to any corporation, partnership, limited liability company
or other business entity, the ownership of fifty percent or more of the voting interests in such
entity or possession, directly or indirectly, of the power to direct or cause the direction of
management policies of such entity, whether through ownership of voting securities or by
contract or otherwise.
“Agreement” means this Agreement, as the same may be from time to time modified,
amended, or supplemented.
“Authority” means the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority.
“Authority Parcels” means the parcels so described in Schedule A of this Agreement.
“Authority Representative” means the Executive Director of the Authority, or any person
designated by the Executive Director to act as the Authority Representative for the purposes of this
Agreement.
“Authorizing Resolution” means the resolution of the Authority, substantially in the form of
attached Schedule B to be adopted by the Authority to authorize the issuance of the Note.
“Available Tax Increment” has the meaning provided in the Authorizing Resolution.
“Business Day” means any day except a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, a day on which
the City is closed for business, or a day on which banking institutions in the City are authorized by
law or executive order to close.
“Business Subsidy Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 116J.993 to 116J.995, as
amended.
“City” means the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 11
3
“Certificate of Completion” means the certification provided to the Redeveloper in
connection with any Phase of the Minimum Improvements, pursuant to Section 4.4 of this
Agreement.
“Construction Plans” means the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents on
the construction work to be performed by the Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property which
(a) shall be as detailed as the plans, specifications, drawings and related documents which are
submitted to the appropriate building officials of the City, and (b) shall include at least the following
for each building: (1) site plan; (2) foundation plan; (3) underground parking plans; (4) floor plan
for each floor; (5) cross sections of each (length and width); (6) elevations (all sides); (7) landscape
plan; and (8) such other plans or supplements to the foregoing plans as the Authority may
reasonably request to allow it to ascertain the nature and quality of the proposed construction work.
“County” means the County of Hennepin, Minnesota.
“Development Pro Forma” means the financial pro forma for the Minimum Improvements
attached hereto as Schedule E.
“Event of Default” means an action by the Redeveloper listed in Article IX of this
Agreement.
“Holder” means the owner of a Mortgage.
“Hotel Component” means construction on the Redevelopment Property of a six-story,
approximately 61,411 square-foot hotel containing 100 rooms.
“HRA Act” means Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.001 to 469.047, as amended.
“Maturity Date” means the date that the Note has been paid in full or terminated in
accordance with its terms, whichever is earlier.
“Minimum Improvements” means construction on the Redevelopment Property of the
Multifamily Component and the Hotel Component, along with all associated parking.
“Mortgage” means any mortgage made by the Redeveloper that is secured, in whole or in
part, with the Redevelopment Property and that is a permitted encumbrance pursuant to the
provisions of Article VIII of this Agreement.
“MPCA” means the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency.
“Multifamily Component” means construction on the Redevelopment Property of a six-
story, approximately 205,670 square-foot multifamily apartment building containing 149 housing
units, as further described in Section 4.7 hereof.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 12
4
“Note” means the Tax Increment Revenue Note, substantially in the form contained in the
Authorizing Resolution, to be delivered by the Authority to the Redeveloper in accordance with
Section 3.7 hereof.
“Planning Development Contract” means the Planning Development Contract between the
City and the Redeveloper, executed in connection with the development of the Minimum
Improvements on the Redevelopment Property and incorporated herein by reference.
“Project” means the Authority’s Redevelopment Project No. 1.
“Public Redevelopment Costs” has the meaning provided in Section 3.7(a) hereof.
“Project Area” means the geographic area within the boundaries of the Project.
“Redeveloper” means SLP Park Ventures LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, or
its permitted successors and assigns.
“Redeveloper Parcels” means the parcels so described in Schedule A of this Agreement.
“Redevelopment Plan” means the Redevelopment Plan for the Project.
“Redevelopment Property” means the real property described in Schedule A of this
Agreement, consisting of the Authority Parcels and the Redeveloper Parcels.
“State” means the state of Minnesota.
“Tax Increment” means that portion of the real property taxes that is paid with respect to the
Redevelopment Property and that is remitted to the Authority as tax increment pursuant to the Tax
Increment Act.
“Tax Increment Act” or “TIF Act” means the Tax Increment Financing Act, Minnesota
Statutes Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended.
“Tax Increment District” or “TIF District” means the Wayzata Boulevard Tax Increment
Financing District created by the City and the Authority.
“Tax Increment Plan” or “TIF Plan” means the Tax Increment Financing Plan for the TIF
District approved by the City Council on March 21, 2016, and as it may be amended.
.
“Tax Official” means any County assessor, County auditor, County or State board of
equalization, the commissioner of revenue of the State, or any State or federal district court, the tax
court of the State, or the State Supreme Court.
“Transfer” has the meaning set forth in Section 8.2(a) hereof.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 13
5
“Unavoidable Delays” means delays beyond the reasonable control of the party seeking to
be excused as a result thereof which are the direct result of strikes, other labor troubles, prolonged
adverse weather or acts of God, fire or other casualty to the Minimum Improvements, litigation
commenced by third parties which, by injunction or other similar judicial action, directly results in
delays, or acts of any federal, state or local governmental unit (other than the Authority or City in
exercising their rights under this Agreement), including without limitation condemnation or threat
of condemnation of any portion of the Redevelopment Property, which directly result in delays.
Unavoidable Delays shall not include delays experienced by the Redeveloper in obtaining permits
or governmental approvals necessary to enable construction of the Minimum Improvements by the
dates such construction is required under Section 4.3 of this Agreement, so long as the Construction
Plans have been approved in accordance with Section 4.2 hereof.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 14
6
ARTICLE II
Representations and Warranties
Section 2.1. Representations by the Authority. (a) The Authority is an economic
development authority duly organized and existing under the laws of the State. Under the
provisions of the Act and the HRA Act, the Authority has the power to enter into this Agreement
and carry out its obligations hereunder.
(b) The Authority will use its best efforts to facilitate development of the Minimum
Improvements, including but not limited to cooperating with the Redeveloper in obtaining necessary
administrative and land use approvals and construction financing pursuant to Section 7.1 hereof.
(c) The Authority will issue the Note, subject to all the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
(d) The activities of the Authority are undertaken for the purpose of fostering the
redevelopment of certain real property previously occupied by substandard and obsolete buildings,
which will revitalize this portion of the Project Area, increase tax base, provide desired services, and
increase housing opportunities.
Section 2.2. Representations and Warranties by the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper
represents and warrants that:
(a) The Redeveloper is a limited liability company, duly organized and in good standing
under the laws of the State, is not in violation of any provisions of its articles of organization or
bylaws, is duly qualified as a foreign limited liability company and authorized to transact business
within the State, has power to enter into this Agreement and has duly authorized the execution,
delivery, and performance of this Agreement by proper action of its members.
(b) If the Redeveloper acquires the Authority Parcels in accordance with this
Agreement, the Redeveloper will construct, operate and maintain the Minimum Improvements in
accordance with the terms of this Agreement, the Redevelopment Plan and all local, state and
federal laws and regulations (including, but not limited to, environmental, zoning, building code,
energy-conservation and public health laws and regulations).
(c) The Redeveloper will use reasonable efforts to secure all permits, licenses and
approvals necessary for construction of the Minimum Improvements.
(d) The Redeveloper has received no written notice or other written communication
from any local, state or federal official that the activities of the Redeveloper or the Authority in the
Project Area may be or will be in violation of any environmental law or regulation (other than those
notices or communications of which the Authority is aware). The Redeveloper is aware of no facts
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 15
7
the existence of which would cause it to be in violation of or give any person a valid claim under
any local, state or federal environmental law, regulation or review procedure.
(e)Neither the execution and delivery of this Agreement, the consummation of the
transactions contemplated hereby, nor the fulfillment of or compliance with the terms and
conditions of this Agreement is prevented, limited by or conflicts with or results in a breach of, the
terms, conditions or provisions of any corporate restriction or any evidences of indebtedness,
agreement or instrument of whatever nature to which the Redeveloper is now a party or by which it
is bound, or constitutes a default under any of the foregoing.
(f)The proposed development by the Redeveloper hereunder would not occur but for
the tax increment financing assistance being provided by the Authority hereunder.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 16
8
ARTICLE III
Property Acquisition; Public Redevelopment Costs
Section 3.1. Conveyance of the Property. (a) The Redevelopment Property consists of
the Redeveloper Parcels and the Authority Parcels described in Schedule A. As of the date of
this Agreement, the Redeveloper has acquired the Redeveloper Parcels. The Authority has no
obligation to acquire the Redeveloper Parcels.
(b) The Authority owns the Authority Parcels and will convey title to and possession of the
Authority Parcels to the Redeveloper, subject to all the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
(c)The Redeveloper is in the process of obtaining final City approval of a Planned
Unit Development ordinance (“PUD”) and plat (the “Redevelopment Plat”) for the
Redevelopment Property and will enter into a Planning Development Contract with the City,
which PUD, Redevelopment Plat, and Planning Development Contract, in final form, are
incorporated into this Agreement by reference.
Section 3.2. Purchase Price; Provisions for Payment. (a) The purchase price to be paid to
the Authority by the Redeveloper in exchange for the conveyance of the Authority Parcels shall be
$73,772 (the “Purchase Price”). The Purchase Price shall be paid in full at Closing (as defined in
Section 3.3(b) hereof), provided that if the Authority Parcels are conveyed to the Redeveloper in
two separate closings as provided hereafter, the Purchase Price for Authority Parcel A shall be
$36,886 and the Purchase Price for Authority Parcel B shall be $36,886.
(b)The Redeveloper may close on conveyance of both Authority Parcels in a single
Closing, or may close on Authority Parcel A (related to the Hotel Component) and Authority Parcel
B (related to the Multifamily Component) in separate closings, in the order selected by the
Redeveloper. If the Redeveloper chooses two separate closings, all conditions of conveyance
provided in Section 3.3 hereof must be met prior to Closing on the applicable Authority Parcel.
Section 3.3. Conditions of Conveyance. (a) The Authority shall convey title to and
possession of the Authority Parcels to the Redeveloper by one or more quit claim deeds
substantially in the form set forth on Schedule B to this Agreement (the “Deed”). The Authority’s
obligation to convey the Authority Parcels to the Redeveloper is subject to satisfaction of the
following terms and conditions:
(1)The Redeveloper having provided a binding financing commitment for
construction of the Minimum Improvements (or applicable portion thereof) from a Lender at
or before Closing on transfer of title to the Authority Parcels to the Redeveloper, and the
Authority having approved such financing for construction of the Minimum Improvements
(or applicable component thereof) in accordance with Article VII hereof.
(2)The City having approved the Redevelopment Plat, PUD, and Planning
Development Contract in accordance with Section 3.1, and the City and Redeveloper having
recorded the Redevelopment Plat on or before Closing.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 17
9
(3) The City having approved all necessary zoning variances to the
Redevelopment Property in accordance with Section 3.1.
(4) The Authority having approved Construction Plans for the Minimum
Improvements (or applicable component thereof) in accordance with Section 4.2.
(5) The Redeveloper having reviewed and approved (or waived objections to)
title to the Authority Parcels as set forth in Section 3.5.
(6) The Redeveloper having made such inspections and testing with regard to
the Authority Parcels and Redevelopment Property as a whole as it deems necessary, and
being satisfied with the results of such inspections.
(7) The Redeveloper having removed all billboards located on the Redeveloper
Parcels prior to Closing (if Redeveloper opts for separate closings, the billboards must be
removed prior to the first Closing to occur).
(8) There is no uncured Event of Default under this Agreement.
Conditions (1), (2), (4), (7) and (8) are solely for the benefit of the Authority, and may be waived by
the Authority. Conditions (5) and (6) are solely for the benefit of the Redeveloper, and may be
waived by the Redeveloper. Condition (3) is for the benefit of both parties and may be waived by
both parties. If any condition is not satisfied or waived by the applicable party on or before Closing,
then either party may terminate this Agreement by ten days’ written notice to the other party. Upon
such termination, neither party shall have any further obligations or liability to the other hereunder;
provided, however, that if there are Administrative Costs (as defined in Section 3.10) incurred but
unpaid at the time of such termination, Redeveloper shall reimburse the Authority for such
Administrative Costs.
(b) The closing on conveyance of the Authority Parcels from the Authority to the
Redeveloper (“Closing”) shall occur within thirty (30) days after satisfaction or waiver of the
conditions specified in this Section, but no later than June 30, 2019, or such later date as is mutually
agreed upon by the parties in writing; provided that if the Authority Parcels are conveyed in two
separate closings, the Closing on conveyance of the final Authority Parcel shall occur no later than
June 30, 2019.
Section 3.4. Place of Document Execution, Delivery and Recording. (a) Unless otherwise
mutually agreed by the Authority and the Redeveloper, the execution and delivery of all deeds,
documents and the payment of any purchase price shall be made at the offices of the Authority or
such other location to which the parties may agree.
(b) The Deed shall be in recordable form and shall be promptly recorded in the proper
office for the recordation of deeds and other instruments pertaining to the Authority Parcels. At
closing, the Redeveloper shall pay: all recording costs, including state deed tax, in connection
with the conveyance of the Authority Parcels (or applicable Authority Parcel); title insurance
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 18
10
commitment fees and premiums, if any; and title company closing fees, if any. The Authority
shall pay costs of recording any instruments used to clear title encumbrances; and any special
assessments outstanding or levied against the Authority Parcels as of the applicable Closing
Date. The parties agree and understand that the Authority Parcels are exempt from property
taxes for taxes payable in 2018, and will be exempt from property taxes for taxes payable in
2019.
Section 3.5. Title. (a) As soon as practicable after the date of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper, at Redeveloper’s sole expense, shall obtain a commitment for the issuance of a policy
of title for the Authority Parcels. The Redeveloper shall have twenty (20) days from the later of the
date of its receipt of such commitment and the date of recording of the Redevelopment Plat to
review the state of title to the Redevelopment Property and to provide the Authority with a list of
written objections to such title. Upon receipt of the Redeveloper’s list of written objections, the
Authority shall proceed in good faith and with all due diligence to attempt to cure the objections
made by the Redeveloper. In the event that the Authority has failed to cure objections within sixty
(60) days after its receipt of the Redeveloper’s list of such objections, the Redeveloper may by the
giving of written notice to the Authority (i) terminate this Agreement, upon the receipt of which this
Agreement shall be null and void and neither party shall have any liability hereunder, other than
Redeveloper’s obligations under Section 3.10 hereof; or (ii) waive the objections and proceed to
Closing. The Authority shall have no obligation to take any action to clear defects in the title to the
Authority Parcels, other than the good faith efforts described above.
(b)The Authority shall take no actions to encumber title to the Authority Parcels
between the date of this Agreement and the time the Deed is delivered to the Redeveloper.
(c)The Redeveloper shall take no actions to encumber title to the Authority Parcels
between the date of this Agreement and the time the Deed is delivered to the Redeveloper. The
Redeveloper expressly agrees that it will not cause or permit the attachment of any mechanics,
attorneys, or other liens to the Authority Parcels prior to Closing. Notwithstanding termination of
this Agreement prior to Closing, Redeveloper is obligated to pay all costs to discharge any
encumbrances to the Authority Parcels attributable to actions of Redeveloper, its employees,
officers, agents or consultants, including without limitation the Architect, Contractor and
Redeveloper’s Engineer.
Section 3.6. Environmental Conditions. (a) Before closing on conveyance of the
Authority Parcels, the Redeveloper may enter the Authority Parcels and conduct any environmental
or soils studies deemed necessary by the Redeveloper. The Redeveloper agrees that it shall cause
all studies, investigations, and inspections performed on the Authority Parcels to be performed in a
manner that does not disturb the Authority Parcels and that the Authority Parcels shall be returned to
their original condition after Redeveloper’s entry, provided that Redeveloper shall not be liable for
any existing conditions on the Authority Parcels or for any environmental remediation or response
actions required as a result of such investigations and inspections. Except for soil borings and test
pits, the Redeveloper shall not conduct or cause to be conducted any physically intrusive
investigations, examinations or studies of the Authority Parcels without obtaining the prior written
consent of the Authority. If at least 10 days before Closing the Redeveloper determines that
hazardous waste or other pollutants as defined under federal and state law exist on the Authority
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 19
11
Parcels, or that the soils are otherwise unsuitable for construction of the Minimum Improvements,
the Redeveloper may at its option terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to the
Authority, upon receipt of which this Agreement shall be null and void and neither party shall have
any liability hereunder, other than Redeveloper’s obligations under Section 3.10 hereof.
(b)The Redeveloper acknowledges that the Authority makes no representations or
warranties as to the condition of the soils on the Redevelopment Property or the fitness of the
Redevelopment Property for construction of the Minimum Improvements or any other purpose for
which the Redeveloper may make use of such property, and that the assistance provided to the
Redeveloper under this Agreement neither implies any responsibility by the Authority or the City
for any contamination of the Redevelopment Property nor imposes any obligation on such parties to
participate in any cleanup of the Redevelopment Property, except as expressly set forth herein.
(c)Without limiting its obligations under Section 8.3 of this Agreement, Redeveloper
agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Authority, the City and their governing body
members, officers and employees (the “Indemnified Parties”), from any claims or actions to the
extent arising out of any claim related to the presence of hazardous substances on the
Redevelopment Property, or any portion thereof, which either (i) arise out of activities of
Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property or (ii) arise out of hazardous substances, asbestos,
petroleum substances, or pollutants, irritants or contaminants brought onto the Redevelopment
Property by Redeveloper. In addition, Redeveloper agrees to release the Indemnified Parties
from any and all costs, expenses, losses, liabilities, claims, causes of action, demands, and
damages relating to the environmental conditions on the Redevelopment Property as of the Date
of Closing, including without limitation any claim the Redeveloper may have to recover from all
or any of the Indemnified Parties any costs or expenses incurred by the Redeveloper in
performing any remediation of the Redevelopment Property. Nothing in this section will be
construed to limit or affect any limitations on liability of the City or Authority under State or federal
law, including without limitation Minnesota Statutes Sections 466.04 and 604.02.
Section 3.7. Issuance of Notes. (a) Generally. The Authority has determined that, in order
to make development of the Minimum Improvements financially feasible, it is necessary to
reimburse Redeveloper for a portion of the cost of site preparation related to demolition, soil
excavation, disposal, and correction, pilings and/or foundational support, environmental
remediation, utility relocation, and underground structured parking (the “Public Redevelopment
Costs”), subject to the terms of this Section.
(b)Terms. To reimburse the Public Redevelopment Costs incurred by Redeveloper, the
Authority shall issue and the Redeveloper shall purchase a Note in connection with the Hotel
Component (the “Hotel Note”) in the maximum principal amount of $714,000, and a Note in
connection with the Multifamily Component (the “Multifamily Note”) in the maximum principal
amount of $2,760,000. The Authority shall issue and deliver each Note upon Redeveloper having:
(i)delivered to the Authority one or more certificates signed by the
Redeveloper’s duly authorized representative, containing the following: (i) a statement
that each cost identified in the certificate is a Public Redevelopment Cost as defined in
this Agreement and that no part of such cost has been included in any previous
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 20
12
certification; (ii) evidence that each identified Public Redevelopment Cost has been paid
or incurred by or on behalf of the Redeveloper; and (iii) a statement that no uncured
Event of Default by the Redeveloper has occurred and is continuing under the
Agreement. The Authority may, if not satisfied that the conditions described herein have
been met, return any certificate with a statement of the reasons why it is not acceptable
and requesting such further documentation or clarification as the Authority may
reasonably require;
(ii)submitted and obtained Authority approval of financing in accordance with
Section 7.1; and
(iii)delivered to the Authority an investment letter in a form reasonably
satisfactory to the Authority.
The terms of the Notes will be substantially those set forth in the form of the Note shown in
Schedule C, and the Notes will be subject to all terms of the Authorizing Resolution, which are
incorporated herein by reference.
(c)Termination of right to Notes. In accordance with Section 469.1763, Subdivision 3
of the TIF Act, conditions for delivery of the Note must be met by June 16, 2021 (five years after
the date of certification of the TIF District by the County). If the conditions are not satisfied by
such date, the Authority has no further obligations under this Section 3.7.
(d)Assignment of Notes. The Authority acknowledges that the Redeveloper may assign
one or both Notes to a third party. The Authority consents to such an assignment, conditioned upon
receipt of an investment letter from such third party in a form reasonably acceptable to the
Authority.
(e)Qualifications. The Redeveloper understands and acknowledges that the
Authority makes no representations or warranties regarding the amount of Tax Increment, or that
revenues pledged to the Notes will be sufficient to pay the principal and interest on the Notes.
Any estimates of Tax Increment prepared by the Authority or its financial advisors in connection
with the TIF District or this Agreement are for the benefit of the Authority, and are not intended
as representations on which the Redeveloper may rely. Public Redevelopment Costs exceeding
the principal amount of the Notes are the sole responsibility of Redeveloper.
Section 3.8. TIF Lookback.
(a)Generally. The financial assistance to the Redeveloper under this Agreement is
based on certain assumptions regarding likely costs and expenses associated with constructing
the Minimum Improvements. The Authority and the Redeveloper agree that those assumptions
will be reviewed at the times described in this Section, and that the amount of Tax Increment
assistance provided under Section 3.7 will be adjusted accordingly.
(b)Definitions. For the purposes of this Section, the following terms have the
following meanings:
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 21
13
“Calculation Date” means 60 days after the earliest of (i) the date of Stabilization of the
Minimum Improvements; (ii) the date of any Transfer of the Minimum Improvements (provided
that the Redeveloper and the Authority agree that the Calculation Date will occur prior to the
actual Transfer); or (iii) three years after the date of completion of the Minimum Improvements,
as evidenced by the Authority’s issuance of a Certificate of Completion.
“Cash Flow” means Net Operating Income less debt service with respect to the first
mortgage loan.
“Cash on Cash Return” means net Cash Flow divided by the sum of Redeveloper’s actual
equity, which excludes any grants or City, Authority, Federal or State funds received by the
Redeveloper, and the principal amount of the Note(s).
“Cash on Cost Return” means Net Operating Income divided by the total development
costs, which excludes any grants or City, Authority, Federal or State funds received by the
Redeveloper.
“Net Operating Income” means total annual income and other project-derived annual
revenue, including payments under the Note(s) (but excluding proceeds, or the financial effect of
the proceeds, from a sale or refinancing), less Operating Expenses in accordance with the Pro
Forma for each Component of the Minimum Improvements.
“Operating Expenses” means reasonable and customary expenses incurred in operating
each Component of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with its respective Pro Forma,
including deposits to capital replacement reserves.
“Stabilization” is defined as follows: for the Apartment Component, the date on which it
has achieved 93% occupancy; and for the Hotel Component, the date on which it has achieved
one full year of operations at 68% occupancy.
(c) Lookback Calculations.
(i) At the time of completion of construction of each Component, if the amount of
the Public Redevelopment Costs actually incurred is less than the amount of Estimated
Public Redevelopment Costs projected in Exhibit D-1 for either Component, the financial
assistance for the Public Redevelopment Costs will be reduced on a dollar for dollar basis
in the amount of such deficiency and the principal amount of the Note issued for the
relevant Component will be adjusted accordingly.
(ii) On the Calculation Date for the Multifamily Component, the principal amount of
the Multifamily Note issued pursuant to this Agreement will be subject to adjustment
based on a targeted annual Cash-On-Cash Return in excess of 10%. By the Calculation
Date, the Redeveloper must deliver to the Authority’s municipal advisor (the
“Consultant”) evidence of its annual Cash-On-Cash Return. The Cash-On-Cash Return
shall be calculated by the Authority’s Consultant based on the Redeveloper’s financial
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 22
14
statement, prepared pursuant to generally accepted industry standards and submitted to
the Authority’s Consultant (to be calculated the same manner as the sample attached as
Exhibit D-2).
If the actual annual Cash-On-Cash Return exceeds 10%, then the principal amount of the
Multifamily Note issued to the Redeveloper will be reduced by 50% of the amount that
results in an annual Cash-On-Cash Return equal to 10% over the term of the Multifamily
Note, and the Redeveloper shall deliver the Multifamily Note to the Authority in
exchange for a new Multifamily Note in the adjusted principal amount upon the
Authority’s written request.
(iii)On the Calculation Date for the Hotel Component, the amount of the Hotel Note
provided pursuant to this Agreement will be subject to adjustment based on a targeted
annual Cash-On-Cost Return in excess of 9%. By the Calculation Date, the Redeveloper
must deliver to the Authority’s Consultant evidence of its Cash-On-Cost Return. The
Cash-On-Cost Return shall be calculated by the Authority’s Consultant based on the
Redeveloper’s financial statement, prepared pursuant to generally accepted industry
standards and submitted to the Authority’s Consultant (to be calculated in the same
manner as the sample attached as Exhibit D-3).
If the actual Cash-On-Cost Return exceeds 9%, then the principal amount of the Hotel
Note issued to the Redeveloper will be reduced by 50% of the amount that results in a
Cash-On-Cost Return equal to 9% over the term of the Hotel Note, and the Redeveloper
shall deliver the Hotel Note to the Authority in exchange for a new Hotel Note in the
adjusted principal amount upon the Authority’s written request.
(d)Property Sale or Refinance. If the Redeveloper sells the Hotel Component or the
Multifamily Component to an unrelated third party or refinances the Hotel Component or the
Multifamily Component (provided, however, the placement of permanent debt on either
Component will not constitute a refinancing giving rise to the review as described in this
Section) during the first five (5) years after issuance of a Certificate of Completion for each
Component of the Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper agrees to provide to the Consultant
reasonable background documentation of actual project costs, project sources, and financing
terms to construct the Minimum Improvements as well as the actual income and operating
expenses related to the relevant Component for the period from the date of this Agreement
through the date of such anticipated sale or refinance (provided that the Redeveloper and the
Authority agree that the Calculation Date will occur prior to the actual sale or refinancing).
Based on such review:
(i)If the Consultant determines that the Multifamily Component exceeds an actual
annual 10% Cash-On-Cash Return (to be calculated in the same manner as the sample
attached as Exhibit D-2), then 50% of the amount that exceeds the annual 10% Cash-On-
Cash Return will be applied to reduce the principal amount payable under the
Multifamily Note.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 23
15
(ii)If the Consultant determines that the Hotel Component exceeds an actual annual
9% Cash-On-Cost Return (to be calculated in the same manner as the sample attached as
Exhibit D-3), then 50% of the amount that exceeds the annual 9% Cash-On-Cost Return
will be applied to reduce the principal amount payable under the Hotel Note.
Such reduction(s) will be effective upon written notice by the Authority to Redeveloper, stating
the amount of such excess profit as determined by the Authority in accordance with this Section,
accompanied by the Consultant's report.
Section 3.9. Business Subsidy. The Redeveloper warrants and represents that the
Redeveloper’s investment in the purchase of the Redevelopment Property and in site preparation
equals at least 70% of the City assessor’s finalized market value of the Redevelopment Property
for the 2017 assessment year (the most recent year for which finalized values are available),
calculated as follows:
Aggregate cost of acquisition of Redevelopment Property……...…..$3,773,772
Plus Estimated cost of site preparation...................………………….$4,030,550
Less site preparation costs reimbursed by the Authority….. ………..($3,474,000)
Equals net land and site preparation cost...................………………..$4,330,322
Assessor’s finalized market value
of Redevelopment Property (2017)...................……………………...$2,331,000
$4,330,322 (net acquisition and site preparation cost) is 185.77% of $2,331,000
(assessor’s finalized fair market value of the Redevelopment Property for 2017).
Accordingly, the parties agree and understand that the financial assistance described in this
Agreement does not constitute a business subsidy within the meaning of the Business Subsidy
Act. The Redeveloper releases and waives any claim against the Authority and its governing
body members, officers, agents, servants and employees thereof arising from application of the
Business Subsidy Act to this Agreement, including without limitation any claim that the
Authority failed to comply with the Business Subsidy Act with respect to this Agreement.
Section 3.10. Payment of Authority Costs. The Redeveloper agrees that it will pay, within
30 days after written notice from the Authority, the reasonable costs of consultants and attorneys
retained by the Authority in connection with the establishment of the TIF District, any necessary
modification of the TIF Plan for the TIF District, and the negotiation and preparation of this
Agreement and other incidental agreements and documents contemplated hereunder, including
without limitation agreements and documents related to land conveyance, development and
financing assistance. The Authority will provide written reports describing the costs accrued under
this Section upon request from the Redeveloper, but not more often than intervals of 45 days. Any
amount deposited by the Redeveloper upon filing its application for tax increment financing with
the Authority will be credited to the Redeveloper’s obligation under this Section. Upon termination
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 24
16
of this Agreement in accordance with its terms, the Redeveloper remains obligated under this
section for costs incurred through the effective date of termination.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 25
17
ARTICLE IV
Construction of Minimum Improvements
Section 4.1. Construction of Improvements. The Redeveloper agrees that it will construct
or cause construction of the Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property in accordance
with the approved Construction Plans and that it will, during any period while the Redeveloper
retains ownership of any portion of the Minimum Improvements, operate and maintain, preserve
and keep the Minimum Improvements or cause the Minimum Improvements to be maintained,
preserved and kept with the appurtenances and every part and parcel thereof, in good repair and
condition.
Section 4.2. Construction Plans. (a) Before commencing construction of the Minimum
Improvements, the Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority Construction Plans for the Minimum
Improvements. The Construction Plans shall provide for the construction of the Minimum
Improvements and shall be in conformity with this Agreement, the Redevelopment Plan and all
applicable State and local laws and regulations. The Authority will approve the Construction Plans
in writing if (i) the Construction Plans conform to all terms and conditions of this Agreement; (ii)
the Construction Plans conform to the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment Plan; (iii) the
Construction Plans conform to all applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances, rules and
regulations; (iv) the Construction Plans are adequate to provide for construction of the Minimum
Improvements; (v) the Construction Plans do not provide for expenditures in excess of the funds
available to the Redeveloper for construction of the Minimum Improvements; and (vi) no Event of
Default has occurred. No approval by the Authority shall relieve the Redeveloper of the obligation
to comply with the terms of this Agreement, applicable federal, state and local laws, ordinances,
rules and regulations, or to construct the Minimum Improvements in accordance therewith. No
approval by the Authority shall constitute a waiver of an Event of Default. If approval of the
Construction Plans is requested by the Redeveloper in writing at the time of submission, such
Construction Plans shall be deemed approved unless rejected in writing by the Authority, in whole
or in part. Such rejections shall set forth in detail the reasons therefor based upon the criteria set
forth in (i) through (vi) above, and shall be made within 20 days after the date of receipt of final
plans from the Redeveloper. If the Authority rejects any Construction Plans in whole or in part, the
Redeveloper shall submit new or corrected Construction Plans within twenty (20) days after written
notification to the Redeveloper of the rejection. The provisions of this Section relating to approval,
rejection and resubmission of corrected Construction Plans shall continue to apply until the
Construction Plans have been approved by the Authority. The Authority’s approval shall not be
unreasonably withheld. Said approval shall constitute a conclusive determination that the
Construction Plans (and the Minimum Improvements, constructed in accordance with said plans)
comply to the Authority’s satisfaction with the provisions of this Agreement relating thereto.
The Redeveloper hereby waives any and all claims and causes of action whatsoever
resulting from the review of the Construction Plans by the Authority and/or any changes in the
Construction Plans requested by the Authority. Neither the Authority, the City, nor any employee
or official of the Authority or City shall be responsible in any manner whatsoever for any defect in
the Construction Plans or in any work done pursuant to the Construction Plans, including changes
requested by the Authority.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 26
18
(b)If the Redeveloper desires to make any material change in the Construction Plans or
any component thereof after their approval by the Authority, the Redeveloper shall submit the
proposed change to the Authority for its approval. For the purpose of this section, the term
“material” means changes that decrease construction costs by $750,000 or more. If the
Construction Plans, as modified by the proposed change, conform to the requirements of this
Section 4.2 of this Agreement with respect to such previously approved Construction Plans, the
Authority shall approve the proposed change and notify the Redeveloper in writing of its approval.
Such change in the Construction Plans shall, in any event, be deemed approved by the Authority
unless rejected, in whole or in part, by written notice by the Authority to the Redeveloper, setting
forth in detail the reasons therefor. Such rejection shall be made within 10 days after receipt of the
notice of such change. The Authority’s approval of any such change in the Construction Plans will
not be unreasonably withheld.
Section 4.3. Commencement and Completion of Construction. (a) Subject to Unavoidable
Delays, the Redeveloper shall commence construction of the Hotel Component and Multifamily
Component of the Minimum Improvements by July 1, 2019. Subject to Unavoidable Delays, the
Redeveloper shall complete the construction of the Hotel Component and Multifamily Component
of the Minimum Improvements by December 31, 2020. All work with respect to the Minimum
Improvements to be constructed or provided by the Redeveloper on the Redevelopment Property
shall be in conformity with the Construction Plans as submitted by the Redeveloper and approved
by the Authority.
(b)The Redeveloper agrees for itself, its successors, and assigns, and every successor in
interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, that the Redeveloper, and such
successors and assigns, shall promptly begin and diligently prosecute to completion the
development of the Redevelopment Property through the construction of the Minimum
Improvements thereon, and that such construction shall in any event be commenced and completed
within the periods specified in this Section 4.3 of this Agreement. After the date of this Agreement
and until the Multifamily Component of the Minimum Improvements has been fully leased, the
Redeveloper shall make reports, in such detail and at such times as may reasonably be requested by
the Authority, but no more than monthly, as to the actual progress of the Redeveloper with respect
to such construction and leasing.
(c)If the Redeveloper anticipates that construction of either Component of the
Minimum Improvements will not take place by the dates provided in this Section, the Redeveloper
shall provide a written and oral report to the City Council of the City at a regular City Council
meeting at least 45 days prior to the applicable required date of commencement or completion. The
report must describe the reasons for the expected failure to meet the construction timeline, evidence
of Redeveloper’s due diligence in working toward construction of the applicable Component, and a
detailed revised schedule of construction of such Component. Approval by the Authority of a
modified schedule for construction of the applicable Component of the Minimum Improvements
shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed. Failure by the Redeveloper to provide
the written and oral report described in this Section is an Event of Default pursuant to Article IX
hereof.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 27
19
(d)The Redeveloper shall comply with the City’s Green Building Policy, adopted by
the City Council on February 16, 2010 and amended on September 16, 2014, and as such policy
may be amended as of the date of issuance of a building permit for the Minimum Improvements,
and shall use commercially reasonable efforts to obtain “green” certification for each component of
the Minimum Improvements. As a condition to issuance of a Certificate of Completion for each
component of the Minimum Improvements, Redeveloper shall submit to the Authority either (a)
evidence of certification from Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (“LEED”) or
similar certification or (b) in absence of actual certification, evidence of compliance with the Green
Building Policy including a detail of the specific energy-efficient/sustainable features or
components implemented in the construction of each Component of the Minimum Improvements.
Section 4.4. Certificate of Completion. (a) Promptly after completion of each Component
of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with those provisions of the Agreement relating
solely to the obligations of the Redeveloper to construct such Component of the Minimum
Improvements (including the dates for beginning and completion thereof and the efforts regarding
LEED or comparable certification described in Section 4.3), the Authority Representative shall
deliver to the Redeveloper a Certificate of Completion in substantially the form shown as Schedule
E, in recordable form and executed by the Authority.
(b)If the Authority Representative shall refuse or fail to provide any certification in
accordance with the provisions of this Section 4.4 of this Agreement, the Authority Representative
shall, within thirty (30) days after written request by the Redeveloper, provide the Redeveloper with
a written statement, indicating in adequate detail in what respects the Redeveloper has failed to
complete the relevant Component of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions
of the Agreement, or is otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be necessary, in the
opinion of the Authority, for the Redeveloper to take or perform in order for the Authority to issue
the Certificate of Completion.
(c)The construction of each Component of the Minimum Improvements shall be
deemed to be substantially complete upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy for that Component
of the Minimum Improvements, and upon determination by the Authority Representative that all
related site improvements on the Redevelopment Property have been substantially completed in
accordance with approved Construction Plans, subject to landscaping that cannot be completed until
seasonal conditions permit.
Section 4.5. Records. The Authority and the City through any authorized representatives,
shall have the right at all reasonable times after reasonable notice to inspect, examine and copy all
books and records of Redeveloper relating to the Minimum Improvements. Such records shall be
kept and maintained by Redeveloper through the Maturity Date.
Section 4.6. Management. The Redeveloper shall at all times engage a property
management company with substantial experience in operating mixed use developments, subject to
approval by the Authority, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld. The Redeveloper
will submit evidence of such management upon request by the Authority.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 28
20
Section 4.7. Inclusionary Housing Policy. The Redeveloper agrees to comply with the
City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy, as adopted June 1, 2015 and amended May 15, 2017, including
without limitation the following:
(a)Redeveloper agrees to reserve at least 15 of the apartment units in the Multifamily
Component of the Minimum Improvements (the “Affordable Dwelling Units”) for households
earning fifty percent (50%) of Area Median Income (“AMI”) for at least 25 years following
building occupancy.
(b)The monthly rental price for Affordable Dwelling Units shall include rent and
utility costs and shall be based on fifty percent (50%) of AMI for the metropolitan area that
includes St. Louis Park adjusted for bedroom size and calculated annually by Minnesota Housing
in connection with establishing rent limits for the Housing Tax Credit Program.
(c)The size and design of the Affordable Dwelling Units shall be consistent and
comparable with the market rate units in the Multifamily Component of the Minimum
Improvements and is subject to the approval of the City. The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be
distributed throughout the Minimum Improvements.
(d)The Affordable Dwelling Units shall have a number of bedrooms in the
approximate proportion as the market rate units.
(e)Redeveloper agrees to prepare an affordable housing plan as defined in the City’s
Inclusionary Housing Policy (the “Affordable Housing Plan”). The Affordable Housing Plan shall
describe how the Redeveloper complies with each of the applicable requirements of the
Inclusionary Housing Policy. The Affordable Housing Plan shall be prepared by the Redeveloper
and must be approved by the City prior to or in conjunction with delivery of the Certificate of
Completion for the Multifamily Component of the Minimum Improvements.
Section 4.8. Conformity to Planning Development Contract. The Redeveloper shall
construct the Minimum Improvements pursuant to this Agreement and to the Planning Development
Contract. Pursuant to the Planning Development Contract, required improvements shall include
without limitation the following:
(a)Redeveloper shall install dedicated wired connections for the Minimum
Improvements in conformity with the terms and specifications provided in the Planning
Development Contract.
(b)The Redeveloper shall install a video surveillance system to provide complete
coverage of all parking facilities constructed as part of the Minimum Improvements, including
entrances to stairs and elevators, in conformity with the terms and specifications provided in the
Planning Development Contract.
(c)The Redeveloper shall equip both Components of the Minimum Improvements with
an approved bi-directional 800 MHz signal enhancement system in conformity with the terms and
specifications provided in the Planning Development Contract.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 29
21
(d) The Redeveloper shall install electric vehicle charging station infrastructure in both
Components of the Minimum Improvements in conformity with the terms and specifications
provided in the Planning Development Contract.
(e) The Redeveloper shall construct the roofs of both Components of the Minimum
Improvements in such a manner as to allow for solar readiness in conformity with the terms and
specifications provided in the Planning Development Contract.
(f) The Redeveloper shall construct designed outdoor recreation areas and other public
amenities including privately owned artwork on the Redevelopment Property as required under the
Planning Development Contract and as depicted in the approved Site Plan. The parties agree and
understand that the Redeveloper shall be responsible for the cost of any maintenance and repair
of the amenities and artwork.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 30
22
ARTICLE V
Insurance
Section 5.1. Insurance. (a) The Redeveloper will provide and maintain at all times during
the process of constructing the Minimum Improvements an All Risk Broad Form Basis Insurance
Policy and, from time to time during that period, at the request of the Authority, furnish the
Authority with proof of payment of premiums on policies covering the following:
(i)Builder’s risk insurance, written on the so-called “Builder’s Risk –
Completed Value Basis,” in an amount equal to 100% of the principal amount of the Note,
and with coverage available in nonreporting form on the so-called “all risk” form of policy.
The interest of the Authority shall be protected in accordance with a clause in form and
content satisfactory to the Authority;
(ii)Comprehensive general liability insurance (including operations, contingent
liability, operations of subcontractors, completed operations, and contractual liability
insurance) together with an Owner’s Protective Liability Policy with limits against bodily
injury and property damage of not less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence (to accomplish
the above-required limits, an umbrella excess liability policy may be used). The Authority
shall be listed as an additional insured on the policy; and
(iii)Workers’ compensation insurance, with statutory coverage, provided that the
Redeveloper may be self-insured with respect to all or any part of its liability for workers’
compensation.
(b)Upon completion of construction of the Minimum Improvements and prior to the
Maturity Date, the Redeveloper shall maintain, or cause to be maintained, at its cost and expense,
and from time to time at the request of the Authority shall furnish proof of the payment of premiums
on, insurance as follows:
(i)Insurance against loss and/or damage to the Minimum Improvements under
a policy or policies covering such risks as are ordinarily insured against by similar
businesses.
(ii)Comprehensive general public liability insurance, including personal injury
liability (with employee exclusion deleted), against liability for injuries to persons and/or
property, in the minimum amount for each occurrence and for each year of $1,000,000, and
shall be endorsed to show the City and Authority as additional insureds.
(iii)Such other insurance, including workers’ compensation insurance respecting
all employees of the Redeveloper, in such amount as is customarily carried by like
organizations engaged in like activities of comparable size and liability exposure; provided
that the Redeveloper may be self-insured with respect to all or any part of its liability for
workers’ compensation.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 31
23
(c) All insurance required in Article V of this Agreement shall be taken out and
maintained in responsible insurance companies selected by the Redeveloper that are authorized
under the laws of the State to assume the risks covered thereby. Upon request, the Redeveloper will
deposit annually with the Authority policies evidencing all such insurance, or a certificate or
certificates or binders of the respective insurers stating that such insurance is in force and effect.
Unless otherwise provided in this Article V of this Agreement each policy shall contain a provision
that the insurer shall not cancel nor modify it in such a way as to reduce the coverage provided
below the amounts required herein without giving written notice to the Redeveloper and the
Authority at least 30 days before the cancellation or modification becomes effective. In lieu of
separate policies, the Redeveloper may maintain a single policy, blanket or umbrella policies, or a
combination thereof, having the coverage required herein, in which event the Redeveloper shall
deposit with the Authority a certificate or certificates of the respective insurers as to the amount of
coverage in force upon the Minimum Improvements.
(d) The Redeveloper agrees to notify the Authority immediately in the case of damage
exceeding $750,000 in amount to, or destruction of, the Minimum Improvements or any portion
thereof resulting from fire or other casualty. In such event the Redeveloper will forthwith repair,
reconstruct, and restore the Minimum Improvements to substantially the same or an improved
condition or value as it existed prior to the event causing such damage and, to the extent necessary
to accomplish such repair, reconstruction, and restoration, the Redeveloper will apply the net
proceeds of any insurance relating to such damage received by the Redeveloper to the payment or
reimbursement of the costs thereof.
The Redeveloper shall complete the repair, reconstruction and restoration of the Minimum
Improvements, regardless of whether the net proceeds of insurance received by the Redeveloper for
such purposes are sufficient to pay for the same. Any net proceeds remaining after completion of
such repairs, construction, and restoration shall be the property of the Redeveloper.
(e) In lieu of its obligation to reconstruct any Component of the Minimum
Improvements as set forth in this Section, the Redeveloper shall have the option of: (i) if
Redeveloper has assigned the Note corresponding to such Component to a third party, paying to the
Authority an amount that, in the opinion of the Authority and its fiscal consultant, is sufficient to
pay or redeem the outstanding principal and accrued interest on the Note, or (ii) so long as the
Redeveloper is the owner of the Note, waiving its right to receive subsequent payments under the
Note.
(f) The Redeveloper and the Authority agree that all of the insurance provisions set
forth in this Article V shall terminate upon the termination of this Agreement.
Section 5.2. Subordination. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, the rights of
the Authority with respect to the receipt and application of any insurance proceeds shall, in all
respects, be subordinate and subject to the rights of any Holder under a Mortgage allowed pursuant
to Article VII of this Agreement.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 32
24
ARTICLE VI
Tax Increment; Taxes
Section 6.1. Right to Collect Delinquent Taxes. The Redeveloper acknowledges that the
Authority is providing substantial aid and assistance in furtherance of the development through
reimbursement of Public Redevelopment Costs. The Redeveloper understands that the Tax
Increments pledged to payment on the Notes are derived from real estate taxes on the
Redevelopment Property, which taxes must be promptly and timely paid. To that end, the
Redeveloper agrees for itself, its successors and assigns, that in addition to the obligation pursuant
to statute to pay real estate taxes, it is also obligated by reason of this Agreement to pay before
delinquency all real estate taxes assessed against the Redevelopment Property and the Minimum
Improvements. The Redeveloper acknowledges that this obligation creates a contractual right on
behalf of the Authority to sue the Redeveloper or its successors and assigns to collect delinquent
real estate taxes and any penalty or interest thereon and to pay over the same as a tax payment to the
county auditor. In any such suit, the Authority shall also be entitled to recover its costs, expenses
and reasonable attorney fees.
Section 6.2. Review of Taxes. The Redeveloper agrees that prior to the Maturity Date, it
will not cause a reduction in the real property taxes paid in respect of the Redevelopment Property
through: (A) willful destruction of the Redevelopment Property or any part thereof; or (B) willful
refusal to reconstruct damaged or destroyed property pursuant to Section 5.1 of this Agreement,
except as provided in Section 5.1(c). The Redeveloper also agrees that it will not, prior to the
Maturity Date, seek exemption from property tax for the Redevelopment Property or any portion
thereof or transfer or permit the transfer of the Redevelopment Property to any entity that is exempt
from real property taxes and state law (other than any portion thereof dedicated or conveyed to the
City in accordance with platting of the Redevelopment Property), or apply for a deferral of property
tax on the Redevelopment Property pursuant to any law.
Section 6.3. Assessment Agreement. (a) Upon execution of this Agreement, the
Redeveloper shall, with the Authority, execute an Assessment Agreement pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.177, subd. 8, specifying an assessor’s minimum Market Value for the
Redevelopment Property and both Components of the Minimum Improvements constructed
thereon. The amount of the minimum Market Value for the Hotel Component shall be $8,500,000
as of January 2, 2021 and each January 2 thereafter, notwithstanding the status of construction by
such dates. The amount of the minimum Market Value for the Multifamily Component shall be
$14,900,000 as of January 2, 2020, and $29,800,000 as of January 2, 2021 and each January 2
thereafter, notwithstanding the status of construction by such dates.
(b)The Assessment Agreement for each Component of the Minimum Improvements
shall be substantially in the form attached hereto as Schedule F. Nothing in the Assessment
Agreements shall limit the discretion of the assessor to assign a market value to the property in
excess of such assessor’s minimum Market Value. The Assessment Agreements shall remain in
force for the period specified in the Assessment Agreements.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 33
25
(c) Nothing in this Agreement or in the Assessment Agreements shall limit the right of
the Redeveloper, or its successors and assigns, to bring a tax petition challenging a Market Value
determination that exceeds the established minimum Market Value for either Component of the
Minimum Improvements on the Redevelopment Property; provided that if the Redeveloper brings
such a challenge, the Redeveloper must inform the Authority of such tax petition in writing. During
the pendency of such challenge, the Authority will pay principal and interest on the Note
corresponding to the challenged Market Value only to the extent of the Available Tax Increment
attributable to the minimum Market Value of such Component; provided that if the Redeveloper
fails to notify the Authority of the tax petition, the Authority shall have the right to withhold all
payments of principal and interest on the applicable Note until the Redeveloper’s challenge is
resolved. Upon resolution of Redeveloper’s tax petition, any Available Tax Increment deferred
and withheld under this Section shall be paid, without interest thereon, to the extent payable
under the assessor’s final determination of Market Value for the applicable Component of the
Minimum Improvements.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 34
26
ARTICLE VII
Other Financing
Section 7.1. Generally. Before issuance of the Notes, the Redeveloper shall submit to the
Authority or provide access thereto for review by Authority staff, consultants and agents, evidence
reasonably satisfactory to the Authority that Redeveloper has available funds, or commitments to
obtain funds, whether in the nature of mortgage financing, equity, grants, loans, or other sources
sufficient for paying the cost of the developing the Minimum Improvements, provided that any
lender or grantor commitments shall be subject only to such conditions as are normal and customary
in the commercial lending industry.
Section 7.2. Authority's Option to Cure Default on Mortgage. In the event that any portion
of the Redeveloper's funds is provided through mortgage financing, and there occurs a default under
any Mortgage authorized pursuant to Article VII of this Agreement, the Redeveloper shall cause the
Authority to receive copies of any notice of default received by the Redeveloper from the holder of
such Mortgage. Thereafter, the Authority shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure any
such default on behalf of the Redeveloper within such cure periods as are available to the
Redeveloper under the Mortgage documents.
Section 7.3. Modification; Subordination. The Authority agrees to subordinate its rights
under this Agreement to the Holder of any Mortgage securing construction or permanent financing,
in accordance with the terms of a subordination agreement substantially in the form attached as
Schedule G, or such other form as the Authority approves.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 35
27
ARTICLE VIII
Prohibitions Against Assignment and Transfer; Indemnification
Section 8.1. Representation as to Development. The Redeveloper represents and agrees
that its purchase of the Redevelopment Property, and its other undertakings pursuant to the
Agreement, are, and will be used, for the purpose of development of the Redevelopment Property
and not for speculation in land holding.
Section 8.2. Prohibition Against Redeveloper’s Transfer of Property and Assignment of
Agreement. The Redeveloper represents and agrees that prior to issuance of a Certificate of
Completion for both Components of the Minimum Improvements:
(a) Except only by way of security for, and only for, the purpose of obtaining financing
necessary to enable the Redeveloper or any successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property, or
any part thereof, to perform its obligations with respect to undertaking the redevelopment
contemplated under this Agreement, and any other purpose authorized by this Agreement, the
Redeveloper has not made or created and will not make or create or suffer to be made or created any
total or partial sale, assignment, conveyance, or lease, or any trust or power, or transfer in any other
mode or form of or with respect to this Agreement or the Redevelopment Property or any part
thereof or any interest therein, or any contract or agreement to do any of the same, to any person or
entity whether or not related in any way to the Redeveloper (collectively, a “Transfer”), without the
prior written approval of the Authority (whose approval will not be unreasonably withheld, subject
to the standards described in paragraph (b) of this Section) unless the Redeveloper remains liable
and bound by this Redevelopment Agreement in which event the Authority’s approval is not
required. Any such Transfer shall be subject to the provisions of this Agreement. For the purposes
of this Agreement, the term Transfer does not include (i) acquisition of a controlling interest in
Redeveloper by another entity or merger of Redeveloper with another entity; or (ii) any sale,
conveyance, or transfer in any form to any Affiliate.
(b) In the event the Redeveloper, upon Transfer of the Redevelopment Property or any
portion thereof either before or after issuance of the Certificate of Completion, seeks to be released
from its obligations under this Redevelopment Agreement as to the portion of the Redevelopment
Property that is transferred, the Authority shall be entitled to require, except as otherwise provided
in the Agreement, as conditions to any such release that:
(i) Any proposed transferee shall have the qualifications and financial
responsibility, in the reasonable judgment of the Authority, necessary and adequate to fulfill
the obligations undertaken in this Agreement by the Redeveloper as to the portion of the
Redevelopment Property to be transferred.
(ii) Any proposed transferee, by instrument in writing satisfactory to the
Authority and in form recordable in the public land records of Hennepin County, Minnesota,
shall, for itself and its successors and assigns, and expressly for the benefit of the Authority,
have expressly assumed all of the obligations of the Redeveloper under this Agreement as to
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 36
28
the portion of the Redevelopment Property to be transferred and agreed to be subject to all
the conditions and restrictions to which the Redeveloper is subject as to such portion;
provided, however, that the fact that any transferee of, or any other successor in interest
whatsoever to, the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof, shall not, for whatever
reason, have assumed such obligations or so agreed, and shall not (unless and only to the
extent otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement or agreed to in writing by the
Authority) deprive the Authority of any rights or remedies or controls with respect to the
Redevelopment Property, the Minimum Improvements or any part thereof or the
construction of the Minimum Improvements; it being the intent of the parties as expressed in
this Agreement that (to the fullest extent permitted at law and in equity and excepting only
in the manner and to the extent specifically provided otherwise in this Agreement) no
transfer of, or change with respect to, ownership in the Redevelopment Property or any part
thereof, or any interest therein, however consummated or occurring, and whether voluntary
or involuntary, shall operate, legally, or practically, to deprive or limit the Authority of or
with respect to any rights or remedies on controls provided in or resulting from this
Agreement with respect to the Redevelopment Property that the Authority would have had,
had there been no such transfer or change. In the absence of specific written agreement by
the Authority to the contrary, no such transfer or approval by the Authority thereof shall be
deemed to relieve the Redeveloper, or any other party bound in any way by this Agreement
or otherwise with respect to the Redevelopment Property, from any of its obligations with
respect thereto.
(iii) Any and all instruments and other legal documents involved in effecting the
transfer of any interest in this Agreement or the Redevelopment Property governed by this
Article VIII, shall be in a form reasonably satisfactory to the Authority.
(iv) At the written request of Redeveloper, the Authority shall execute and
deliver to Redeveloper and the proposed transferee an estoppel certificate containing
commercially customary and reasonable certifications.
In the event the foregoing conditions are satisfied then the Redeveloper shall be released from its
obligation under this Agreement, as to the portion of the Redevelopment Property that is transferred,
assigned, or otherwise conveyed.
Section 8.3. Release and Indemnification Covenants. (a) Except for any willful
misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or negligence of the Indemnified Parties
as hereinafter defined, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified Parties of their
obligations under this Agreement, the Redeveloper releases from and covenants and agrees that the
Authority, the City, and the governing body members, officers, agents, servants, and employees
thereof (the “Indemnified Parties”) shall not be liable for and agrees to indemnify and hold harmless
the Indemnified Parties against any loss or damage to property or any injury to or death of any
person occurring at or about or resulting from any defect in the Redevelopment Property or the
Minimum Improvements.
(b) Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or
negligence of the Indemnified Parties, and except for any breach by any of the Indemnified Parties
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 37
29
of their obligations under this Agreement, the Redeveloper agrees to protect and defend the
Indemnified Parties, now and forever, and further agrees to hold the aforesaid harmless from any
claim, demand, suit, action, or other proceeding whatsoever by any person or entity whatsoever
arising or purportedly arising from this Agreement, or the transactions contemplated hereby or the
acquisition, construction, installation, ownership, maintenance, and operation of the Redevelopment
Property.
(c)Except for any willful misrepresentation or any willful or wanton misconduct or
negligence of the Indemnified Parties as hereinafter defined, and except for any breach by any of
the Indemnified Parties of their obligations under this Agreement, the Indemnified Parties shall
not be liable for any damage or injury to the persons or property of the Redeveloper or its officers,
agents, servants, or employees or any other person who may be about the Redevelopment Property
or Minimum Improvements.
(d)All covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements and obligations of the Authority
contained herein shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, promises, agreements, and
obligations of such entity and not of any governing body member, officer, agent, servant, or
employee of such entities in the individual capacity thereof.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 38
30
ARTICLE IX
Events of Default
Section 9.1. Events of Default Defined. The following shall be “Events of Default” under
this Agreement and the term “Event of Default” shall mean, whenever it is used in this Agreement,
any one or more of the following events, after the non-defaulting party provides thirty (30) days
written notice to the defaulting party of the event, but only if the event has not been cured within
said thirty (30) days or, if the event is by its nature incurable within thirty (30) days, the defaulting
party does not, within such thirty- (30-) day period, provide assurances reasonably satisfactory to
the party providing notice of default that the event will be cured and will be cured as soon as
reasonably possible:
(a)Failure by the Redeveloper or Authority to observe or perform any covenant,
condition, obligation, or agreement on its part to be observed or performed under this Agreement.
(b)If, before issuance of the certificate of completion for all Components of the
Minimum Improvements, the Redeveloper shall
(i)file any petition in bankruptcy or for any reorganization, arrangement,
composition, readjustment, liquidation, dissolution, or similar relief under the United States
Bankruptcy Act or under any similar federal or State law, which action is not dismissed
within sixty (60) days after filing; or
(ii)make an assignment for benefit of its creditors; or
(iii)admit in writing its inability to pay its debts generally as they become due; or
(iv)be adjudicated a bankrupt or insolvent.
Section 9.2. Remedies on Default. Whenever any Event of Default referred to in Section
9.1 of this Agreement occurs, the non-defaulting party may:
(a)Suspend its performance under this Agreement until it receives assurances that the
defaulting party will cure its default and continue its performance under the Agreement.
(b)Upon a default by the Redeveloper under this Agreement, the Authority may
terminate the Note and this Agreement.
(c)Take whatever action, including legal, equitable, or administrative action, which
may appear necessary or desirable to collect any payments due under this Agreement, or to enforce
performance and observance of any obligation, agreement, or covenant under this Agreement,
provided that nothing contained herein shall give the Authority the right to seek specific
performance by Redeveloper of the construction of the Minimum Improvements.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 39
31
Section 9.3. Revesting Title in Authority Upon Happening of Event Subsequent to
Conveyance to Redeveloper. In the event that subsequent to conveyance of the Authority Parcels to
Redeveloper and prior to completion of construction of the Minimum Improvements (evidenced by
a Certificate of Completion described in Section 4.4):
(a) Redeveloper, subject to Unavoidable Delays, shall fail to begin construction of the
Minimum Improvements in conformity with this Agreement and such failure to begin construction
is not cured within 90 days after written notice from the Authority to Redeveloper to do so; or
(b) Redeveloper fails to pay real estate taxes or assessments on the parcel or any part
thereof when due, or creates, suffers, assumes, or agrees to any encumbrance or lien on the parcel
(except to the extent permitted by this Agreement), or shall suffer any levy or attachment to be
made, or any materialmen’s or mechanics’ lien, or any other unauthorized encumbrance or lien to
attach, and such taxes or assessments shall not have been paid, or the encumbrance or lien removed
or discharged or provision satisfactory to the Authority made for such payment, removal, or
discharge, within thirty (30) days after written demand by the Authority to do so; provided, that if
Redeveloper first notifies the Authority of its intention to do so, it may in good faith contest any
mechanics’ or other lien filed or established and in such event the Authority shall permit such
mechanics’ or other lien to remain undischarged and unsatisfied during the period of such contest
and any appeal and during the course of such contest Redeveloper shall keep the Authority
informed respecting the status of such defense; or
(c) there is, in violation of the Agreement, any Transfer of the parcel in violation of the
terms of Section 8.2, and such violation is not cured within sixty (60) days after written demand by
the Authority to Redeveloper, or if the event is by its nature incurable within 30 days, Redeveloper
does not, within such 30-day period, provide assurances reasonably satisfactory to the Authority that
the event will be cured as soon as reasonably possible; or
(d) Redeveloper fails to comply with any of its other covenants under this Agreement
related to the Minimum Improvements and fails to cure any such noncompliance or breach within
thirty (30) days after written demand from the Authority to Redeveloper to do so, or if the event is
by its nature incurable within 30 days, Redeveloper does not, within such 30-day period, provide
assurances reasonably satisfactory to the Authority that the event will be cured as soon as
reasonably possible; or
(e) the Holder of any Mortgage secured by the subject property exercises any remedy
provided by the Mortgage documents or exercises any remedy provided by law or equity in the
event of a default in any of the terms or conditions of the Mortgage, in either case which would
materially adversely affect the rights and obligations of the Authority hereunder;
Then the Authority shall have the right to re-enter and take possession of the Authority
Parcel to which the default relates and to terminate (and revest in the Authority) the estate conveyed
by the deed to Redeveloper as to that parcel, subject to all intervening matters, it being the intent of
this provision, together with other provisions of the Agreement, that the conveyance of the parcel to
Redeveloper shall be made upon, and that the deed shall contain a condition subsequent to the effect
that in the event of any default on the part of Redeveloper and failure on the part of Redeveloper to
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 40
32
remedy, end, or abrogate such default within the period and in the manner stated in such
subdivisions, the Authority at its option may declare a termination in favor of the Authority of the
title, and of all the rights and interests in and to the parcel conveyed to Redeveloper, and that such
title and all rights and interests of Redeveloper, and any assigns or successors in interest to and in
the parcel, shall revert to the Authority, but only if the events stated in Section 9.3(a)-(e) have not
been cured within the time periods provided above.
Section 9.4. Resale of Reacquired Property; Disposition of Proceeds. Upon the revesting in
the Authority of title to and/or possession of the parcel or any part thereof as provided in Section
9.3, the Authority shall, pursuant to its responsibilities under law, use its best efforts to sell the
parcel or part thereof as soon and in such manner as the Authority shall find feasible and consistent
with the objectives of such law and of the Redevelopment Plan and TIF Plan to a qualified and
responsible party or parties (as determined by the Authority) who will assume the obligation of
making or completing the Minimum Improvements as shall be satisfactory to the Authority in
accordance with the uses specified for such parcel or part thereof in the Redevelopment Plan and
TIF Plan. During any time while the Authority has title to and/or possession of a parcel obtained by
reverter, the Authority will not disturb the rights of any tenants under any leases encumbering such
parcel. Upon resale of the parcel, the proceeds thereof shall be applied:
(a)First, to reimburse the Authority for all costs and expenses incurred by them,
including but not limited to salaries of personnel, in connection with the recapture, management,
and resale of the parcel (but less any income derived by the Authority from the property or part
thereof in connection with such management); all taxes, assessments, and water and sewer charges
with respect to the parcel or part thereof (or, in the event the parcel is exempt from taxation or
assessment or such charge during the period of ownership thereof by the Authority, an amount, if
paid, equal to such taxes, assessments, or charges (as determined by the Authority assessing official)
as would have been payable if the parcel were not so exempt); any payments made or necessary to
be made to discharge any encumbrances or liens existing on the parcel or part thereof at the time of
revesting of title thereto in the Authority or to discharge or prevent from attaching or being made
any subsequent encumbrances or liens due to obligations, defaults or acts of Redeveloper, its
successors or transferees; any expenditures made or obligations incurred with respect to the making
or completion of the subject improvements or any part thereof on the parcel or part thereof; and any
amounts otherwise owing the Authority by Redeveloper and its successor or transferee; and
(b)Second, to reimburse Redeveloper, its successor or transferee, up to the amount
equal to (1) the purchase price paid by Redeveloper under Section 3.2 with respect to the parcel
revested; plus (2) the amount actually invested by it in making any of the subject improvements
on the parcel or part thereof.
Any balance remaining after such reimbursements shall be retained by the Authority as its property.
Section 9.5. No Remedy Exclusive. No remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to any
party is intended to be exclusive of any other available remedy or remedies, but each and every such
remedy shall be cumulative and shall be in addition to every other remedy given under this
Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. No delay or omission to
exercise any right or power accruing upon any default shall impair any such right or power or shall
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 41
33
be construed to be a waiver thereof, but any such right and power may be exercised from time to
time and as often as may be deemed expedient. To entitle the Authority to exercise any remedy
reserved to it, it shall not be necessary to give notice, other than such notice as may be required in
this Article IX.
Section 9.6. No Additional Waiver Implied by One Waiver. In the event any agreement
contained in this Agreement should be breached by either party and thereafter waived by the other
party, such waiver shall be limited to the particular breach so waived and shall not be deemed to
waive any other concurrent, previous or subsequent breach hereunder.
Section 9.7. Attorney Fees. Whenever any Event of Default occurs and if the non-
defaulting party employs attorneys or incurs other expenses for the collection of payments due or to
become due or for the enforcement of performance or observance of any obligation or agreement on
the part of the defaulting party under this Agreement, the defaulting party shall, within ten (10) days
of written demand by the non-defaulting party, pay to the non-defaulting party the reasonable fees
of such attorneys and such other expenses so incurred by the non-defaulting party.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 42
34
ARTICLE X
Additional Provisions
Section 10.1. Conflict of Interests; Representatives Not Individually Liable. The Authority
and the Redeveloper, to the best of their respective knowledge, represent and agree that no member,
official, or employee of the Authority shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in the
Agreement, nor shall any such member, official, or employee participate in any decision relating to
the Agreement that affects his personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership, or
association in which he, directly or indirectly, is interested. No member, official, or employee of the
City or Authority shall be personally liable to the Redeveloper, or any successor in interest, in the
event of any default or breach by the Authority or for any amount that may become due to the
Redeveloper or successor or on any obligations under the terms of the Agreement.
Section 10.2. Equal Employment Opportunity. The Redeveloper, for itself and its
successors and assigns, agrees that during the construction of the Minimum Improvements provided
for in the Agreement it will comply with all applicable federal, state, and local equal employment
and non-discrimination laws and regulations.
Section 10.3. Restrictions on Use. The Redeveloper agrees that until the Maturity Date, the
Redeveloper, and such successors and assigns, shall devote the Redevelopment Property to the
operation of the Minimum Improvements as described in Section 4.1 hereof, and shall not
discriminate upon the basis of race, color, creed, sex or national origin in the sale, lease, or rental or
in the construction or maintenance of the Minimum Improvements or in the use or occupancy of the
Redevelopment Property or any improvements erected or to be erected thereon, or any part thereof.
Redeveloper agrees that no portion of the Redevelopment Property will be used for a sexually-
oriented business, a pawnshop, a check-cashing business, a tattoo business, a gun business, a
payday loan agency, or for the sale of tobacco products including without limitation “vaping” or
hookah shops.
Section 10.4. Provisions Not Merged With Deed. None of the provisions of this Agreement
are intended to or shall be merged by reason of any deed transferring any interest in the
Redevelopment Property and any such deed shall not be deemed to affect or impair the provisions
and covenants of this Agreement.
Section 10.5. Titles of Articles and Sections. Any titles of the several parts, Articles, and
Sections of the Agreement are inserted for convenience of reference only and shall be disregarded in
construing or interpreting any of its provisions.
Section 10.6. Notices and Demands. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this
Agreement, a notice, demand, or other communication under the Agreement by either party to the
other shall be sufficiently given or delivered if it is dispatched by registered or certified mail,
postage prepaid, return receipt requested, or delivered personally, to the following addresses (or to
such other addresses as either party may notify the other):
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 43
35
To Redeveloper: SLP Park Ventures LLC
Attn: Manager
440 Third Street
Excelsior, MN 55331
To Authority: St. Louis Park EDA
Attn: Executive Director
5005 Minnetonka Boulevard
St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416-2518
Section 10.7. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in any number of
counterparts, each of which shall constitute one and the same instrument.
Section 10.8. Recording. The Authority may record this Agreement and any amendments
thereto with the Hennepin County recorder. The Redeveloper shall pay all costs for recording. The
Redeveloper’s obligations under this Agreement are covenants running with the land for the term of
this Agreement, enforceable by the Authority against the Redeveloper, its successor and assigns,
and every successor in interest to the Redevelopment Property, or any part thereof or any interest
therein.
Section 10.9 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended only by written agreement
approved by the Authority and the Redeveloper.
Section 10.10. Authority Approvals. Unless otherwise specified, any approval required by
the Authority under this Agreement may be given by the Authority Representative, except that final
approval of issuance of the Note shall be made by the Authority’s board of commissioners.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 44
36
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Authority and Redeveloper have caused this Agreement to be duly
executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date first above written.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________, 2018
by Steve Hallfin and Thomas K. Harmening, the President and Executive Director of the St. Louis
Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic and political
subdivision of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 45
37
SLP PARK VENTURES LLC
By
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ________, 2018,
by _________________________, the _________________ of SLP Park Ventures LLC, a
Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company.
Notary Public
518115v8 MNI SA285-100
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 46
A-1
SCHEDULE A
REDEVELOPMENT PROPERTY
Redeveloper Parcels:
Parcel 1:
That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 117, Range
22 described as beginning at point on the most Southerly line of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD
PARK distant 315.25 feet Easterly from the West line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter as measured along said most Southerly line of Lot 1; thence North 87 degrees 41minutes
54 seconds East (assuming said West line has a bearing of South 1 degree 11 minutes 16 seconds
West) along said most Southerly line of Lot 1 and its Easterly extension a distance of 317.55 feet
to the Northerly extension of the West line of Lot 4, said Block 7; thence South 2 degrees 03
minutes 09 seconds West along said Northerly extension of the West line of Lot 4 and the West
line of said Lot 4, a distance 119.74 feet; thence South 64 degrees 01 minutes 24 seconds West a
distance of 197.53 feet; thence South 87 degrees 44 minutes 40 seconds West a distance of
139.87 feet to the intersection with a line bearing South 1 degree 14 minutes 59 seconds West
from the point of beginning; thence North 1 degree 14 minutes 59 seconds East a distance of
198.98 feet to the point of beginning.
The boundary lines of the above described land have been marked by Judicial Landmarks set
pursuant to Torrens Case No. 19207.
Parcel 2:
That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 117, Range
22 described as beginning at a point on the most Southerly line of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD
PARK distant 315.25 feet Easterly from the West line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast
Quarter as measured along said most Southerly line of Lot 1; thence South 87 degrees 41minutes
54 seconds West along said most Southerly line of Lot 1 to said West line (assuming said West
line has a bearing of South 1 degree 11 minutes 16 seconds West) a distance of 315.25 feet;
thence South 1 degree 11 minutes 16 seconds West along said West line a distance of 144.56
feet; thence South 77 degrees 38 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 214.20 feet; thence North
87 degrees 44 minutes 40 seconds East a distance of 104.50 feet to the intersection with a line
bearing South 1 degree 14 minutes 59 seconds West from the point of beginning; thence North 1
degree 14 minutes 59 seconds East, a distance of 198.98 feet to the point of beginning.
The boundary lines of the above described land have been marked by Judicial Landmarks set
pursuant to Torrens Case No. 17713.
Parcel 3 - Tract A:
That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 117, Range
22, and that part of Parcel 44 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No.
27-23, which lies Northerly of the Southerly and Southwesterly lines of said Parcel 44 and the
Northwesterly extension of said Southwesterly line; Westerly of the Southerly extension of the
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 47
A-2
West line of Lot 4, Block 7, SHELARD PARK; Southerly and Easterly of the following
described line:
Commencing at a point on the most Southerly line of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK distant
315.25 feet Easterly from the West line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter as
measured along said most Southerly line of Lot 1; thence North 87 degrees 41 minutes 54
seconds East (assuming the West line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter has a
bearing of South 01 degree 11 minutes 16 seconds West) along said most Southerly line of Lot 1
and its Easterly extension 317.55 feet to the Northerly extension of the West line of Lot 4, said
Block 7; thence South 02 degrees 03 minutes 09 seconds West along said Northerly extension of
the West line of Lot 4 and the West line of said Lot 4 a distance of 119.74 feet to the point of
beginning of the line being described; thence South 64 degrees 01 minute 24 seconds West a
distance of 197.53 feet; thence South 87 degrees 44 minutes 40 seconds West 139.87 feet to the
intersection with a line bearing South 01 degree 14 minutes 59 seconds West from the point of
commencement; thence South 01 degree 14 minutes 59 seconds West to the Southerly line of
said Parcel 44, and there terminating; and Northerly of Line 1.
Line 1 is described as follows:
Commencing at Right of Way Boundary Corner B212 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23; thence
Northerly on an azimuth of 00 degrees 13 minutes 27 seconds along the West line of the
boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of 484.26 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner
B211 and the point of beginning of the line being described; thence Easterly on an azimuth of
101 degrees 20 minutes 23 seconds along the boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of
214.28 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B1; thence continue on an azimuth of 101 degrees
20 minutes 23 seconds 93.00 feet; thence deflect to the left 350.87 feet on a non-tangential curve,
concave to the North and passing through Right of Way Boundary Corner B2 as shown on said
Plat No. 27-23, having a radius of 763.94 feet, a delta angle of 26 degrees 18 minutes 56
seconds, and a chord azimuth of 70 degrees 47 minutes 34 seconds to the Easterly line of said
Parcel 44; thence on an azimuth of 01 degree 05 minutes 15 seconds 7.37 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Corner B3 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23 and there terminating.
The Northerly line of the above land has been marked by Judicial Landmarks set pursuant to
Order Doc. No. T2062170 in Torrens Case No. 19207.
Parcel 3 - Tract B:
That part of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 1, Township 117, Range
22, and that part of Parcel 44 on Minnesota Department of Transportation Right of Way Plat No.
27-23, which lies Northerly of the Southerly and Southwesterly lines of said Parcel 44 and the
Northwesterly extension of said Southwesterly line; Easterly of the West line of said Southeast
Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 1; Southerly and Westerly of the following described
line:
Commencing at a point on the most Southerly line of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD PARK distant
315.25 feet Easterly from the West line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter as
measured along said most Southerly line of Lot 1; thence South 87 degrees 41 minutes 54
seconds West along said most Southerly line of Lot 1 to said West line (assuming said West line
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 48
A-3
has a bearing of South 01 degree 11 minutes 16 seconds West) a distance of 315.25 feet; thence
South 01 degree 11 minutes 16 seconds West along said West line 144.56 feet to a point 2.37
feet North of Right of Way Boundary Corner B211 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23, and the
point of beginning of the line being described; thence South 77 degrees 38 minutes 16 seconds
East a distance of 214.20 feet; thence North 87 degrees 44 minutes 40 seconds East 104.50 feet
to the intersection with a line bearing South 01 degree 14 minutes 59 seconds West from the
point of commencement; thence South 01 degree 14 minutes 59 seconds West to the Southerly
line of said Parcel 44, and there terminating;
And Northerly of Line 1.
Line 1 is described as follows:
Commencing at Right of Way Boundary Corner B212 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23; thence
Northerly on an azimuth of 00 degrees 13 minutes 27 seconds along the West line of the
boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of 484.26 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner
B211 and the point of beginning of the line being described; thence Easterly on an azimuth of
101 degrees 20 minutes 23 seconds along the boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of
214.28 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B1; thence continue on an azimuth of 101 degrees
20 minutes 23 seconds 93.00 feet; thence deflect to the left 350.87 feet on a non-tangential curve,
concave to the North and passing through Right of Way Boundary Corner B2 as shown on said
Plat No. 27-23, having a radius of 763.94 feet, a delta angle of 26 degrees 18 minutes 56
seconds, and a chord azimuth of 70 degrees 47 minutes 34 seconds to the Easterly line of said
Parcel 44; thence on an azimuth of 01 degree 05 minutes 15 seconds 7.37 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Corner B3 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23 and there terminating.
The Northerly line of the above land has been marked by Judicial Landmarks set pursuant to
Order Doc. No. T2062169 in Torrens Case No. 17713.
Authority Parcels:
Authority Parcel A:
That part of Trunk Highway No. 12 as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 27-23 described as follows:
Beginning at right of way Boundary corner B3; thence on an assumed azimuth of 1 degree 05
minutes 15 seconds along the boundary line of said plat a distance of 86.85 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Corner B4; thence deflect to the right 83.74 feet along a non-tangential curve concave
to the northwest and passing through Right of Way Boundary Corner B5, having a radius of
2083.24 feet, central angle of 2 degrees 18 minutes 11 seconds, chord azimuth of 48 degrees 18
minutes 24 seconds and chord distance of 83.73 feet; thence on an azimuth of 91 degrees 27
minutes 32 seconds a distance of 98.89 feet; thence southwesterly deflecting to the right on a
non- tangential curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 788.53 feet, delta angle of 15
degrees 42 minutes 58 seconds, and a chord azimuth of 229 degrees 07 minutes 59 seconds and
chord distance of 215.62 feet to the East line of parcel 44 as shown on said plat 27-23; thence
north along said East line of Parcel 44 to the point of beginning.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 49
A-4
AND
Authority Parcel B:
That part of Trunk Highway No. 12 as shown on MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION RIGHT OF WAY PLAT NO. 27-23 which lies southwesterly and
southerly of Line 1, said Line 1 being described as follows:
Line 1:
Commencing at Right of Way Boundary Corner B212 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23; thence
Northerly on an azimuth of 00 degrees 13 minutes 27 seconds along the West line of the
boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of 484.26 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner
B211 and the point of beginning of the line being described; thence Easterly on an azimuth of
101 degrees 20 minutes 23 seconds along the boundary of said Plat No. 27-23 a distance of
214.28 feet to Right of Way Boundary Corner B1; thence continue on an azimuth of 101 degrees
20 minutes 23 seconds 93.00 feet; thence deflect to the left 350.87 feet on a non-tangential curve,
concave to the North and passing through Right of Way Boundary Corner B2 as shown on said
Plat No. 27-23, having a radius of 763.94 feet, a delta angle of 26 degrees 18 minutes 56
seconds, and a chord azimuth of 70 degrees 47 minutes 34 seconds to the Easterly line of said
Parcel 44; thence on an azimuth of 01 degree 05 minutes 15 seconds 7.37 feet to Right of Way
Boundary Corner B3 as shown on said Plat No. 27-23 and there terminating.
And northerly of the following described line and its easterly extension:
Commencing at the point of intersection of the West line of the Southeast Quarter of the
Northeast Quarter of said Section 1 with the most southerly line of Lot 1, Block 7, SHELARD
PARK; thence on an assumed bearing of South 0 degrees 39 minutes 11 seconds West along said
West line a distance of 187.99 feet to the point of beginning of the line being described; thence
along a non-tangential curve concave to the northeast having a radius of 788.53 feet, central
angle of 7 degrees 43 minutes 57 seconds, chord bearing of South 78 degrees 42 minutes 56
seconds East to its intersection with the most westerly extension of the southerly line of said
Parcel 44; thence easterly along said extension of the most southerly line of said Parcel 44 to its
intersection with Line 1 described above, and said line there ending.
To be platted as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Platia Place, according to the recorded plat thereof,
Hennepin County, Minnesota.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 50
B-1
SCHEDULE B
FORM OF QUIT CLAIM DEED
THIS INDENTURE, between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a
public body corporate and politic (the “Grantor”), and SLP Park Ventures LLC, a Minnesota limited
liability company (the “Grantee”).
WITNESSETH, that Grantor, in consideration of the sum of $______ and other good and
valuable consideration the receipt whereof is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, bargain,
quitclaim and convey to the Grantee, its successors and assigns forever, all the tract or parcel of land
lying and being in the County of Hennepin and State of Minnesota described as follows, to-wit
(such tract or parcel of land is hereinafter referred to as the “Property”):
[insert legal description]
To have and to hold the same, together with all the hereditaments and appurtenances
thereunto belonging.
SECTION 1.
It is understood and agreed that this Deed is subject to the covenants, conditions, restrictions
and provisions of an agreement recorded herewith entered into between the Grantor and Grantee on
the __ day of ____________, 2018, identified as “Purchase and Redevelopment Contract”
(hereafter referred to as the “Agreement”) and that the Grantee shall not convey this Property, or
any part thereof, except as permitted by the Agreement until a certificate of completion releasing the
Grantee from certain obligations of said Agreement as to this Property or such part thereof then to
be conveyed, has been placed of record. This provision, however, shall in no way prevent the
Grantee from mortgaging this Property in order to obtain funds for the purchase of the Property
hereby conveyed or for erecting the Minimum Improvements thereon (as defined in the Agreement)
in conformity with the Agreement, any applicable development program and applicable provisions
of the zoning ordinance of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, or for the refinancing of the same.
It is specifically agreed that the Grantee shall promptly begin and diligently prosecute to
completion the development of the Property through the construction of the Minimum
Improvements thereon, as provided in the Agreement.
Promptly after completion of the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions
of the Agreement, the Grantor will furnish the Grantee with an appropriate instrument so certifying.
Such certification by the Grantor shall be (and it shall be so provided in the certification itself) a
conclusive determination of satisfaction and termination of the agreements and covenants of the
Agreement and of this Deed with respect to the obligation of the Grantee, and its successors and
assigns, to construct the Minimum Improvements and the dates for the beginning and completion
thereof. Such certifications and such determination shall not constitute evidence of compliance with
or satisfaction of any obligation of the Grantee to any holder of a mortgage, or any insurer of a
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 51
B-2
mortgage, securing money loaned to finance the purchase of the Property hereby conveyed or the
Minimum Improvements, or any part thereof.
All certifications provided for herein shall be in such form as will enable them to be
recorded with the County Recorder and/or Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota. If the
Grantor shall refuse or fail to provide any such certification in accordance with the provisions of the
Agreement and this Deed, the Grantor shall, within thirty (30) days after written request by the
Grantee, provide the Grantee with a written statement indicating in adequate detail in what respects
the Grantee has failed to complete the Minimum Improvements in accordance with the provisions
of the Agreement or is otherwise in default, and what measures or acts it will be necessary, in the
opinion of the Grantor, for the Grantee to take or perform in order to obtain such certification.
SECTION 2.
The Grantee’s rights and interest in the Property are subject to the terms and conditions of
Section 9.3 of the Agreement relating to the Grantor’s right to re-enter and revest in Grantor title to
the Property under conditions specified therein, including but not limited to termination of such
right upon issuance of a Certificate of Completion as defined in the Agreement.
SECTION 3.
The Grantee agrees for itself and its successors and assigns to or of the Property or any part
thereof, hereinbefore described, that the Grantee and such successors and assigns shall comply with
all provisions of the Agreement that relate to the Property or use thereof for the periods specified in
the Agreement, including without limitation the covenant set forth in Section 10.3 thereof.
It is intended and agreed that the above and foregoing agreements and covenants shall be
covenants running with the land for the respective terms herein provided, and that they shall, in any
event, and without regard to technical classification or designation, legal or otherwise, and except
only as otherwise specifically provided in this Deed, be binding, to the fullest extent permitted by
law and equity for the benefit and in favor of, and enforceable by, the Grantor against the Grantee,
its successors and assigns, and every successor in interest to the Property, or any part thereof or any
interest therein, and any party in possession or occupancy of the Property or any part thereof.
In amplification, and not in restriction of, the provisions of the preceding section, it is
intended and agreed that the Grantor shall be deemed a beneficiary of the agreements and covenants
provided herein, both for and in its own right, and also for the purposes of protecting the interest of
the community and the other parties, public or private, in whose favor or for whose benefit these
agreements and covenants have been provided. Such agreements and covenants shall run in favor
of the Grantor without regard to whether the Grantor has at any time been, remains, or is an owner
of any land or interest therein to, or in favor of, which such agreements and covenants relate. The
Grantor shall have the right, in the event of any breach of any such agreement or covenant to
exercise all the rights and remedies, and to maintain any actions or suits at law or in equity or other
proper proceedings to enforce the curing of such breach of agreement or covenant, to which it or
any other beneficiaries of such agreement or covenant may be entitled; provided that Grantor shall
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 52
B-3
not have any right to re-enter the Property or revest in the Grantor the estate conveyed by this Deed
on grounds of Grantee’s failure to comply with its obligations under this Section 3.
SECTION 4.
This Deed is also given subject to:
(a)Provision of the ordinances, building and zoning laws of the City of St.
Louis Park, and state and federal laws and regulations in so far as they affect this real estate.
(b)[Others]
Grantor certifies that it does not know of any wells on the Property.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 53
B-4
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Grantor has caused this Deed to be duly executed in its
behalf by its President and Executive Director this ______ day of ____________, 2019.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________, 2019
by Steve Hallfin and Thomas K. Harmening, the President and Executive Director of the St. Louis
Park Economic Development Authority, a public body corporate and politic and political
subdivision of the State of Minnesota, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
This instrument was drafted by:
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered (MNI)
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 54
C-1
SCHEDULE C
AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
RESOLUTION NO. ______
RESOLUTION APPROVING PURCHASE AND
REDEVELOPMENT CONTRACT AND AWARDING THE
SALE OF, AND PROVIDING THE FORM, TERMS,
COVENANTS AND DIRECTIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF
ITS TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTES TO SLP PARK
VENTURES LLC.
BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of Commissioners ("Board") of the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority, St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "Authority") as follows:
Section 1. Recitals; Approval and Authorization; Award of Sale.
1.01. Recitals. (a) The Authority and the City of St. Louis Park have heretofore approved
the establishment of the Wayzata Boulevard Tax Increment Financing District (the "TIF District")
within Redevelopment Project No. 1 ("Project"), and have adopted a tax increment financing plan
for the purpose of financing certain improvements within the Project.
(b) To facilitate the redevelopment of certain property within the Project and TIF
District, the Authority and SLP Park Ventures LLC (the “Owner”) have negotiated a Purchase
and Redevelopment Contract (the “Agreement”) which provides for the conveyance of certain
Authority-owned property (the “Authority Parcels”) to the Owner, the construction by the Owner
of a rental housing facility, a hotel, and associated parking on certain Redevelopment Property
including the Authority Parcels, and the issuance by the Authority of one or more Tax Increment
Revenue Notes, Series 2018 (the “Notes”) to the Owner.
(c) On ____________, 2018, the Planning Commission of the City reviewed the
proposed conveyance of the Property and found that such conveyance is consistent with the
City’s comprehensive plan.
(d) On the date hereof, the Authority conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding
the conveyance of the Authority Parcels to the Owner pursuant to the Agreement, at which all
interested parties were given an opportunity to be heard, and hereby finds that the execution of the
Agreement and performance of the Authority's obligations thereunder, including the conveyance of
the Authority Parcels to the Owner, are in the best interest of the City and its residents.
1.02. Approval of Agreement. (a) The Agreement is hereby in all respects approved,
subject to modifications that do not alter the substance of the transaction and that are approved by
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 55
C-2
the President and Executive Director, provided that execution of the Agreement by such officials
shall be conclusive evidence of approval. The Board hereby approves the conveyance of the
Authority Parcels pursuant to the terms of the Agreement.
(b)Authority staff and officials are authorized to take all actions necessary to perform
the Authority’s obligations under the Agreement as a whole, including without limitation execution
of any documents to which the Authority is a party referenced in or attached to the Agreement, and
any deed or other documents necessary to convey the Authority Parcels to Redeveloper, all as
described in the Agreement.
1.03. Issuance, Sale, and Terms of the Notes. (a) The Authority hereby authorizes the
President and Executive Director to issue the Notes in accordance with the Agreement. All
capitalized terms in this resolution have the meaning provided in the Agreement unless the context
requires otherwise.
(b) The Notes shall be issued to the Owner as two separate Notes: the Hotel Note in the
maximum aggregate principal amount of $714,000 in consideration of certain eligible costs incurred
by the Owner in connection with construction of the Hotel Component of the Minimum
Improvements, and the Multifamily Note in the maximum aggregate principal amount of
$2,760,000 in consideration of certain eligible costs incurred by the Owner in connection with
construction of the Multifamily Component of the Minimum Improvements under the Agreement.
The Notes shall be dated the date of delivery thereof, and shall bear interest at the lesser of the rate
of 5.5% per annum or the actual rate of the Owner’s mortgage financing, from the date of issue to
the earlier of maturity or prepayment. The Notes will be issued in the principal amount of Public
Redevelopment Costs submitted and approved in accordance with Section 3.6 of the Agreement.
The Notes are secured by Available Tax Increment, as further described in the form of the Note
herein. The Authority hereby delegates to the Executive Director the determination of the date on
which each Note is to be delivered, in accordance with the Agreement.
Section 2. Form of Notes. The Notes shall be in substantially the following form, with
the blanks to be properly filled in and the principal amount adjusted as of the date of issue:
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 56
C-3
UNITED STATE OF AMERICA
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
No. R-1 $_____________
TAX INCREMENT REVENUE NOTE
SERIES 20__
(Platia Place, ________ Component)
Date
Rate of Original Issue
___%
The St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (“Authority”) for value received,
certifies that it is indebted and hereby promises to pay to SLP Park Ventures LLC or registered
assigns (the "Owner"), the principal sum of $__________ and to pay interest thereon at the rate of
__% per annum, solely from the sources and to the extent set forth herein. Capitalized terms shall
have the meanings provided in the Purchase and Redevelopment Contract between the Authority
and the Owner, dated as of _______________, 2018 (the "Agreement"), unless the context requires
otherwise.
1. Payments. Principal and interest ("Payments") shall be paid on August 1, 20__ and
each February 1 and August 1 thereafter to and including February 1, 20__ ("Payment Dates") in the
amounts and from the sources set forth in Section 3 herein. Payments shall be applied first to
accrued interest, and then to unpaid principal. Simple interest accruing from the date of issue
through and including February 1, 20__ shall be added to principal.
Payments are payable by mail to the address of the Owner or such other address as the
Owner may designate upon 30 days written notice to the Authority. Payments on this Note are
payable in any coin or currency of the United States of America which, on the Payment Date, is
legal tender for the payment of public and private debts.
2. Interest. Interest at the rate stated herein shall accrue on the unpaid principal,
commencing on the date of original issue. Interest shall be computed on the basis of a year of 360
days and charged for actual days principal is unpaid.
3. Available Tax Increment. (a) Payments on this Note are payable on each Payment
Date solely from and in the amount of Available Tax Increment, which shall mean 95% of the Tax
Increment attributable to the [______ Component] of the Minimum Improvements and
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 57
C-4
Redevelopment Property that is paid to the Authority by Hennepin County in the six months
preceding each Payment Date on the Note.
(b) The Authority shall have no obligation to pay principal of and interest on this Note on
each Payment Date from any source other than Available Tax Increment and the failure of the
Authority to pay principal or interest on this Note on any Payment Date shall not constitute a default
hereunder as long as the Authority pays principal and interest hereon to the extent of Available Tax
Increment. The Authority shall have no obligation to pay any unpaid balance of principal or
accrued interest that may remain after the final Payment on February 1, 20__.
4.Default. If on any Payment Date there has occurred and is continuing any Event of
Default under the Agreement, the Authority may withhold from payments hereunder under all
Available Tax Increment. If the Event of Default is thereafter cured in accordance with the
Agreement, the Available Tax Increment withheld under this Section shall be deferred and paid,
without interest thereon, within 30 days after the Event of Default is cured. If the Event of Default
is not cured in a timely manner, the Authority may terminate this Note by written notice to the
Owner in accordance with the Agreement.
5.Prepayment. (a) The principal sum and all accrued interest payable under this Note
is prepayable in whole or in part at any time by the Authority without premium or penalty. No
partial prepayment shall affect the amount or timing of any other regular Payment otherwise
required to be made under this Note.
(b)Upon receipt by Redeveloper of the Authority’s written statement of the
Participation Amount as described in Section 3.8 of the Agreement, fifty percent of such
Participation Amount will be deemed to constitute, and will be applied to, prepayment of the
principal amount of this Note. Such deemed prepayment is effective as of the date of delivery of
such statement to the Owner, and will be recorded by the Registrar in its records for the Note. Upon
request of the Owner, the Authority will deliver to the Owner a statement of the outstanding
principal balance of the Note after application of the deemed prepayment under this paragraph.
6.Nature of Obligation. This Note is one of an issue in the total principal amount of
$_________________, issued to aid in financing certain public redevelopment costs and
administrative costs of a Project undertaken by the Authority pursuant to Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.001 through 469.047, and is issued pursuant to an authorizing resolution (the
"Resolution") duly adopted by the Authority on ________, 2018, and pursuant to and in full
conformity with the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, including Minnesota Statutes,
Sections 469.174 to 469.1794, as amended. This Note is a limited obligation of the Authority which
is payable solely from Available Tax Increment pledged to the payment hereof under the
Resolution. This Note and the interest hereon shall not be deemed to constitute a general obligation
of the State of Minnesota or any political subdivision thereof, including, without limitation, the
Authority. Neither the State of Minnesota, nor any political subdivision thereof shall be obligated to
pay the principal of or interest on this Note or other costs incident hereto except out of Available
Tax Increment, and neither the full faith and credit nor the taxing power of the State of Minnesota or
any political subdivision thereof is pledged to the payment of the principal of or interest on this Note
or other costs incident hereto.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 58
C-5
7. Registration and Transfer. This Note is issuable only as a fully registered note
without coupons. As provided in the Resolution, and subject to certain limitations set forth therein,
this Note is transferable upon the books of the Authority kept for that purpose at the principal office
of the City Finance Director, by the Owner hereof in person or by such Owner's attorney duly
authorized in writing, upon surrender of this Note together with a written instrument of transfer
satisfactory to the Authority, duly executed by the Owner. Upon such transfer or exchange and the
payment by the Owner of any tax, fee, or governmental charge required to be paid by the Authority
with respect to such transfer or exchange, there will be issued in the name of the transferee a new
Note of the same aggregate principal amount, bearing interest at the same rate and maturing on the
same dates.
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED AND RECITED that all acts, conditions, and things required
by the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota to be done, to exist, to happen, and to be
performed in order to make this Note a valid and binding limited obligation of the Authority
according to its terms, have been done, do exist, have happened, and have been performed in due
form, time and manner as so required.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Commissioners of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority have caused this Note to be executed with the manual signatures of its
President and Executive Director, all as of the Date of Original Issue specified above.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Executive Director President
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 59
C-6
REGISTRATION PROVISIONS
The ownership of the unpaid balance of the within Note is registered in the bond register of
the City Finance Director, in the name of the person last listed below.
Date of Signature of
Registration Registered Owner____ City Finance Director
SLP Park Ventures LLC
Federal Tax I.D. No. _____________
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 60
C-7
Section 3. Terms, Execution and Delivery.
3.01. Denomination, Payment. Each Note shall be issued as a single typewritten note
numbered R-1.
Each Note shall be issuable only in fully registered form. Principal of and interest on the
Notes shall be payable by check or draft issued by the Registrar described herein.
3.02. Dates; Interest Payment Dates. Principal of and interest on the Notes shall be
payable by mail to the owner of record thereof as of the close of business on the fifteenth day of the
month preceding the Payment Date, whether or not such day is a business day.
3.03. Registration. The Authority hereby appoints the Chief Financial Officer of the City
to perform the functions of registrar, transfer agent and paying agent (the "Registrar"). The effect of
registration and the rights and duties of the Authority and the Registrar with respect thereto shall be
as follows:
(a) Register. The Registrar shall keep at its office a bond register in which the Registrar
shall provide for the registration of ownership of the Notes and the registration of transfers and
exchanges of the Notes.
(b) Transfer of Note. Upon surrender for transfer of any Note duly endorsed by the
registered owner thereof or accompanied by a written instrument of transfer, in form reasonably
satisfactory to the Registrar, duly executed by the registered owner thereof or by an attorney duly
authorized by the registered owner in writing, the Registrar shall authenticate and deliver, in the
name of the designated transferee or transferees, a new Note of a like aggregate principal amount
and maturity, as requested by the transferor. The Registrar may close the books for registration of
any transfer after the fifteenth day of the month preceding each Payment Date and until such
Payment Date.
(c) Cancellation. The Note surrendered upon any transfer shall be promptly cancelled
by the Registrar and thereafter disposed of as directed by the Authority.
(d) Improper or Unauthorized Transfer. When any Note is presented to the Registrar for
transfer, the Registrar may refuse to transfer the same until it is satisfied that the endorsement on
such Note or separate instrument of transfer is legally authorized. The Registrar shall incur no
liability for its refusal, in good faith, to make transfers which it, in its judgment, deems improper or
unauthorized.
(e) Persons Deemed Owners. The Authority and the Registrar may treat the person in
whose name each Note is at any time registered in the bond register as the absolute owner of such
Note, whether the Note shall be overdue or not, for the purpose of receiving payment of, or on
account of, the principal of and interest on such Note and for all other purposes, and all such
payments so made to any such registered owner or upon the owner's order shall be valid and
effectual to satisfy and discharge the liability of the Authority upon such Note to the extent of the
sum or sums so paid.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 61
C-8
(f)Taxes, Fees and Charges. For every transfer or exchange of any Note, the Registrar
may impose a charge upon the owner thereof sufficient to reimburse the Registrar for any tax, fee,
or other governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange.
(g)Mutilated, Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Note. In case any Note shall become mutilated
or be lost, stolen, or destroyed, the Registrar shall deliver a new Note of like amount, maturity dates
and tenor in exchange and substitution for and upon cancellation of such mutilated Note or in lieu of
and in substitution for such Note lost, stolen, or destroyed, upon the payment of the reasonable
expenses and charges of the Registrar in connection therewith; and, in the case the Note lost, stolen,
or destroyed, upon filing with the Registrar of evidence satisfactory to it that such Note was lost,
stolen, or destroyed, and of the ownership thereof, and upon furnishing to the Registrar of an
appropriate bond or indemnity in form, substance, and amount satisfactory to it, in which both the
Authority and the Registrar shall be named as obligees. The Note so surrendered to the Registrar
shall be cancelled by it and evidence of such cancellation shall be given to the Authority. If the
mutilated, lost, stolen, or destroyed Note has already matured or been called for redemption in
accordance with its terms, it shall not be necessary to issue a new Note prior to payment.
3.04. Preparation and Delivery. The Notes shall be prepared under the direction of the
Chief Financial Officer of the City and shall be executed on behalf of the Authority by the
signatures of its President and Executive Director. In case any officer whose signature shall appear
on any Note shall cease to be such officer before the delivery of such Note, such signature shall
nevertheless be valid and sufficient for all purposes, the same as if such officer had remained in
office until delivery. When each Note has been so executed, it shall be delivered by the Executive
Director to the Owner thereof in accordance with the Agreement.
Section 4. Security Provisions.
4.01. Pledge. The Authority hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and interest
on the Hotel Note all Available Tax Increment attributable to the Hotel Component of the Minimum
Improvements as defined in the Note, and hereby pledges to the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Multifamily Note all Available Tax Increment attributable to the Multifamily
Component of the Minimum Improvements as defined in the Note.
Available Tax Increment shall be applied to payment of the principal of and interest on each Note in
accordance with the terms of the form of Note set forth in Section 2 of this resolution.
4.02. Bond Fund. Until the date the Notes are no longer outstanding and no principal
thereof or interest thereon (to the extent required to be paid pursuant to this resolution) remains
unpaid, the Authority shall maintain a separate and special "Bond Fund" to be used for no purpose
other than the payment of the principal of and interest on the Notes. The Authority irrevocably
agrees to appropriate to the Bond Fund on or before each Payment Date the Available Tax
Increment in an amount equal to the Payment then due, or the actual Available Tax Increment,
whichever is less. Any Available Tax Increment remaining in the Bond Fund shall be transferred to
the Authority's account for the TIF District upon the termination of the Notes in accordance with
their terms.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 62
C-9
4.03. Additional Obligations. The Authority will issue no other obligations secured in
whole or in part by Available Tax Increment unless such pledge is on a subordinate basis to the
pledge on the Notes.
Section 5. Certification of Proceedings.
5.01. Certification of Proceedings. The officers of the Authority are hereby authorized and
directed to prepare and furnish to the Owner of each Note certified copies of all proceedings and
records of the Authority, and such other affidavits, certificates, and information as may be required
to show the facts relating to the legality and marketability of each Note as the same appear from the
books and records under their custody and control or as otherwise known to them, and all such
certified copies, certificates, and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall be deemed
representations of the Authority as to the facts recited therein.
Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective upon approval.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the Economic Development
Authority __________, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, Executive Director Steve Hallfin, President
Attest
Secretary
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 63
D-1-1
SCHEDULE D-1
ESTIMATED PUBLIC REDEVELOPMENT COSTS
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 64
D-1-2
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 65
D-2-1
SCHEDULE D-2
CASH-ON-CASH RETURN CALCULATION: MULTIFAMILY COMPONENT
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 66
D-2-2
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 67
D-3-1
SCHEDULE D-3
CASH-ON-COST RETURN CALCULATION: HOTEL COMPONENT
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 68
E-1
SCHEDULE E
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION
WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "Authority") and
SLP Park Ventures LLC (“Redeveloper”) entered into a certain Purchase and Redevelopment
Contract dated _____________, 2018 (“Contract”), filed as Document No. _________ at the office
of the County Registrar of Titles; and
WHEREAS, the Contract contains certain covenants and restrictions set forth in Articles
III and IV thereof related to completing the ___________ Component of certain Minimum
Improvements; and
WHEREAS, the Redeveloper has performed said covenants and conditions insofar as it is
able in a manner deemed sufficient by the Authority to permit the execution and recording of this
certification;
NOW, THEREFORE, this is to certify that all construction and other physical
improvements related to the _____________ Component of the Minimum Improvements
specified to be done and made by the Redeveloper have been completed and the agreements and
covenants in Articles III and IV of the Contract have been performed by the Redeveloper, and
this Certificate is intended to be a conclusive determination of the satisfactory termination of the
covenants and conditions of Articles III and IV of the Contract related to completion of the
___________ Component of the Minimum Improvements, but any other covenants in the
Contract shall remain in full force and effect.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 69
E-2
Dated: _______________, 20__. ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
By
Authority Representative
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of _________, 20__
by ______________________, the __________________ of the St. Louis Park Economic
Development Authority, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
This document drafted by:
Kennedy & Graven, Chartered
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 70
F-1
SCHEDULE F
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
_______________________________________________________________________________
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
[__________ Component]
and
ASSESSOR'S CERTIFICATION
By and Between
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
and
SLP PARK VENTURES LLC
This Document was drafted by:
KENNEDY & GRAVEN, Chartered
470 U.S. Bank Plaza
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 71
F-2
ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
[______________ Component]
THIS AGREEMENT, made on or as of the ____ day of _________________, 2019, by and
between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body, corporate and politic
(the “Authority”) and SLP Park Ventures LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company (the
“Redeveloper”).
WITNESSETH, that
WHEREAS, on or before the date hereof the Authority and Redeveloper have entered into a
Purchase and Redevelopment Contract dated _____________, 2018 (the “Redevelopment
Contract”), pursuant to which the Authority is to facilitate development of certain property in the
Authority of St. Louis Park hereinafter referred to as the “Property” and legally described in Exhibit
A hereto; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the Redevelopment Contract the Redeveloper is obligated to
construct certain improvements (the “____________ Component”) upon the Property; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and Redeveloper desire to establish a minimum market value for
the Property and the ______________ Component to be constructed thereon, pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes, Section 469.177, Subdivision 8; and
WHEREAS, the Authority and the City Assessor (the “Assessor”) have reviewed the
preliminary plans and specifications for the improvements and have inspected such improvements;
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this Agreement, in consideration of the promises,
covenants and agreements made by each to the other, do hereby agree as follows:
1. The minimum market value which shall be assessed for ad valorem tax purposes for
the Property described in Exhibit A, together with the ___________ Component constructed
thereon, shall be $_____________ as of January 2, 2020, notwithstanding the progress of
construction by such date, and shall be $____________ as of January 20, 2021 and each January 2
thereafter until termination of this Agreement under Section 2 hereof.
2. The minimum market value herein established shall be of no further force and effect
and this Agreement shall terminate on the earlier of the following: (a) The date of receipt by the
Authority of the final payment from Hennepin County of Tax Increments from the Wayzata
Boulevard Tax Increment Financing District, or (b) the date when the ______________ Note, as
defined in the Redevelopment Contract, has been fully paid, defeased or terminated in accordance
with its terms.
The event referred to in Section 2(b) of this Agreement shall be evidenced by a certificate or
affidavit executed by the Authority.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 72
F-3
3. This Agreement shall be promptly recorded by the Authority. The Redeveloper
shall pay all costs of recording.
4. Neither the preambles nor provisions of this Agreement are intended to, nor shall
they be construed as, modifying the terms of the Redevelopment Contract between the Authority
and the Redeveloper.
5. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the successors and
assigns of the parties.
6. Each of the parties has authority to enter into this Agreement and to take all actions
required of it, and has taken all actions necessary to authorize the execution and delivery of this
Agreement.
7. In the event any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid and unenforceable
by any court of competent jurisdiction, such holding shall not invalidate or render unenforceable
any other provision hereof.
8. The parties hereto agree that they will, from time to time, execute, acknowledge and
deliver, or cause to be executed, acknowledged and delivered, such supplements, amendments and
modifications hereto, and such further instruments as may reasonably be required for correcting any
inadequate, or incorrect, or amended description of the Property or the ___________ Component or
for carrying out the expressed intention of this Agreement, including, without limitation, any further
instruments required to delete from the description of the Property such part or parts as may be
included within a separate assessment agreement.
9. Except as provided in Section 8 of this Agreement, this Agreement may not be
amended nor any of its terms modified except by a writing authorized and executed by all parties
hereto.
10. This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of
which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
11. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of Minnesota.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 73
F-4
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of ________, 2019 by
Steve Hallfin and Thomas K. Harmening, the President and Executive Director of the St. Louis Park
Economic Development Authority, on behalf of the Authority.
Notary Public
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 74
F-5
SLP PARK VENTURES LLC
By
Its
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF__________ )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of _____________,
2019 by ____________________, the ____________________ of SLP Park Ventures LLC, a
Minnesota limited liability company, on behalf of the company.
Notary Public
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 75
F-6
CERTIFICATION BY CITY ASSESSOR
The undersigned, having reviewed the plans and specifications for the improvements to be
constructed and the market value assigned to the land upon which the improvements are to be
constructed, hereby certifies as follows: The undersigned Assessor, being legally responsible for
the assessment of the above described property, hereby certifies that the values assigned to the land
and improvements are reasonable.
City Assessor for the City of St. Louis Park
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ___ day of ____________,
2019 by Cory Bultema, the City Assessor of the City of St. Louis Park.
Notary Public
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 76
F-7
EXHIBIT A of ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT
Legal Description of Property
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 77
G-1
518115v9 MNI SA285-100
SCHEDULE G
Form of Subordination Agreement
THIS SUBORDINATION AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made as of this _____
day of __________, 20__, between _______________ ("Lender"), whose address is at
_________________________, and the ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, a public body corporate and politic ("Authority").
RECITALS
A. SLP Park Ventures LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company ("Redeveloper"),
is the owner of certain real property situated in Hennepin County, Minnesota and legally
described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein (the "Property").
B. Lender has made a mortgage loan to Redeveloper in the original principal amount
of $__________ (the "Loan"). The Loan is the evidenced and secured by the following
documents:
(i) a certain promissory note (the "Note") made by Redeveloper dated
__________, 20__, in the amount of $___________; and
(ii) a certain mortgage, security agreement and fixture financing statement
(the "Mortgage") made by Redeveloper dated __________, 20__, filed __________,
20__, as Hennepin County Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. __________
encumbering the Property; and
(iii) a certain assignment of leases and rents (the "Assignment") made by
Redeveloper dated __________, 20__, filed __________, 20__, as Hennepin County
Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. __________ encumbering the Property.
The Note, the Mortgage, the Assignment, and all other documents and instruments
evidencing, securing and executed in connection with the Loan, are hereinafter collectively
referred to as the "Loan Documents."
C. Authority is the owner and holder of certain rights under that certain Purchase and
Redevelopment Contract (the "Contract") by and between Redeveloper and Authority dated
______________________, 2018, filed ____________, 20__, as Hennepin County
Recorder/Registrar of Titles Doc. No. _______________.
D. Redeveloper is entitled under the Contract to acquire a certain Tax Increment Tax
Revenue Note, Series 20__ in the original principal amount of $______________ (the “TIF Note”).
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and as an inducement to Lender to
make the Loan, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto represent, warrant and agree as follows:
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 78
G-2
518115v9 MNI SA285-100
1. Consent. The Authority acknowledges that the Lender is making the Loan to the
Redeveloper and consents to the same. The Authority also consents to and approves the collateral
assignment of the Contract and TIF Note (when and if issued) by the Redeveloper to the Lender as
collateral for the Loan; provided, however, that this consent shall not deprive the Authority of or
otherwise limit any of the Authority’s rights or remedies under the Contract and TIF Note and shall
not relieve the Redeveloper of any of its obligations under the Contract and TIF Note; provided
further, however, the limitations to the Authority’s consent contained in this Paragraph 1 are subject
to the provisions of Paragraph 2 below.
2. Subordination. The Authority hereby agrees that the rights of the Authority with
respect to [_____________________] under the Contract are and shall remain subordinate and
subject to liens, rights and security interests created by the Loan Documents and to any and all
amendments, modifications, extensions, replacements or renewals of the Loan Documents;
provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed as subordinating the requirement
contained in the Contract the Property be used in accordance with the provisions of Section 10.3 of
the Contract, or as subordinating the Authority’s rights under the TIF Note to suspend payments in
accordance with the TIF Note.
3. Notice to Authority. Lender agrees to use commercially reasonable efforts to notify
Authority of the occurrence of any Event of Default given to Redeveloper under the Loan
Documents, in accordance with Section 7.2 of the Contract. The Lender shall not be bound by the
other requirements in Section 7.2 of the Contract.
4. Statutory Exception. Nothing in this Agreement shall alter, remove or affect
Lender’s obligation under Minnesota Statutes, § 469.029 to use the Property in conformity to
Section 10.3 of the Contract.
5. No Assumption. The Authority acknowledges that the Lender is not a party to the
Contract and by executing this Agreement does not become a party to the Contract, and specifically
does not assume and shall not be bound by any obligations of the Redeveloper to the Authority
under the Contract, and that the Lender shall incur no obligations whatsoever to the Authority
except as expressly provided herein.
6. Notice from Authority. So long as the Contract remains in effect, the Authority
agrees to give to the Lender copies of notices of any Event of Default given to Redeveloper under
the Contract.
7. Governing Law. This Agreement is made in and shall be construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of Minnesota.
8. Successors. This Agreement and each and every covenant, agreement and other
provision hereof shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their
respective successors and assigns, including any person who acquires title to the Property through
the Lender of a foreclosure of the Mortgage.
9. Severability. The unenforceability or invalidity of any provision hereof shall not
render any other provision or provisions herein contained unenforceable or invalid.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 79
G-3
518115v9 MNI SA285-100
10. Notice. Any notices and other communications permitted or required by the
provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been properly given or
served by depositing the same with the United States Postal Service, or any official successor
thereto, designated as registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, bearing adequate
postage, or delivery by reputable private carrier and addresses as set forth above.
11. Transfer of Title to Lender. The Authority agrees that in the event the Lender, a
transferee of Lender, or a purchaser at foreclosure sale, acquires title to the Property pursuant to a
foreclosure, or a deed in lieu thereof, the Lender, transferee, or purchaser shall not be bound by the
terms and conditions of the Contract except as expressly herein provided. Further the Authority
agrees that in the event the Lender, a transferee of Lender, or a purchaser at foreclosure sale
acquires title to the Property pursuant to a foreclosure sale or a deed in lieu thereof, then the Lender,
transferee, or purchaser shall be entitled to all rights conferred upon the Redeveloper under the
Contract, provided that no condition of default exists and remains uncured beyond applicable cure
periods in the obligations of the Redeveloper under the Contract.
12. Estoppel. The Authority hereby represents and warrants to Lender, for the purpose
of inducing Lender to make advances to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents that:
(a) No default or event of default by Redeveloper exists under the terms of the Contract
on the date hereof;
(b) The Contract has not been amended or modified in any respect, nor has any material
provision thereof been waived by either the Authority or the Redeveloper, and the
Contract is in full force and effect;
(c) Such other reasonable certifications as the Lender may request.
13. Amendments. The Authority hereby represents and warrants to Lender for the
purpose of inducing Lender to make advances to Redeveloper under the Loan Documents that
Authority will not agree to any amendment or modification to the or any TIF Note issued under the
Contract that materially affects the collection of Available Tax Increment (as defined in the
Contract) in any way affects the Property without the Lender’s written consent.
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 80
G-4
518115v9 MNI SA285-100
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed and delivered as of the day
and year first written above.
ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
By
Its President
By
Its Executive Director
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) SS.
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this _____ day of ___________,
by _______________________ and ______________________ the President and Executive
Director, respectively, of the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, a public body
corporate and politic, on behalf of such public body.
Notary Public
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 81
G-5
518115v9 MNI SA285-100
[LENDER]
By:
Its
Economic development authority meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 7a)
Title: Revised Purchase and Redevelopment Contract with SLP Park Ventures, LLC Page 82
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Minutes: 3a
Unofficial minutes
City council special study session
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
September 17, 2018
The meeting convened at 6:55 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller,
and Margaret Rog.
Councilmember Absent: Mayor Jake Spano
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffman) Director of
Operations and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Nature Center Manager (Mr. Oestreich), and Recording
Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
Guest: Tara Blotske, RJM; Glenn Waguespack and Nancy Blankfard, HGA.
1. Westwood Hills Nature Center Project Update
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen called the meeting to order.
Mr. Waguespack presented the updates on the project. He noted the water feature north of
the projected building.
Ms. Walsh noted staff is working with Friend of the Arts and has organized an arts and culture
taskforce to focus on public art for the project. She added as the project moves forward, staff
will work with communications to deliver updates to residents regarding the progress.
Mr. Oestreich stated the water and proposed bog will educate students and others about the
habitat and plantings on the site, and noted there will be access points for folks to get into the
streambed and interact. He also stated he has met with the school district, and presented the
plan to them. Mr. Duffy, with the district, stated he is excited about the multipurpose room and
would like to do an in-service for teachers there in 2020. Mr. Oestreich went on to note there
will be a pollinator area and live animal displays featuring snakes and reptiles in exhibit areas.
Councilmember Rog asked about the building being described as “net zero”. Ms. Walsh stated
staff is working to standardize the language, and the building is a “zero energy” building, noting
with weather factors, there will be some months when zero energy is achieved and others
when it is not – therefore it will balance out.
Councilmember Rog asked if there is capacity to store energy at the building. Ms. Walsh stated
it is designed to feed back into the grid. Mayor Pro Tem Brausen added the city will get credit
for the energy sent back to the grid.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3a) Page 2
Title: Special study session minutes of September 17, 2018
Councilmember Rog stated she is pleased to hear the school partnerships are getting stronger
related to the project. She noted it is important to ensure culture inclusion and this is the time
to be intentional as it relates to public art, and culture. She encouraged a sharper lens on
inclusivity and equity on the project.
Ms. Walsh affirmed staff has been working closely with Ms. Sojourner and talking through ideas
and arts and culture. She noted there is also an outreach team that has been formed, and staff
will be looking for input and feedback, both on programming and art. She added they are also
discussing the use of revolving art at the nature center.
Councilmember Rog pointed out there is also an opportunity here to include multiple languages
in signage and displays at the center, noting the city does a good job of that in municipal
buildings.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen agreed with Councilmember Rog on the signage and program
materials, adding that self-guided tours are another area where multiple languages should be
used.
The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Tim Brausen, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Minutes: 3b
Unofficial minutes
City council meeting
St. Louis Park, Minnesota
September 17, 2018
1. Call to order
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Rachel Harris, Anne Mavity, Thom Miller,
and Margaret Rog.
Councilmembers absent: Mayor Jake Spano.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Community Development Director (Ms. Barton),
City Attorney (Mr. Mattick), Deputy City Manager/Human Resources Director (Ms. Deno),
Assistant Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison), Operations & Recreation Director (Ms. Walsh),
Associate Planner (Ms. Kramer), Public Works Services Manager (Mr. Merkley), Natural
Resources Coordinator (Mr. Vaughan), Management Assistant (Ms. Carrillo Perez), Police Chief
Harcey, and Recording Secretary (Ms. Pappas).
Guests: Police Dept. members; Hennepin County Sherriff Stanek; members of Yeshiva
community, members of Wat Promwachirayan community; Kaitlyn Murray, Northshore
Development, and city residents.
1a. Pledge of allegiance
1b. Roll call
2. Presentations
2a. Evergreen awards
Natural Resources Coordinator Mr. Vaughan presented the 2018 Evergreen award to
Patricia Janecula of the Wolfe Park neighborhood. He stated her home landscape was
awarded this year’s prize because of her very creative and beautiful plantings,
landscaping and floral designs. He noted there were five judges inspecting this year’s
nominees. Ms. Janecula was presented with an award certificate, Dwarf Alberta Spruce
tree, and an award sign to post on her boulevard for two weeks.
2b. Police officer oath of office
Chief Harcey presented new officer Mitch Swanson, to be sworn in by City Clerk
Kennedy. Chief Harcey stated Officer Swanson began working part-time with the city
police force in 2014, while completing his law enforcement education. Officer Swanson
was immediately regarded as hardworking, enthusiastic, and mature beyond his years,
and was hired by the police department in 2018. Chief Harcey stated Officer Swanson
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 2
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
has successfully complete the PTO field training program and has met all the
requirements to work as a police officer in St. Louis Park. He and Mayor Pro Tem
Brausen congratulated Officer Swanson.
Officer Swanson thanked his family and his police partners, along with the city council.
2c. Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office (HCSO) update
Sheriff Rich Stanek gave a short presentation to the council and community on the role
of the sheriff’s office and the areas they work in including: agency leadership, jail, court
security, patrol (in partnership with local police depts.), warrants, civil process,
investigations, 911 dispatch, and crime lab.
Sheriff Stanek also noted the office’s work in the opioid epidemic. He stated the sheriff’s
office educates the public about the epidemic and about opioid deaths. He stated in
2018, they have seen a slight decline, so far; however, deaths have been increasing from
overdoses since 2013. Sheriff Stanek noted three programs the county administers
related to the opioid epidemic including the #Noverdose campaign, Naloxone, and the
drug take back program.
Sheriff Stanek thanked the city council and Chief Harcey for doing a great job in St. Louis
Park, adding the county appreciates all the hard work the police force does.
2d. Recognition of donations
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen expressed his thanks on behalf of the council for the following
donations:
• Athletic Business donated up to $450 for Recreation Superintendent Jason West
to attend the Athletic Business conference in New Orleans, LA, November 7-10,
2018.
• American Legion donated $3000 to ROCtoberfest event to be held September
28, 2018.
• Ken and Sue Isler donated $300 for the planting of a tree honoring Anna Nichole
Isler in Shelard Park.
• Linda Mell donated $300 for the planting of a memorial tree in Wolfe Park.
• Friends of the Parks and Trails of St. Paul and Ramsey County donated $80 for
trees to be planted in city parks.
• True North Leadership donated $3000 for partial program tuition costs for Racial
Equity Manager Alicia Sojourner to attend the True North Leadership program in
Scotts Valley, CA, October 14-19, 2018.
3. Approval of minutes
3a. Special study session minutes of August 6, 2018
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to approve
the August 6, 2018 meeting minutes as presented.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 3
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
The motion passed 6-0.
3b. City Council minutes of August 6, 2018
Councilmember Harris stated in the communication section, her comments should read:
“Councilmember Harris added there is an inaugural TexaTonka Neighborhood
Association meeting at Ainsworth Park is on Thursday August 16th, from 6-8 p.m. and
encouraged folks to attend.”
Councilmember Rog noted on page 8, it should read, “She also suggested a landing
above the trail entrance at 23rd Street to allow bikers entering trail to make sure the trail
is clear before entering.”
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve
the August 6, 2018 meeting minutes with corrections.
The motion passed 6-0.
3c. Study session minutes of August 13, 2018
Councilmember Rog noted on the bottom of page 7, it should read, “Councilmember
Rog said she was notified by STEP that they are willing to partner to administer the fund
on behalf of the city.”
Councilmember Rog added on page 9, the following sentence should be stricken from
the minutes: “She stated she does not feel satisfied with the racial equity on this, and
doesn’t understand consequences.”
It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to approve
the August 13, 2018 meeting minutes with corrections.
The motion passed 6-0.
3d. City council meeting minutes of August 20, 2018
Councilmember Rog noted on page 4, a spelling correction of the name “Marilyn Klug”.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen added in 8a in the last paragraph, it should read “…. assured
the council….” as opposed to “insured the council”.
It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to approve
the August 20, 2018 meeting minutes with changes.
The motion passed 6-0.
3e. Special city council meeting minutes of August 27, 2018
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 4
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Rog, to approve the
August 27, 2018 meeting minutes as presented.
The motion passed 6-0.
3f. Study session minutes of August 27, 2018
It was moved by Councilmember Miller, seconded by Councilmember Hallfin, to approve
the August 27, 2018 meeting minutes as presented.
The motion passed 6-0.
4. Approval of agenda and items on consent calendar
4a. Adopt Resolution No. 18-135 authorizing the 2019 Preliminary HRA Levy.
4b. Adopt Resolution No. 18-136 approving acceptance of a donation from Athletic
Business in an amount not to exceed $450 to cover the registration fee for Jason West,
Recreation Superintendent, to attend the Athletic Business Conference in New Orleans,
Louisiana November 7 - 10, 2018.
4c. Adopt Resolution No. 18-137 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from the
American Legion in the amount of $3,000 for the ROCtoberfest event to be held
September 28, 2018.
4d. Adopt Resolution No. 18-138 approving acceptance of monetary donations as follows:
• Ken and Sue Isler in the amount of $300 honoring Anna Nicole Isler with a memorial
tree in Shelard Park.
• Linda Mell in the amount of $300 for a memorial tree in Wolfe Park.
• Friends of the Parks and Trails of St. Paul and Ramsey County in the amount of $80
for trees to be planted in city parks.
4e. Approve a temporary on-sale 3.2% malt liquor license for Best Friends Animal Society
for their event to be held on September 29, 2018 at Wolfe Park, 3700 Monterey Drive in
St. Louis Park.
4f. Adopt Resolution No. 18-139 accepting work and authorizing final payment in the
amount of $25,610.51 for the annual sanitary sewer mainline rehabilitation project with
Visu-Sewer, Inc. - Project No. 4018-3000, City Contract No. 46-18.
4g. Adopt Resolution No. 18-140 approving acceptance of a monetary donation from True
North Leadership in an amount of $3,000 to cover partial program tuition for Alicia
Sojourner, Racial Equity Manager, to attend the 2018 True North Leadership program in
Scotts Valley, CA.
4h. Approve for filing planning commission meeting minutes of August 1, 2018
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to approve
the agenda as presented and items listed on the consent calendar; and to waive reading
of all resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 6-0.
5. Boards and commissions
5a. Appointment of youth representative to boards and commissions
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 5
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to
approve the appointment of Zoe Frank to the Environment and Sustainability
Commission (ESC) as youth member for one-year term ending on August 31, 2019.
The motion passed 6-0.
6. Public hearings
6a. Consolidated public hearing
I.-VI. 2019 Budget and property owner service charges for Special Service
Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6.
Mr. Merkley presented the staff report. He noted the 2019 proposed budgets and
service charges are similar to that of past years, and pointed out staff has held meetings
with the property owners from each of the six districts and received their support for
approving the proposed 2019 budgets and service charges.
Mr. Merkley stated there is no formal action to be taken today and action on the budget
and service charges will be placed on the October 1 council agenda.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen opened the public hearing.
Mr. Bertomeu, 4419 Excelsior Blvd., asked if the 14 petitions are for or against the
Special Service District 2 reauthorization. Mr. Merkley stated for the reauthorization of
the special district, there were 14 petitions from the 26 properties and requirement for
approval is 25%.
Mr. Bertomeu stated he did contact staff about this issue, and he would like the city
council to consider changing the methodology for how the service charges are
calculated to make it more fair for small businesses, such as his. He stated the costs are
too high for him and he cannot compete against other larger developments on Excelsior
Avenue.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen closed the public hearing.
Mr. Harmening noted that the formula used for charging businesses on Excelsior
Boulevard was developed by the property owners. He added these property owners
chose how they wanted to have the costs allocated based on services provided.
7. Requests, petitions, and communications from the public – none
8. Resolutions, ordinances, motions and discussion items
8a. Educational facilities with student housing in the R-4 multiple-family residence
district.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 6
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. He stated the recommended action is to
approve the first reading of an ordinance related to educational facilities in the R-4
multiple-family residence zoning district, and to set the second reading for October 1,
2018.
Mr. Morrison stated the Yeshiva of Minneapolis requests an amendment to section 36-
166 (d) (8) of the St. Louis Park city code proposing to:
1. Allow dormitories as part of educational facilities in the R-4 district.
2. Limit the number of dorm rooms allowed based on the parcel size.
3. Limit the number of students to 200 that can live at the school.
Mr. Morrison added that the Yeshiva is planning an expansion of their school, and if the
amendment is approved, the Yeshiva of Minneapolis must request a rezoning of their
property from R-3 to R-4, obtain approvals for conditional use permits for the
expansion, comprehensive plan amendment, lot combination and variances. He added
there are currently no schools located in the R-4 zoning district, so the Yeshiva of
Minneapolis would be the first school utilizing the amendment if the applications above
are approved.
Councilmember Rog stated the school is in Ward 1, and she has met with the Rabbi and
also attended the neighborhood meetings, where neighbors were supportive. She
stated she supports the change in zoning, and pointed out that she learned how very
popular the Yeshiva is around the country, and that those attending are doing so
because of St. Louis Park’s safe community. She added the building will be tucked into a
hill in an innovative way, with less impacts evident, noting the boys at the school do not
drive cars, so there will be no increase in traffic. She wished the group well.
Councilmember Mavity asked about the additional square footage, adding a dormitory
is definitely new to St. Louis Park. Councilmember Mavity noted her concerns about
alignment of the total square footage with the living space, adding she does not
understand how the city is defining that, and why the city is not providing more
guidance on the living space in the building.
Mr. Morrison stated the school is proposing quads for the dorm living space, adding
there is ample room for the living space, and they are limited to 200 students. He noted
the school is able to divide up the living spaces however they want.
Councilmember Mavity noted she has no problem with the proposal, and does not want
to be disruptive in moving this forward; however, the way it is being set up lacks clarity,
and she is concerned about setting precedent.
Shlomo Kutoff, 4401 W. 25th St., stated the living quarters must be in alignment with the
MN Health Department regulations, adding they are under inspection by the health
department, and the school bases their number on what is allowed. He stated the
Yeshiva is following the health department guidelines.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 7
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
Councilmember Mavity stated it would be helpful in the staff report for the second
reading to provide an explanation of how space is defined and if other entities are
handling this.
It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to approve
the first reading of an ordinance pertaining to educational facilities in the R-4 multiple-
family residence zoning district, and setting the second reading for October 1, 2018.
The motion passed 6-0.
8b. 2019 preliminary property tax levy certification. Resolution No. 18-141.
Mr. Simon noted the 2019 preliminary property tax levy at $33,392,261, which is a
5.18% change over the 2018 final property tax levy. Mr. Simon also provided the date
and time for the truth in taxation proposed public hearing on the 2019 budget as
December 3, 2018. He reviewed the calendar for October, November and December
and referred to the staff report for details. The council will then adopt the 2018 revised
budget, 2019 budgets, final tax levies (city and HRA) and 2019-2028 CIP at the
December 17, 2018 meeting.
Councilmember Mavity stated the council discusses this each year, noting this is one of
the more important decisions made by council. She added this outlines funding for
services everyone wants for the community and added, the council can propose a lower
tax levy amount, but not a higher one. She also stated her constituents want value and
good services in the city, adding the city has been consistent in delivering services, year
over year, and she will support this tonight.
Councilmember Miller stated he will oppose this tonight, not because the city is not
well-managed, but he feels the property taxes are regressive, and he is very concerned
about the elderly who are on fixed incomes and face increases in their cost of living. He
added renters also are not seeing any increase in their property values, and he is
concerned about them as well. He stated he advocates the increases be moderate and
closer to wage growth figures over the past 20 years, at 3% vs. the 5.18% proposed.
Councilmember Rog stated she appreciates Councilmembers Miller’s and Mavity’s
comments, adding she has put much thought into this, but will be voting in favor of the
tax levy tonight. She stated she is hopeful the council and community can look for ways
to reduce costs, while getting more in line with the values of the city.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen added the council has been engaged in this since June and has
discussed the need to continue the level of services everyone in St. Louis Park enjoys. He
stated the city does a good job of managing these services and he invited the public to
become involved in this process as well, adding everyone is encouraged to let the
council know their thoughts on this. He stated he will also support this.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to adopt
Resolution No. 18-141, approving 2019 preliminary property tax levy.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 8
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
The motion passed 5-1 (Councilmember Miller opposed).
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Harris, to set the
budget public hearing date for December 3, 2018.
The motion passed 6-0.
8c. Wat Promwachirayan conditional use permit for 2544 Hwy. 100. Resolution
No. 18-142.
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. If approved, the resolution will allow a
conditional use permit (CUP) for a religious institution at 2544 Hwy. 100, with
conditions.
Mr. Morrison stated the Wat Promwachirayan (Wat Prom) requests a CUP to operate a
Buddhist Temple at 2544 Hwy. 100, to expand their parking lot, and to export more than
400 cubic yards of material.
Mr. Morrison noted there are three phases of development:
1. Parking lot and stormwater improvements beginning this fall
2. Construct new service hall approximately 10 years from now
3. Construct new meditation hall approximately 20 years from now
Mr. Morrison stated two neighborhood meetings were held, and those in attendance
were generally in support of the plans, although there were some comments about
trees to be removed for the project.
Councilmember Miller stated he was shocked about the fees, adding it seems like an
extraordinary amount for the trees. He asked if there are scrub trees in the area, or
larger trees. Mr. Morrison stated the fee is based on the removal of large trees. He
added removal depends on species and trunk size.
Councilmember Brausen noted there is a storm sewer and sanitary sewer on the lot,
and asked how site storm water requirements will be met. Mr. Morrison stated there is
a storm water improvement proposed under the parking lot, adjacent to the storm and
sanitary sewer. The storm water improvement is all part of phase 1.
Sharon Lehrman, 2610 Vernon Ave. S., stated she lives directly across from the green
space area and is a 35-year resident of Birchwood. She was born and raised in St. Louis
Park and is sad to see so many trees gone on the boulevard. She stated she has always
loved the green spaces in the city, and was sad over the loss of over 200 trees in her
neighborhood due to the Lyman Lumber parking expansion. She noted how trees
provide clean air, water, and improved mental health and asked the council to consider
these things. She stated every little green space that goes away is a loss to the entire
community. She asked, since the temple will not build the social hall until phase 2,
which is 10 years from now, why do they need to remove the trees now.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 9
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
Councilmember Harris stated in the plan, the community garden space is to remain, and
asked if Wat Prom might consider removing the garden and replacing it with trees,
which might be a good compromise, and would also lower the fees.
Councilmember Rog stated Wat Prom has been a welcome neighbor in Birchwood, and
a good partner, adding she also is disappointed with the loss of trees, but happy with
the temple’s growth in the community and making St. Louis Park their home. She stated
there has been good compromise, and she believes there is a commitment to preserve
as many trees as possible. She added the parking needs are significant so there is a good
rationale for the change.
It was moved by Councilmember Rog, seconded by Councilmember Miller, to adopt
Resolution No. 18-142, approving a conditional use permit (CUP) for a religious
institution at 2544 Highway 100, with conditions.
The motion passed 6-0.
8d. Urban Park Apartments conditional use permit and variances for 3601 Phillips
Parkway. Resolution No. 18-143.
Ms. Kramer presented the staff report. She noted that the developer is requesting a
conditional use permit (CUP) and five variances to build a second apartment building at
3601 Phillips Parkway. The variance request includes an increase in the maximum
allowed ground floor area ratio; an increase in the maximum allowed floor area ratio; a
reduction in the amount of required parking; and, a reduction in the side yard widths.
Ms. Kramer stated a neighborhood meeting was held and about 10 residents attended
and expressed concerns about parking on the site. She further stated the planning
commission held a public hearing on August 15, 2018, at which time two residents
provided feedback on the project. The planning commission recommended approval of
the application 5-0 with one abstention.
Councilmember Harris asked, given the parking variance request with 26 spaces not
met, where will guests park at the property. Ms. Kramer stated management will issue
guest parking passes to residents, who in turn would give them to their guests for on-
site parking.
Councilmember Harris stated she had feedback from several residents related to the
bike trail southeast of the site line, referring to some challenges with building on this
space. She noted she received assurances the development would deal with this issue,
and yet there was a slight discrepancy in the staff report related to this.
Ms. Kramer stated staff feedback was that the trail will be kept open during the entire
project; however, there are plans to have re-routes of the trail, during the project, when
needed.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 10
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
Councilmember Miller asked about Shalom to the west and if they participated in the
neighborhood or planning commission meetings. Ms. Kramer stated a representative
from Shalom was in attendance at the planning commission meeting, and talked about
concerns related to guest parking at their site, and also general parking concerns.
Councilmember Hallfin stated he will defer to Councilmember Harris, the Ward 3
councilmember, but noted he has attended many events at Knollwood Plaza, adding
there is typically no place to park there when large events are taking place.
Councilmember Rog also deferred to Councilmember Harris on this, but stated she
echos these parking concerns.
Donna Rock, 3601 Phillips Parkway, stated she is a long-term St. Louis Park resident and
attended the planning commission meeting. She said the parking variance was for 35
spaces at that meeting, but now is down to 26. Ms. Kramer stated the parking plan was
re-worked since the planning commission meeting.
Ms. Rock stated she has concerns about traffic and parking in the area, adding other
residents are concerned also. She stated many who live there currently have 2 and 3
cars, and many times must park blocks away, due to lack of parking there already. She
added she also has concerns about trees being taken away from the area, and the
underground garage becoming a two-way exit and entrance vs. one-way, as it is
currently.
Ms. Murray, Northshore Property Development representative, stated plans have been
provided related to the trees and site lines, which include curb cuts for greater visibility.
She also noted the bike trail will continue to stay open.
Ms. Murray added they have worked on a parking plan and implemented a registered
car process. She stated a towing company will also be hired to remove cars that are
parking illegally at the site. She stated they are committed to making sure parking will
run smoothly there.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen asked if charging stations will be available in the building. Ms.
Murray stated yes, along with bike racks, and irrigation systems for watering.
Councilmember Mavity stated she is really excited about this project, noting it is exactly
the type of project the city should be embracing. She stated the city needs to be smart
and creative so as to support population growth in our city, and this little slip of land can
help the city achieve their goals of affordable housing.
Councilmember Mavity said there will be hardworking folks living there, and it is built on
a current bike superhighway and behind a grocery store, so hopefully folks will be able
to reduce their driving, as the area promotes biking and walking, plus there will be
affordable housing there as well. She stated the city is at a cusp of change here, and she
will support the project.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 3b) Page 11
Title: City council meeting minutes of September 17, 2018
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen stated if parking is made too easy, people will fill up the spaces.
He added hopefully electric cars will be smaller, and noted he puts much credence in
staff recommendations, as they understand the city’s goals and get the highest use of
land. He stated the project makes sense to him and he will also support it.
It was moved by Councilmember Harris, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to adopt
Resolution No. 18-143, approving a conditional use permit and variances for
construction of an apartment building at 3601 Phillips Parkway, with conditions.
The motion passed 6-0.
9. Communications
Mr. Harmening stated Friday September 21, absentee voting begins at city hall from
8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Mr. Harmening also stated Saturday, September 22, is the city’s annual fall clean-up day,
at the Municipal Service Center on Oxford Street, adding folks should visit the city
website for more details.
Councilmember Rog noted a fundraiser for the Lenox Foundation at Parkway Pizza, on
Minnetonka and Dakota Avenues, on Tuesday, September 25, from 11 a.m. – 10 p.m.
and 10 % of all sales will go to the foundation and seniors in the community.
Councilmember Harris stated the St. Louis Park Art Fair will be held Saturday,
September 22, from 11 a.m. – 6 p.m. at the ROC, and in conjunction with SLP Friends of
the Arts. She also noted a bikeway/sidewalk open house on Tuesday, September 25, at
City Hall from 6-7:30 p.m. and an additional open house for the Dakota Avenue bikeway,
and the pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks, at Peter Hobart School on September
26, from 6-7:30 p.m.
Mayor Pro Tem Brausen noted ROCtober Fest on Sunday, October 28. He stated he
attended the St. Louis Park employee recognition event at the ROC recently and
thanked employees for being involved in racial equity efforts and for all their hard work.
He stated folks with 30 years or more of service were recognized.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.
______________________________________ ______________________________________
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Tim Brausen, Mayor Pro Tem
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4a
Executive summary
Title: Affordable housing trust fund ordinance and policy
Recommended action: Motion to approve second reading and adopt Ordinance amending the
St. Louis Park code of ordinances relating to the establishment of an affordable housing trust
fund and the housing trust fund policy to guide the use of the fund.
Policy consideration: Does the council wish to establish a local affordable housing trust fund?
Summary: At the August 13, 2018 study session, staff presented a draft affordable housing
trust fund policy that identified the fund objectives, funding resources and eligible uses of the
funds. The council supported establishing the trust fund and directed staff to draft an
ordinance creating an affordable housing trust fund to be administered by the city and return
to a future council meeting for the first reading of the ordinance. Adoption of the ordinance is
required by law to create the housing trust fund and the housing trust fund policy sets forth the
guidelines under which the fund will be operated.
At the October 1, 2018 council meeting, the council approved the first reading of the ordinance
relating to the creation of a local affordable housing trust fund and set the second reading for
October 15, 2018.
Financial or budget considerations: The primary source of funding for the affordable housing
trust fund will be an annual budgeted allocation of funds from the city’s HRA tax levy as
approved by the city council, although the city may finance the fund with any money available
to a local government unless prohibited by state law.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to providing a broad range of
housing and neighborhood oriented development.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Affordable housing trust fund policy
Ordinance
Prepared by: Michele Schnitker, Housing Supervisor & CD Deputy Director
Reviewed by: Karen Barton, Community Development Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 2
Title: Affordable housing trust fund ordinance and policy
Discussion
Background: Local affordable housing trust fund: The Minnesota legislature passed a bill in
2017 that allows local communities to establish housing trust funds. The housing trust fund
may be established by ordinance and administered by the city. Money in a housing trust fund
may only be used to:
• pay for administrative expenses not to exceed 10% of the balance of the fund;
• make grants, loans, and loan guarantees for the development, rehabilitation, or
financing of housing;
• match other funds from federal, state, or private resources for housing projects; and/or
• provide down-payment assistance, rental assistance, and homebuyer counseling
services.
The city may finance the fund with any money available to a local government, unless expressly
prohibited by state law. Sources include, but are not limited to:
• donations;
• bond proceeds;
• grants and loans from a state, federal, or private source;
• appropriations by a local government to the fund;
• investment earnings of the fund;
• TIF pooled funds; and
• housing and redevelopment authority levies.
The proposed primary source of funding for the city’s trust fund is an annual budgeted
allocation of HRA levy funds, which will be available beginning in 2020.
Attached is a proposed affordable housing trust fund policy for council review and approval
that identifies fund objectives, funding resources and eligible uses of the funds. The city’s chief
financial officer has reviewed the policy. Also attached is the ordinance that establishes the
trust fund.
At the October 1, 2018 council meeting, the council approved the first reading of the ordinance
related to the establishment study session and set the second the second reading for October
15, 2018.
Staff will be presenting additional affordable housing strategies for discussion including the 4(d)
tax classification, legacy transfer program, and establishment of an affordable housing fee or
tax at an upcoming council study session in November.
Next steps: Following approval of the second reading of the ordinance and approval of the
policy, the ordinance will take effect November 9, 2018.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 3
Title: Affordable housing trust fund ordinance and policy
City of St. Louis Park
Affordable Housing Trust Fund Policy
I. PURPOSE
The City of St. Louis Park has established an Affordable Housing Trust Fund to provide a source
of funds to facilitate the housing needs of low and moderate income individuals and families of
the City. The Affordable Housing Trust Fund shall be a permanent endowment and continually
renewable source of revenue to provide loans and grants to for-profit and non-profit housing
developers for the acquisition and capital and soft costs necessary for the creation of new
affordable rental and owner-occupied housing, for the rehabilitation and preservation of existing
multi-family residential rental housing including Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH)
and rental assistance and homeownership assistance to low and moderate income individuals
and families.
This policy is intended to set forth the general requirements and guidelines regarding the use of
the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. The city council may modify the terms at any time.
II. FUNDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND ACCOUNT
The primary source of funding for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund is an annual budgeted
allocation of funds from the city’s Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) Tax Levy as
approved by the city council. Other sources of funding for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund
may include, but are not limited to the following:
1. Private cash donations from individuals and corporations designated for the
Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
2. Payments in lieu of participation in current or future affordable housing programs, as
allowed.
3. Matching funds from a federal or state affordable housing trust fund; or a state
program designated to fund an affordable housing trust fund.
4. Principal and interest from Affordable Housing Trust Fund loan repayments and all
other income from Trust Fund activities.
5. The sale of real and personal property.
6. Federal and state grants.
7. Local government appropriations, development fees and other funds as designated
from time to time by the City Council.
8. Tax Increment Finance (TIF) pooled funds.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 4
Title: Affordable housing trust fund ordinance and policy
City staff is directed to take all actions necessary to capitalize and maintain the fund balance in
the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to the extent that funds are subject to restrictions as to their
use by virtue of the source of such funds. The Affordable Housing Trust Fund will contain sub-
accounts to ensure that such restrictions as to the reuse of the funds are met.
III. OBJECTIVES
The objective of the Affordable Housing Land Trust is to assist in funding programs and proposals
that create new affordable rental and homeownership housing opportunities and to rehabilitate
and preserve existing affordable housing units in St. Louis Park. Initiatives will strive to provide
balanced and sustainable affordable housing options responsive to the present and future
diversified needs in the community for very low, low and moderate income households including:
persons on fixed incomes, such as seniors and persons with disabilities; young families just
starting out; indigenous persons; persons of color; and veterans.
The Affordable Housing Trust fund will promote community revitalization and reinvestment by
creating and preserving viable, safe and well maintained affordable housing developments and
expanding options for affordable homeownership for very low, low and moderate income
households.
IV. USE OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND
As a matter of policy, the Affordable Housing Trust Fund will only be used to assist proposed
projects or programs to develop or preserve affordable housing opportunities for low and
moderate income individuals and families.
The following general guidelines will be followed in connection with the use of funds from the
Affordable Housing Trust Fund:
1. The types of uses of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund will include, but not be limited to
the following: (i) the making of loans at interest rates below or at market rates, including
no-interest, deferred, and forgivable loans, in order to strengthen the financial feasibility
of proposed projects; (ii) the guaranteeing of loans; (iii) the provision of gap financing for
affordable housing developments; (iv) the financing of acquisition, demolition, and
disposition; (v) the financing of the construction of public improvements and utilities to
aid proposed affordable residential developments; (vi) the financing of rehabilitation,
remodeling, or new construction of affordable housing; (vii) tenant and project based
rental assistance; (viii) administrative costs associated with affordable housing programs;
and (ix) any other uses as permitted by applicable law and approved by the council.
2. The Affordable Housing Trust Fund may be used to provide interim financing of public
cost for affordable housing projects in anticipation of a permanent financing source (i.e.
construction financing, bond sale, etc.).
3. To the extent possible the Affordable Housing Trust Fund will be secured by liens, letters
of credit, tax increment, or other forms of reasonable security.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 5
Title: Affordable housing trust fund ordinance and policy
4. Consideration regarding the establishment of applicable terms on loans from the
Affordable Housing Trust Fund, including interest rates and deferral provisions, will be
established by the city at the time of approval of a specific project or program.
V. PROCESS
In establishing projects and programs to be financed using the Affordable Housing Trust
Fund, the city shall to the extent possible:
1. Establish guidelines and criteria for each project or program to be assisted unless the
project or program already exists.
2. Establish a timeframe for completing the project or program and the repayment terms to
the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, if applicable.
3. Prepare a financing plan for the project or program for review and approval by the city
council and by other entities as may be required by state law.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 6
Title: Affordable housing trust fund ordinance and policy
Ordinance No. ___-18
An ordinance establishing an
affordable housing trust fund
The City of St. Louis Park does ordain:
Section 1. Definitions. The following definitions apply in this Ordinance.
Persons of very low income means families and individuals whose incomes do not exceed
50 percent of area median income, as median income was most recently determined by the
United States Department of Housing and Urban development for the Minneapolis-St. Paul-
Bloomington, Minnesota-Wisconsin Metropolitan Statistical Area, as adjusted for smaller and
larger families.
Persons of low income means families and individuals whose incomes do not exceed 80
percent of the area median income, as median income was most recently determined by the
United States Department of Housing and Urban development for the Minneapolis-St. Paul-
Bloomington, Minnesota-Wisconsin Metropolitan Statistical Area, as adjusted for smaller and
larger families.
Persons of moderate income means families and individuals whose incomes exceed 80
percent, but do not exceed 120 percent, of area median income, as median income was most
recently determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban development for the
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, Minnesota-Wisconsin Metropolitan Statistical Area, as
adjusted for smaller and larger families.
Section 2. Pursuant to the authority granted to the city under Minnesota Statutes Section
462C.16, an affordable housing trust fund is established to provide loans and grants to for-profit
and non-profit housing developers for the acquisition and capital and soft costs necessary for the
creation of new affordable renter and owner-occupied housing, for the rehabilitation and
preservation of existing multi-family residential rental housing including Naturally Occurring
Affordable Housing (NOAH) and rental assistance and homeownership assistance to persons of
very low, low and moderate income.
Section 3. The Affordable Housing Trust Fund shall be funded by an annual budgeted
allocation of funds from the city’s Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) levy as approved
by the city council. Other sources of funding may include, but are not limited to:
(a) Private cash donations from individuals and corporations designated for the
Affordable Housing Trust Fund.
(b) Payments in lieu of participation in current or future affordable housing programs.
(c) Matching funds from a federal or state affordable housing trust fund; or a state
program designated to fund an affordable housing trust fund.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 7
Title: Affordable housing trust fund ordinance and policy
(d) Principal and interest from Affordable Housing Trust Fund loan repayments and all
other income from Trust Fund activities.
(e) The sale of real and personal property.
(f) Local government appropriations, development fees and other funds as
designated from time to time by the city council.
(g) Tax Increment Finance (TIF) pooled funds.
Section 4. The city may use money from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to assist
proposed projects or programs to develop or preserve affordable housing for persons of very low,
low and moderate income to include:
(a) Making loans at interest rates below or at market rates in order to strengthen the
financial feasibility of proposed projects.
(a) Guaranteeing of loans.
(b) Providing gap financing for affordable housing developments.
(c) Financing the acquisition, demolition, and disposition of property for affordable
housing projects.
(d) Financing construction of public improvements and utilities to aid proposed
affordable residential developments.
(e) Financing the rehabilitation, remodeling, or new construction of affordable
housing.
(f) Tenant and project based rental assistance.
(g) Funding for acquisition and rehab in conjunction with related to housing trust fund
projects.
(h) Funding to facilitate affordable homeownership opportunities including down
payment assistance, second mortgages, closing costs, etc.
(i) Administrative costs associated with affordable housing programs.
(j) Interim financing of public costs for affordable housing projects in anticipation of a
permanent financing source (i.e. construction financing, bond sale, etc.)
(k) Other uses as permitted by law and approved by the city council.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4a) Page 8
Title: Affordable housing trust fund ordinance and policy
Section 5. The city shall determine the terms and conditions of repayment of loans and
grants from the Affordable Housing Trust Fund including the appropriate security and interest, if
any, should repayment be required. Interest on loans and grants shall be as established by the
city from time to time or at the time of approval of a specific project or program.
Section 6. The Affordable Housing Trust Fund shall report annually to the city on the use
of the Affordable Housing Trust Fund account including the number of loans and grants made,
the number and types of residential units assisted through the account, and the number of
households for whom rental assistance payments were provided. The city shall post the report
on its Web site.
Section 7. This Ordinance shall take effect after passage and publication.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney
First Reading October 1, 2018
Second Reading October 15, 2018
Date of Publication October 25, 2018
Date Ordinance takes effect November 9, 2018
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4b
Executive summary
Title: Adoption of 2019 utility rates
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution setting the 2019 Utility Rates.
Policy consideration: Are the modifications to the utility rates, including water tier structure,
adequate to meet the conservation goals of the city council and insure long term sustainability of
the City’s utility operations and capital plans?
Summary: At the September 24, 2018 study session Ehlers and staff presented the results and
recommendations of the recently completed utility rate review/analysis. Highlights of the study
included a lowered residential tier structure, the introduction of commercial and industrial water
tiers, and new options of 20 and 30 gallon every other week garbage service. Rates were adjusted
to support utility operations and capital plans over the next 10 years and maintain long-term
sustainability in each of the four utility funds. At the October 8, 2018 study session, staff
presented the proposed utility rates to Council in a written report as part of the fee schedule.
Solid waste rates continue to support pay as you throw, and encourages recycling and organics
use. Water and sewer rates are structured to encourage water conservation.
For 2019, the approximate cumulative effect on a typical residential property for all the utility
rate adjustments would be an increase of $19.13/quarter, or approximately $6.38 per month.
The calculation is based on a family of four using 30 units of water per quarter (22,500 gallons),
and 60 gallon solid waste service. Another example, if that same property used 30 units of water
per quarter (22,500 gallons), and switched from a 60 gallon to 30 gallon solid waste service, the
overall bill would decrease by $5.55/quarter or $1.85/month.
The recommended rates will be in place for consumption or services provided beginning on
January 1, 2019. The attached resolution provides specific information on the recommended
rate adjustments for each fund.
Financial or budget considerations: Water, sewer, storm water and solid waste are enterprise
funds and are anticipated to have rates that cover the fund for all the related costs from debt
service, operations and capital improvement plans. The utility rates will support necessary city
services and capital improvements during 2019.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in environmental
stewardship.
Supporting documents: 2019 proposed utility rates - Impact on a residential property
Resolution
Utility rates summary
Prepared by: Mark Ebensteiner, Finance Manager
Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 2
Title: Adoption of 2019 utility rates
2019 proposed utility rates
Impact on a residential property
Household Size 4
Water - Units per quarter 30
Sewer - Winter average 20
Solid Waste Service 60-gallon
Meter size 3/4 inch
Actual Proposed Dollar Percent
Service Type 2018 2019 Change Change
Water
Per unit rate - Tier 1 1.89$ 1.89$ -$ 0.00%
Per unit rate - Tier 2 2.34$ 2.30$ (0.04)$ -1.71%
Service charge 27.23$ 31.31$ 4.08$ 14.98%
State testing fee 1.59$ 1.59$ -$ 0.00%
Consumption 56.70$ 63.53$ 6.83$ 12.05%
Sewer
Service charge 17.61$ 18.49$ 0.88$ 5.00%
Per unit 3.44$ 3.61$ 0.17$ 4.94%
Consumption 68.80$ 72.20$ 3.40$ 4.94%
Storm Drainage
Service charge 23.14$ 23.83$ 0.69$ 2.98%
Bassett Creek Fee*1.93$ 1.93$ -$ 0.00%
Solid Waste (includes tax)72.45$ 75.70$ 3.25$ 4.49%
Total Bill without Bassett*267.52$ 286.65$ 19.13$ 7.15%
Increase per quarter (dollars)19.13$
Increase per month (dollars)6.38$
* Since not all property owners would be charged this fee, it is not included in the dollar or
percentage change in total bill.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 3
Title: Adoption of 2019 utility rates
Resolution No. 18-____
Resolution setting utility rates
Whereas, The City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has received a report
from the Chief Financial Officer related to proposed utility rates; and
Whereas, it is necessary for the city to maintain charges in an amount necessary to cover
the cost of providing services to users; and
Whereas, maintaining rates through regular adjustment is a recommended practice
rather than large intermittent increases;
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
that:
1.The water rates as recommended are hereby adopted.
Residential Units of Usage*Adopted Rate
Tier 1 0 - 13.333 units (0 - 10,000 gallons)1.89$
Tier 2 13.333 - 20 units (10,000 - 15,000 gallons)2.30$
Tier 3 > 20 units (>15,000 gallons)2.75$
Multi Family All units 2.30$
Commercial
Tier 1 0 - 100 units (0 - 75,000 galllons)2.10$
Tier 2 100 - 300 units (75,000 - 225,000 galllons)2.31$
Tier 3 > 300 units (>225,000 galllons)2.54$
Industrial
Tier 1 0 - 1,000 units (0 - 750,000 galllons)2.10$
Tier 2 1,000 - 3,000 units (750,000 - 2,225,000 galllons)2.31$
Tier 3 > 3,000 units (>2,225,000 galllons)2.54$
Irrigation All units 3.75$
* 1 unit equals 100 cubic fee or 750 gallons.
2.The water meter charges recommended are hereby adopted.
Meter Size
Residential/Multi-Family
Quarterly Fee Commercial Monthly Fee
5/8" meter 31.31$ 10.53$
3/4"31.31$ 10.53$
1"43.82$ 14.73$
1.5"56.34$ 18.94$
2"90.77$ 30.52$
3"344.34$ 115.78$
4"438.25$ 147.35$
6"657.36$ 221.03$
2" compound 90.76$ n/a
3" compound 344.34$ n/a
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4b) Page 4
Title: Adoption of 2019 utility rates
3.The Minnesota Department of Health state testing for water quality will continue to be
imposed at a rate of $1.59 per quarter for residential and multi-family and $0.53 per
month for commercial accounts.
4.The sanitary sewer usage rate recommended is hereby adopted at $3.61 per unit.
5.The sanitary sewer base charge recommended is hereby adopted at $18.49 per quarter
for residential and multi-family accounts and $6.16 per month for commercial accounts.
6.The storm sewer rate recommended is hereby adopted at $23.83 per quarter per
residential equivalent unit or $39.72 per month per residential equivalent unit for
commercial accounts.
7.The Bassett Creek Watershed Management Charge pass through for properties located
within the Bassett Creek Watershed Management District will be $1.93 per quarter per
residential equivalent unit or $0.64 per month per residential equivalent unit.
8.The solid waste service charges per quarter recommended are hereby adopted.
Service Level Residential*
In Gallons Quarterly Monthly Quarterly Monthly Quarterly Monthly Quarterly
20 EOW 25.72$ n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
30 EOW 35.71$ n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
20 36.75$ n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
30 51.03$ $ 16.44 $ 49.32 n/a n/a n/a n/a
60 75.70$ 23.00$ 69.00$ n/a n/a n/a n/a
90 116.04$ 31.40$ 94.21$ 12.85$ 38.55$ 16.52$ 49.56$
120 184.34$ n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
150 230.42$ n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
180 276.51$ 64.87$ 194.61$ 23.02$ 69.09$ 31.79$ 95.37$
270 414.76$ n/a n/a 31.79$ 95.37$ n/a n/a
360 553.03$ n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Garbage Recycling Organics
Commercial
* Rate includes Garbage, Recycling and Organics
Note: Taxes and fees are included in rates where applicable.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Residential 2018 2019
Tier 1 ‐ 0 ‐ 13.333 units (0 ‐ 10,000 gallons)1.89$ 1.89$
Tier 2 ‐ 13.333 ‐ 20 units (10,000 ‐ 15,000 gallons)2.34$ 2.30$
Tier 3 ‐ > 20 units (>15,000 gallons)3.51$ 2.75$
Multi Family ‐ All units n/a 2.30$
Commercial
Tier 1 ‐ 0 ‐ 100 units (0 ‐ 75,000 galllons)1.89$ 2.10$
Tier 2 ‐ 100 ‐ 300 units (75,000 ‐ 225,000 galllons)n/a 2.31$
Tier 3 ‐ > 300 units (>225,000 galllons)n/a 2.54$
Industrial
Tier 1 ‐ 0 ‐ 1,000 units (0 ‐ 750,000 galllons)1.89$ 2.10$
Tier 2 ‐ 1,000 ‐ 3,000 units (750,000 ‐ 2,225,000 galllons)n/a 2.31$
Tier 3 ‐ > 3,000 units (>2,225,000 galllons)n/a 2.54$
Irrigation ‐ All units 3.51$ 3.75$
Meter
Size 2018 2019 2018 2019
5/8"9.08$ 10.53$ 27.23$ 31.31$
3/4"9.08$ 10.53$ 27.23$ 31.31$
1.0"12.70$ 14.73$ 38.10$ 43.82$
1.5"16.33$ 18.94$ 48.99$ 56.34$
2.0"26.31$ 30.52$ 78.93$ 90.77$
3.0"99.81$ 115.78$ 299.43$ 344.34$
4.0"127.03$ 147.35$ 381.09$ 438.25$
6.0"190.54$ 221.03$ 571.62$ 657.36$
2.0" Compound n/a n/a 78.93$ 90.76$
3.0" Compound n/a n/a 299.43$ 344.34$
State Testing Fee 2018 2019
Commercial 0.53$ 0.53$ Monthly
Residential 1.59$ 1.59$ Quarterly
Residential/Multi‐Family 2018 2019
Base Charge 17.61$ 18.49$ Quarterly
Usage 3.44$ 3.61$ Per unit ‐ Quarterly
Commercial
Base Charge 16.78$ 18.49$ Quarterly
Usage 3.44$ 3.61$ Per unit ‐ Quarterly
Base Charge 5.60$ 6.16$ Monthly
Usage 3.44$ 3.61$ Per unit ‐ Monthly
Residential 2018 2019
Quarterly 23.14$ 23.83$ per residential equivalent unit
Commercial
Monthly 38.56$ 39.72$ per residential equivalent unit
Quarterly 115.68$ 119.15$ per residential equivalent unit
Bassett Creek Watershed Management District (pass‐through)
Monthly 0.64$ 0.64$
Quarterly 1.93$ 1.93$
2018 2019 2018 2019
20‐gallon EOW n/a 25.72$ Quarterly 30 gallon service
30‐gallon EOW n/a 35.71$ Quarterly Garbage 17.08$ $ 16.44 Monthly
20‐gallon 29.40$ 36.75$ Quarterly Garbage 51.24$ $ 49.32 Quarterly
30‐gallon 48.83$ 51.03$ Quarterly 60 gallon service
60‐gallon 72.45$ 75.70$ Quarterly Garbage 22.01$ 23.00$ Monthly
90‐gallon 111.04$ 116.04$ Quarterly Garbage 66.03$ 69.00$ Quarterly
120‐gallon 176.40$ 184.34$ Quarterly 90 gallon service
150‐gallon 220.50$ 230.42$ Quarterly Garbage 30.05$ 31.40$ Monthly
180‐gallon 264.60$ 276.51$ Quarterly Garbage 90.15$ 94.21$ Quarterly
270‐gallon 396.90$ 414.76$ Quarterly Recycling 12.30$ 12.85$ Monthly
360‐gallon 529.20$ 553.03$ Quarterly Recycling 36.90$ 38.55$ Quarterly
Organics 15.81$ 16.52$ Monthly
Organics 47.43$ 49.56$ Quarterly
180 gallon service
Garbage 62.08$ 64.87$ Monthly
Garbage 186.24$ 194.61$ Quarterly
Recycling 22.03$ 23.02$ Monthly
Recycling 66.09$ 69.09$ Quarterly
Organics 30.42$ 31.79$ Monthly
Organics 91.26$ 95.37$ Quarterly
270 gallon service
Recycling 30.42$ 31.79$ Monthly
Recycling 91.26$ 95.37$ Quarterly
Utility Rates Summary
Solid Waste Rates (including tax when applicable)
Residential Commercial
Water Rates
Water Meter Charges
Commercial Residential
Sewer Rates
Storm Drainage Rates
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4b)
Title: Adoption of 2019 utility rates Page 5
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4c
Executive summary
Title: Special assessment – water service line repair at 8307 Virginia Circle North
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the
repair of the water service line at 8307 Virginia Circle North, P.I.D. 07-117-21-14-0037.
Policy consideration: The proposed action is consistent with policy previously established by
the City Council.
Summary: Bret and Cheryl Hanson, owners of the single family residence at 8307 Virginia Circle
North, have requested the city authorize the repair of the water service line for their home and
assess the cost against the property in accordance with the city’s special assessment policy.
This is a repair that was made between the home and the curb box and is not impacted by the city’s
new waterline ownership policy. Homeowners are still responsible for water lines repairs that
occur between their home and the curb box located in the right of way.
The city requires the repair of service lines to promote the general public health, safety and welfare
within the community. The special assessment policy for the repair or replacement of water or
sewer service lines for existing homes was adopted by the city council in 1996. This program was put
into place because sometimes property owners face financial hardships when emergency repairs
like this are unexpectedly required. Plans and permits for this service line repair work were
completed, submitted, and approved by city staff. The property owner hired a contractor and
repaired the water service line in compliance with current codes and regulations. Based on the
completed work, this repair qualifies for the city’s special assessment program. The property owner
has petitioned the city to authorize the water service line repair and special assess the cost of the
repair. The total eligible cost of the repair has been determined to be $2,995.
Financial or budget considerations: The city has funds in place to finance the cost of this
special assessment.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Jay Hall, Utility Superintendent
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Beth Simonsen, Accountant
Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4c)
Title: Special assessment – water service line repair at 8307 Virginia Circle North
Resolution no. 18 - ____
Resolution authorizing the special assessment for the repair of
the water service line at 8307 Virginia Circle North, St. Louis Park, MN
P.I.D. 07-117-21-14-0037
Whereas, the property owners at 8307 Virginia Circle North, have petitioned the City of
St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the repair of the water service line for the
single family residence located at 8307 Virginia Circle North; and
Whereas, the property owners have agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, right
of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
Whereas, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
utility superintendent related to the repair of the water service line.
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park,
Minnesota, that:
1. The petition from the property owners requesting the approval and special assessment for
the water service line repair is hereby accepted.
2. The water service line repair that was done in conformance with the plans and
specifications approved by the Operations and Recreation Department and Department of
Inspections is hereby accepted.
3. The total cost for the repair of the water service line is accepted at $2,995.
4. The property owners have agreed to waive the right to a public hearing, notice and appeal
from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by
other statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law.
5. The property owners have agreed to pay the city for the total cost of the above improvements
through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at the interest rate of 4.00%.
6. The property owners have executed an agreement with the city and all other documents
necessary to implement the repair of the water service line and the special assessment of
all costs associated therewith.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4d
Executive summary
Title: Special assessment for fire suppression sprinkler system
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution establishing a special assessment for the
installation of a fire suppression sprinkler system at 6516 Walker St., St. Louis Park, MN.
Policy consideration: This action is consistent with a policy the council established in 1995.
Summary: Spence Design LLC, owner of the commercial building at 6516 Walker St., has
requested the city to authorize the installation of an automatic fire suppression sprinkler
system for this commercial building and to assess the cost against the property in accordance
with the city’s special assessment policy.
The special assessment policy for installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in existing
buildings was adopted by the city council in 1995. The city promotes the installation of fire
suppression sprinkler systems and facilitates their installation to promote the general public
health, safety and welfare within the community.
Based on the proposed work, the system qualifies for the city’s special assessment program.
The property owner has petitioned the city to authorize the installation of the fire sprinkler
system and special assess the cost of the installation. The total eligible cost of the installation
has been determined to be $133,515. An administrative fee of $668 shall be received prior to
the release of the special assessment funds.
Financial or budget considerations: This action is consistent with a policy the council
established in 1995.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
Prepared by: Cary Smith, Fire Marshal
Reviewed by: Steve Koering, Fire Chief
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4d) Page 2
Title: Special assessment for fire suppression sprinkler system
Resolution No. 18-____
Resolution authorizing installation and special assessment of a
fire sprinkler system at 6516 Walker St., St. Louis Park, MN 55426
Whereas, Spence Design LLC, the property owner at 6516 Walker St. has petitioned the
City of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the installation of a fire sprinkler
system in the building on the benefited property; and
Whereas, the property owner has agreed to waive their right to a public hearing, right
of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of St. Louis Park, that:
1.The petition from the property owner requesting the approval and special assessment
for the fire sprinkler system is hereby accepted.
2.The installation of the fire sprinkler system in conformance with the plans and
specifications approved by the fire department and inspections department is hereby
authorized.
3.The total estimated cost for the design and complete installation of the fire sprinkler
system is accepted at $133,515.
4.An administrative fee of $668 for processing shall be received prior to the release of
special assessment funds.
5.The total special assessment against the property will be $133,515.
6.The property owners have agreed to waive their rights to a public hearing, notice and
appeal from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter
429, or by other statutes, or by ordinance, city charter, the constitution, or common law.
7.The property owners agree to pay the city for the cost of the above improvements
through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at four percent (4.0%) interest.
8.The property owners agree to execute an agreement with the city and any other
document’s necessary to implement the installation of the fire sprinkler system and the
special assessment of all costs associated therewith.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4e
Executive summary
Title: Lease agreement with Methodist Hospital for parking
Recommended action: Motion to approve an agreement between the City of St. Louis Park
and Methodist Hospital, to lease the city’s sanitary lift station property at 3901 Edgewood
Avenue for hospital parking.
Policy consideration: Does the city council want to continue to lease the property to
Methodist Hospital?
Summary:
Original Agreement: In 1998, the city negotiated a ground lease agreement with
Methodist Hospital to allow hospital parking on an excess portion of the city’s property
where the city’s sanitary lift station is located. The agreement was for a five-year term with
the option of three renewable five-year terms. The agreement expires October 31, 2018.
Amended and Restated Agreement: Staff has worked with Methodist Hospital and the city
attorney to revise the existing agreement, both in terms of updating the contract language
and the monetary compensation. The new agreement will have an initial five-year term with
two optional five-year renewal opportunities.
Financial or budget considerations: The annual lease rate for the final year of the current
lease (2017/2018) is $13,680. The lease amount for the first year of the new contract
(2018/2019) will be $14,040. The financial terms of this agreement require annual lease
payments with a 3% annual rate increase.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Services Manager
Reviewed by: Mark Hanson, Public Works Superintendent
Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Operations and Recreation
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4f
Executive summary
Title: Bid Tabulation: Rehabilitation of Water Treatment Plant #16, Flag Ave. Reservoir- Project
No. 4018-5000
Recommended action: Motion to designate Champion Coatings the lowest responsible bidder
and authorize execution of a contract with the contractor in the amount of $384,000.00 for
rehabilitation of Water Treatment Plant #16, Flag Avenue Reservoir- Project No. 4018-5000.
Policy consideration: Does the City Council wish to continue to move forward with making
necessary improvements to the city’s water system?
Summary: A total of three bids were received for this project. Please see bid results below.
CONTRACTOR TOTAL BID
Elevation Coating, LLC $219,500.00
Champion Coatings $384,000.00
TMI Coatings, Inc. $584,000.00
This project involves a full reconditioning of the interior wet area of the tank to replace the
failing coating and bring it into compliance with current requirements.
A review of the bids indicates Elevation Coating, LLC submitted the lowest base bid. In
reviewing the qualifications of the apparent low bidder, Elevation Coatings, LLC, staff
determined that they do not have any work experience with the specified coating system nor
the project type. Staff also believes that their $219,500.00 bid would not cover the cost of the
required materials and the assumed labor for this project.
In reviewing the qualifications of the remaining bidders, we find the second lowest bidder,
Champion Coatings, meets the requirements of the specifications and are qualified to do the
work in the proposal. Therefore, staff recommends that a contract be awarded to Champion
Coatings in the amount of $384,000.00.
Financial or budget considerations: This project was planned for and included in the City’s
Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for 2018. This project will be paid for using water utility
funds.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Prepared by: Aaron Wiesen, Project Engineer
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4f) Page 2
Title: Bid Tabulation: Rehabilitation of Water Treatment Plant #16, Flag Ave. Reservoir- Project No. 4018-5000
Discussion
Background: Bids were received on October 9, 2018 for the Water Treatment Plant #16, Flag
Avenue Reservoir Project. This project is located at 2026 Flag Avenue.
The existing coating on the tank was installed in 1991 and is no longer effective. A full
reconditioning of the interior wet area of the tank is required to replace the failing coating and
bring it into compliance with current requirements.
Water tank coatings are expected to last 20 to 25 years with minor maintenance. The existing
coating on the tank has not received major work for 27 years. An inspection completed a couple
years ago revealed that the coating is failing and needs replacement. Replacing the coating at
this time will extend the life of the reservoir.
An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on September 20 and
September 27, 2018. In addition, plans and specifications are noticed on the City Website and
are made available electronically via the internet by our vendor QuestCDN.com. Email
notification was provided to five minority associations.
Present considerations: Staff has analyzed the bids and determined that Elevation Coating, LLC
is a qualified contractor that can complete this work per the contract documents. Based on the
low bid received, cost details are as follows; this project is paid for using water utility funds:
CIP Low Bid
Construction Cost $325,000.00 $384,000.00
Engineering & Administration $32,500.00 $57,600.00
Total $357,500.00 $441,6000.00
Due to the nature of our construction projects, unexpected costs do come up. To address this,
past practice has been to show a contingency for all aspects of the project. What follows is a
table that shows this 10% contingency and how this would affect the project costs. Engineering
has reviewed these contingency costs with the Chief Financial Officer. If overruns occur there is
adequate funds to cover these costs.
Low Bid Contingency
(10%)
Engineering
(15%)
Total
Watermain $384,000.00 $38,400.00 $57,600.00 $480,000.00
Next steps: City construction is anticipated to begin in November 2018 and should be
completed by December of 2018.
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4g
Executive summary
Title: Liquor license fees
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution setting liquor license fees for the license
term March 1, 2019 – March 1, 2020 pursuant to Minnesota statute 340A.408 and section 3-59
of the St. Louis Park City Code.
Policy consideration: Are the proposed liquor license fees in line with the limits allowed under
M.S.A. Chapter 340A? Will the proposed fees allow the city to cover the costs related to the
administration and enforcement of liquor licensing activities?
Summary: City code provisions permit the council to set liquor license fees annually, by
resolution, in amounts no greater than those set forth in M.S. Ch. 340A. The city annually
reviews and completes a fee study on the costs of providing license administration and
enforcement. Staff has compared the proposed liquor license fees to those of other cities in the
metro area and also solicited input from the police department to see if any increases are
warranted. Based on this analysis and review, staff is not proposing any fee increases for the
upcoming license period.
State law sets the limits on the annual fees that may be charged for certain types of liquor
licenses. Where there is no state restriction, the city can set the fee at an amount to reflect the
cost of issuing the license and other costs directly related to enforcement. License fees may not
be used as a means of raising revenues.
Financial or budget considerations: The proposed fees were used to calculate projected
revenues in the 2019 budget.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Resolution
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4g) Page 2
Title: Liquor license fees
Discussion
Current and proposed liquor license fees are detailed below. On-sale intoxicating license fees
are higher due to the additional staff time typically required for enforcement activities
(restaurants are open Sundays and some have 2 a.m. closing) and general administration and
oversight of the license. Off-sale licenses generally require less staff time due to the fact that
alcohol is not consumed on the premises and they are open fewer hours. Additionally, off-sale
license fees and all background investigation fees are subject to the limits set forth in state
statute.
Current and proposed liquor license and background investigation fees:
Liquor license type: 2018 fee 2019 fee
Effective 3/1/2019
Fee amount
set by:
Brewpub Off Sale Malt Liquor $200 $200 City
Brewers Off Sale Malt Liquor $200 $200 City
Microdistillery Cocktail Room $600 $600 City
Microdistillery Off-Sale $200 $200 City
Off Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor $200 $200 City
Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor $380 $380 STATE
Off Sale Intoxicating Liquor fee per
M.S. 340A.408 Subd.3(c )
$280 $280 STATE
On Sale 3.2 Malt Liquor $750 $750 City
On-Sale Culinary Class $100 $100 City
On Sale Intoxicating Liquor $8,750 $8,750 City
On Sale Brewer’s Taproom $600 $600 City
On Sale Sunday Liquor $200 $200 STATE
On Sale Wine $2,000 $2,000 STATE
Club (per # members): 1 - 200 $300 $300 STATE
201 - 500 $500 $500 STATE
501 - 1000 $650 $650 STATE
1001 - 2000 $800 $800 STATE
2001 - 4000 $1,000 $1,000 STATE
4001 - 6000 $2,000 $2,000 STATE
6000+ $3,000 $3,000 STATE
Temporary On Sale Liquor $100/day $100/day City
Background investigation 2018 fee 2019 fee Fee set
by:
New License Applicant
(non-refundable)
$500 in-state applicant;
actual costs for out-of-
state applicant may be
billed up to a maximum
of $10,000.
$500 in-state applicant;
actual costs for out-of-
state applicant may be
billed up to a maximum
of $10,000.
STATE
New Store Manager $500 $500 STATE
On Sale license renewal
per 340A.412 Subd. 2
$500 $500 STATE
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4g) Page 3
Title: Liquor license fees
St. Louis Park liquor licenses by type:
License type License fee Fee set by: Total Number in
St. Louis Park
Total
On-sale intoxicating $8,750 City 25 $218,750
On-sale Sunday $200 STATE 29 $5,800
On-sale wine $2,000 STATE 14 $28,000
On-sale club $700 STATE 2 $1,400
On-sale 3.2 $750 City 15 $11,250
On-sale taproom $600 City 1 $600
On-sale cocktail room $600 City 1 $600
Off-sale intoxicating $380 STATE 13 $4,940
Off-sale 3.2 $200 City 3 $600
Off-sale brewer $200 City 1 $200
Off-sale microdistillery $200 City 1 $200
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4g) Page 4
Title: Liquor license fees
Resolution no. 18-____
Resolution adopting liquor license fees for the license term
March 1, 2019 – March 1, 2020
Be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows:
Whereas, the St. Louis Park City Code Section 3-59 authorizes the city council to establish
annual fees for liquor licenses by resolution in amounts no greater that those set forth in
M.S.A. Chapter 340A; and
Whereas, it is necessary for the city to maintain fees in an amount necessary to cover
the cost of administration and enforcement of regulating liquor in the city; and
Whereas, fees called for within the Section 3-59 of the city code and Minnesota
Statute Chapter 340A are hereby set by this resolution for the license term effective March
1, 2019 through March 1, 2020; and
Now therefore be it resolved by the city council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
fees for liquor licenses are hereby adopted as follows:
Liquor License Type: Fee
Brewpub off-sale malt liquor $200
Brewers off-sale malt liquor $200
Microdistillery off-sale $200
Off-sale 3.2 malt liquor $200
Off-sale intoxicating liquor $380
Off-sale intoxicating liquor fee per
M.S. 340A.408 Subd.3(c )
$280
On-sale brewer’s taproom $600
On-sale cocktail room $600
On-sale 3.2 malt liquor $750
On-sale intoxicating liquor $8,750
On-sale Sunday liquor $200
On-sale wine $2,000
Club (per # members)
1 - 200 $300
201 - 500 $500
501 - 1000 $650
1001 - 2000 $800
2001 - 4000 $1,000
4001 - 6000 $2,000
6000+ $3,000
Temporary on-sale liquor $100/day
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4g) Page 5
Title: Liquor license fees
Investigation type: Fee
New license applicant
(non-refundable)
$500 in-state applicant;
actual costs for out-of-
state applicant may be
billed up to a maximum
of $10,000.
New store manager $500
On-sale license renewal per
340A.412 Subd. 2
$500
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the city council October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Consent agenda item: 4h
Executive summary
Title: Authorize release of draft surface water management plan for agency review
Recommended action: Motion to authorize staff to submit the draft Surface Water Management
Plan (SWMP) for agency review.
Policy consideration: Is the draft Surface Water Management Plan in a form sufficient for
agency review?
Summary: In accordance with Minnesota Statute 103B.235 and Minnesota Rules 8410, the City
of St. Louis Park is required to update their SWMP in conjunction with the comprehensive plan
update and to comply with changes made to local watershed management organizations plans.
As part of the approval process, state law requires communities to submit the draft plan to
regulatory agencies for a 45 day review period. Following agency review, staff will modify the
plan as necessary based on agency comments and full plan adoption will be brought to planning
commission and city council as part of the city’s overall comprehensive plan update.
The draft plan was presented to council at the September 24 study session and has been
available since then on the city’s website for public review and comment. In addition, staff will
be holding an open house to discuss the plan with the public.
The comment period for both the agency review and the public ends on November 30, 2018.
Financial or budget considerations: The plan includes an implementation program. The
initiatives and projects are comprised of two areas. The first is ongoing programs and activities;
the second is capital improvement projects. Funding for implementation is provided by storm
water utility funds.
Strategic priority consideration: St. Louis Park is committed to continue to lead in
environmental stewardship.
Supporting documents: Draft Surface Water Management Plan link
Prepared by: Phillip Elkin, Senior Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra M. Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Minutes: 4i
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission
January 29, 2018, 6 p.m.
Rec Center Programming Office
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rich Bluma, Tiffany Bushland, Bruce Cantor, George Foulkes, Elizabeth
Griffin, George Hagemann and Peter May
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
GUEST(S) PRESENT: Jamie Marshall, Friends of the Arts
STAFF PRESENT: Lisa Abernathy, Recreation Supervisor, Debra Heiser, Director of
Engineering, Jacqueline Larson, Communications and Marketing
Manager, Meg McMonigal, Principal Planner, Jennifer Monson, Planner,
Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center, Cindy Walsh,
Director of Operations and Recreation, Jason West, Recreation
Superintendent and Stacy Voelker, Recording Secretary
1. Call to Order
Commissioner Bushland called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m.
2. Presentations – Friends of the Arts (Jamie Marshall)
Jamie Marshall, Executive Director of Friends of the Arts, introduced himself to the
Commission. Friends of the Arts, Mr. Marshall explained, does a great deal of partnering with
the City of St. Louis Park, especially events held at the ROC and Wolfe Park.
Arts for Life Scholarships are offered through Friends of the Arts for funding youth who would
like to take lessons, dance classes, etc. and is based on financial needs. Scholarships are
reviewed and rewarded quarterly. This program, Mr. Marshall advised, is promoted at
community events, such as the Community Link event. Commissioner Foulkes asked how many
scholarships are generally awarded. Mr. Marshall advised they receive an average of 10-15
applicants each quarter with 6 – 8 being awarded, depending on the amount of the request.
Last year they had 56 applicants and were able to award approximately $5,000 annually.
Historically they fund approximately half of requests received.
Friends of the Arts offers a Gift of Music program where donated instruments are repaired and
offered to students in school. The program is a partnership with the school district, a strong
program and they continue to look for ways to promote and collect instruments.
Mr. Marshall advised 2017 was the second year of the Our Town Sings program held in Wolfe
Park. One of the events was moved to the ROC due to rain. The ROC was a great location with
over 250 people in attendance. The program produced performers from various areas of music
from the Twin Cities. It was a great way to partner with organizations and use the Wolfe Park
Amphitheater, Mr. Marshall indicated. In 2018 FOTA is moving forward with Unity Sings, which
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 2
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
builds on the most successful elements of Our Town Sings. They are working to bring various
singers together in the ROC on May 22 to sing together and experience a sense of community in
St. Louis Park through song. If it is successful, it may become an annual event. Commissioner
May inquired on the acoustics in the ROC. Mr. Marshall indicated the outdoor, covered space
was fine for their event.
Mr. Marshall advised Friends of the Arts is exploring an exciting opportunity for Friends of the
Arts titled Arts Lab. He has attended learning retreats from Arts Midwest, along with 12 other
communities, to learn about leveraging the creative community within an area. Arts Lab is also
a way to leverage the economy by bringing people into the community. This project will provide
free workshops for participants to explore their art form and see what it’s like to be an artist.
This may provide other opportunities for artists also. Arts Lab is still in the development phase.
Friends of the Arts continues to be a strong partner with the City of St. Louis Park. Friends of
the Arts assists in organizing the City-School calendar, Arts and Culture Grants, public art in City
Hall and others. They are also working on an exhibit with a partnership with Jean Stevens
Gallery so artists can feel like they have a home in St. Louis Park.
Friends of the Arts 2017 budget was $85,000 which included five concerts in the park. A good
portion of the budget goes toward artists in the form of grants.
Commissioners and Mr. Marshall traded thanks.
3. Approval of Minutes
a. November 29, 2017
Commissioner May requested clarification on page 5, last sentence in the first paragraph.
The sentence should read “…Aquila fields two and three but lights will be changed to LED.”
Commissioner Cantor made a motion to approve the minutes of November 29, 2017 as amended.
Commissioner May seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7 – 0.
4. Business
a. Comprehensive Plan Discussion (Jennifer Monson & Meg McMonigal)
Ms. Monson, Planner, indicated a lot of demographic and data collection has been
completed. The timeline of the Comprehensive Plan was shown in a presentation to the
Commission, along with what’s included in the Comprehensive Plan and ways to utilize
the information.
Four neighborhood planning workshops were held throughout the City in November
with a total of 130 participants. An internet based survey was also available which had
approximately 1,000 responders. Staff is currently working on tabulating the data from
that survey. Ms. Monson reviewed various areas that pertained to Parks and Recreation,
along with the input received from the workshops.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 3
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
Where are we going? Ms. Monson indicated the city has a denser, more diverse and
aging population. Staff took the existing goals and policies and rewrote them as to
where they think parks and natural resources are going for the 2040 comp plan. Items
included expanding parks (if available), opportunities for the 40th & France land, the
opportunity for a new community park should either golf courses be redeveloped,
connect existing parks through trails, continue shared use of parks, continue
partnerships, privately owned public parks, open space and regional trails. Other items
mentioned are to review park and trail dedication fees, partner with other public
improvement projects to provide recreational opportunities and partner with other
entities for natural resources and recreational opportunities.
Ms. Monson and the Commission reviewed preserving park assets which include
implementing the master plan at Westwood Hills Nature Center, staying on the park
improvement schedule, promoting volunteer opportunities and providing programs for
all ages and diversity through partnerships.
In the Natural Resource section, diversifying tree species is listed along with removing
invasive species, offering opportunities for residents, and creating a natural
environment that’s diverse and sustainable. The Healthy Living recommendations
includes community gardening and partnerships and to look at health holistically. All
items listed will be viewed through a Race and Equity lens.
City-wide demographics, population growth, age of individuals, household income, etc.
was provided to Commissioners by Ms. Monson. The information was taken from the
2010 census or the 2011-2015 American Community survey. Members viewed a map of
each neighborhood and amenities. Ms. Monson indicated all information is on the city’s
website.
Ms. Monson asked the Commissioners to email her with any additional information they
would like to add and provided her email address. She will have a draft available in the
next few weeks and will email to members for review prior to the April 4 joint meeting
with the Planning Commission. Ms. McMonigal advised the final plan will go before the
Planning Commission in June for their approval.
Members thanked Ms. Monson and Ms. McMonigal.
b. Louisiana Oaks Bridge Project and 2018 Projects (Debra Heiser)
Debra Heiser, Engineering Director, introduced herself to the Commission and indicated
Engineering has a lot of upcoming projects in the next two years. The Commissioners
viewed upcoming pavement management and regional projects. The city and MnDOT
work in partnership as roads in the city could be owned by MnDOT or the City.
Engineering has a commitment to sustainability: to move traffic efficiently, LED lighting,
etc. Roundabouts are great for traffic, pedestrians and bikes as people are going slower
and all are going in the same direction. The Louisiana Avenue roundabouts have
reduced accidents by 30% since installed.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 4
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
The city has 25 bridges (excluding park bridges) that are inspected annually.
Commissioners viewed the Louisiana Avenue Bridge Rehabilitation project as the bridge
over Minnehaha Creek needs to be rebuilt. Funds from the state will assist in replacing
the bridge in 2019. As part of this project, staff is researching reconstructing the corridor
and seeing how the bikeways and sidewalks fit into the overall plan. Commissioners
viewed a preliminary design which will be brought to the City Council in February. Part
of the project is to provide a safe connection for trail users to cross Louisiana Avenue
and to develop connections to transit. To accomplish this, the proposal includes a trail
built under Louisiana Avenue. This is an $11 million project. Phase I will be from the
hospital entrance to Excelsior Boulevard; Phase II and Phase III will be constructed
sometime in the next 10 years. Need to stage phases appropriately to ensure access to
hospital at all times. The bridge will be closed July through November 2019. The project
will start in July due to creek spawning times. The commission had a question regarding
the future of the trail along Minnehaha Creek. The city will discuss with Minnehaha
Creek Watershed District.
Ms. Heiser explained how it is determined what bikeway design is best suited for
specific roads. Lower volume roads installed share the road for bicycles (less than 1,000
vehicles on road); on-street bike lanes are for higher volume roads and protective
bicycle facility is for even higher volume roads. Louisiana Avenue has approximately
16,000 vehicles which protected bicycle facility is recommended. By putting in a
protected bicycle facility, there is a dedicated space for bicycles and dedicated space for
a pedestrians with green space separating the two. Staff is proposing green grass
medians which have a potential for landscaping and public art. Storm water treatment is
also being researched in that area as all water from the road enters Minnehaha Creek.
Commissioner Hagemann provided feedback on how bike lane will work in a round-about.
Ms. Heiser went on to explain the proposed modifications for the Wooddale bridge over
Highway 7. This project will widen the bridge deck to better accommodate bicycles and
pedestrians, and improve the sightlines at the ramp. Also, as a part of the Southwest
LRT Project. There will be a tunnel installed so the regional trail would go under
Wooddale Avenue and the trail would go over Belt Line Boulevard. Construction on
Blake Road begins this year and partnerships were discussed. Texas Avenue (south of
Highway 7) will also include bike lanes with a connection to Lake Street.
Commissioners viewed the 2018 pavement management project. When developing
plans for projects, Engineering looks at everything in the right-of-way, to determine
what needs to be replaced.
Ms. Walsh advised watermain projects are major and may take the entire season to
complete. Watermain breaks are prominent with old watermains. Staff reviews the age
of the infrastructure below the street when looking at pavement management projects.
Also, when asphalt is ground up from one area, it is used in another to save money and
for better sustainability.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 5
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
Ms. Heiser mentioned they also review active transportation connections; they
reviewed existing sidewalks and identified gaps. They review all things that may be
impacted in the right of way including trees, retaining walls, landscaping, etc. A public
hearing will be held to recommend sidewalks.
The City Council also asked Engineering to look at traffic, which is part of the
neighborhood livability component. A traffic study was completed using various traffic
management techniques to see how they worked. Traffic data was collected and
modeled what could address concerns. Traffic control recommendations will be brought
to Council. The Commissioners and Ms. Heiser discussed the difference between traffic
circles and roundabouts.
The City is committed to making quality infrastructure. Residents are not assessed for
any of these projects, Ms. Heiser advised, which changed approximately five to six years
ago with the initiation of Connect the Park.
Commissioners reviewed and provided feedback. Members and Ms. Heiser traded
thanks.
c. Communication Plan for Westwood Hills Nature Center Project (Jacqueline
Larson)
Jacqueline Larson, Communications and Marketing Manager, distributed the
communications plan summary for the Westwood Hills Nature Center Project. The
opportunity was outlined and the plan is to build awareness to gain support among
various community groups. Also, staff is providing an organized and public process
encouraging community engagement. Staff wants to ensure a thorough public process.
The plan was reviewed and Commissioners were asked to provide feedback. The plan
can change as the project continues.
Ms. Larson said videos are being created to show what users have experienced at
Westwood Hills Nature Center. There will be a two minute video and a 60 second video,
which are interview style. The shorter video will be used specifically for social media
while the longer video can be used in a variety of applications. The company hired to
create the videos did similar work for the St. Louis Park School District referendum that
passed successfully last fall.
Users of the Nature Center, volunteers, parents of kids and neighborhood members
were contacted, Ms. Larson advised. Commissioners suggested contacting college age
kids, which may have been impacted by the Nature Center, visitors with disabilities,
preschool kids, birding groups, culture diversity, etc.
Ms. Walsh asked Commissioners to share any additional thoughts with Mr. West, Mr.
Oestreich and herself. Members thanked Ms. Larson.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 6
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
Westwood Hills Nature Center Update:
Commissioner Hagemann has been gaining factual data to pass along to individuals that
are opposed to the project. He met with Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer, to obtain
answers regarding the funding of this project, as well as other Capital Improvement
Projects. Mr. Simon provided funding information, including bonding information, as it
relates to the Nature Center and other projects. The City can bond over $100 million
dollars and is estimated to be around 18% of its bonding ability. This is the highest it will
be in the current 10 year projections. In approximately two years, the outstanding debt
will start to go down, even if all projects are approved. In less than 10 years, the
outstanding debt will be less than it is now, even if all projects, including the Westwood
Hills Nature Center project are approved. Another issue that was brought up is this
project would inhibit the ability to deal with low income housing and arts. It was stated
the bond is for a specific project and can only be used for that; it cannot be used for
other items. Commissioner Hagemann feels the information getting disseminated is not
always completely accurate. Commissioner Hagemann created talking points for
members on the financial aspect of the project. The City Council has approved moving
forward with the project (which only requires a simple majority), Commissioner
Hagemann indicated, now a super majority (6 of 7) of votes are needed to move
forward with the bonding to support the project. The bonds would be for 2019, when
construction would begin.
Commissioners viewed the revised plan, which is not the final design, of the Nature
Center building. The footprint was reduced slightly to reduce the amount of the project,
Mr. West indicated. The City Council wants to ensure there is enough gathering space to
relax without being in a multi-use classroom. The gathering space was expanded and
one of the classrooms reduced in size to ensure an adequate gathering area. Maximizing
space is a priority. Staff has met with Split Rock Studio, the exhibit designers, and are
pleased with the progress. When available, Commissioners may view pictures and
diagrams of the exhibits at an upcoming meeting.
Commissioner Griffin encouraged that since the Commission is supporting this project,
they should talk to their Council members, friends, neighbors and attend the public
meetings. Commissioners discussed and suggested reaching out to schools and the
school board to gain support for the project since every child in the school district goes
to WHNC as a part of their science curriculum.
Commissioner Griffin inquired if the project has been presented to the School Board.
Ms. Walsh indicated staff would be happy to do that if the School Board was interested.
CEAC has asked for a presentation and Jason West and Mark Oestreich will be
presenting there on Monday, February 12. Commissioner Griffin suggested having a
table or display at the upcoming school conferences to explain the project. Members
reviewed various ways to provide factual information on the bonding and project.
It was moved by Commissioner Foulkes and seconded by Commissioner Cantor to
approve the Resolution of Support regarding the Westwood Hills Nature Center Project.
The entire Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission (PRAC) voted unanimously in
support of the Westwood Hills Nature Center project process and design schematic. The
motion passed 7 – 0. The resolution is as follows
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 7
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
Resolution of Support:
By unanimous vote the Park and Recreation Advisory Commission whole heartedly
supports recognition of the Westwood Hills Nature Center master plan, the needs
assessment process and to that end the needs driven schematic plan now in the process
of being finalized.
The outcome from the needs analysis process showed need and demand for:
• Additional, and more flexible, programming space
• Additional adequate space for exhibits and exhibit storage and planning
• Adult usage both during and without programming
• Active and passive programming for all ages
• Separation of program space from common space
• Better facilities for outside users and after-hour building users
• Community space for public or private meetings, events, activities, celebrations
• Programming space for up to 150 participants
• Reconfigurable rooms
• Zero energy (Council request)
The plan is in line with both needs, financial analysis by staff (including the City’s Chief
Financial Officer) and PRAC’s unanimous opinion that the cost is justified within the
context of other city buildings, similar nature center buildings and the future use(s)
expected across its lifespan. Further, the plan in no way restricts the ability of Council to
respond to other current or future issues.
The Commission strongly urges that all parties give their unbiased support and follow
through to the remaining planning, public process and decision making steps.
Mr. West indicated public meeting will begin February 21 or 22 and February 28 or
March 1. Official dates will be emailed to members; members were encouraged to
attend the public meetings.
d. Annual Meeting, Report and Goals with Council
Commission members reviewed the report and goals; all approved.
e. Naming Policy Request
Ms. Griffin provided the Commission with an overview of the meetings held with the
group that would like a field renamed. The request was to have a field at Carpenter or
Rotary Park and rename it Marty Hammer field. The subcommittee suggested renaming
a softball field at Dakota Park. Marty Hammer’s supporters were fine with that
suggestions. The requested group has not raised any funding but hope they can raise
$50,000 toward the renaming project. It was suggested the group attend the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Commission meeting in March to present their request and obtain a
vote from the Commission. The requested group’s goal is to have the renaming
complete and a ribbon cutting on Mr. Hammer’s birthday in July.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 8
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
f. Dakota Park Lights Update
Ms. Walsh indicated they would like to add field lights to the Dakota Park fields. With
lights, the adult softball league can play longer as well as youth football.
5. Staff Communication
a. Program Update
Lisa Abernathy, Recreation Supervisor introduced herself to the Commission. Her focus
is on youth programs, family programs and special events. Ms. Abernathy provided
specifics on activities she oversees as follows:
The 2017 Ugly Sweater Dash was held in December with 171 participants. They
received donations to raffle during the event.
The warming house season begin in mid-December and has only been closed one or
two days this winter. People enjoy the rinks regardless of the weather. Rentals are
lower this year but neighborhoods have held events. Warming houses are open until
February 19 this year.
A Saturday Sampler was held on the first Saturday in January for individuals to
sample some classes offered in spring. The free Sampler included Yoga, Fun
Functional Fitness and an Express Circuit Workout. This was the fourth year it was
held.
Ms. Abernathy is currently working on the arts and culture grant process. The grants
have been chosen for 2018; are reviewing the application and scoring process for
2019. Applications are available late May for the following year.
Safety Camp will be held every other year, Ms. Abernathy advised. Initially the
program was held annually then participation numbers lowered so decided to offer
the program every other year. Commissioners learned what Safety Camp offers and
were advised a grant from AAA has been received to assist with expenses in the
past.
The playground and preschool playground programs are very successful. Staff is
thankful to the St. Louis Park Community and Youth Development Fund, and others,
for donations received and make it possible.
Junior leaders are volunteers ages 13 – 15 to assist with the summer parks
playground program. In 2017, there were approximately 40 junior leaders. Many
junior leaders return annually become playground leaders when they turn 16.
Ms. Abernathy mentioned ongoing programs that she oversees which include art
programs, youth dance programs, younger kids dance programs, adult fitness
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 9
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
programs and the Little Tot Playtime. Little Tot Playtime has been very well attended
and intend to move program to enjoy the turf in the ROC in April.
The Lions Club Egg Hunt, sponsored by the Lions Club, will be held in the ROC on
March 31. The annual event was previously held in the Middle School.
The department will participate in the 6th annual Community Link event held the
third Wednesday in August. This is the second year it will be held in the ROC with the
option to use the Aquatic Park after hours. Community Link is an outreach event for
residents to access resources (i.e. free haircuts, back pack giveaway, food shelf
services, etc.).
Ms. Abernathy advised this year she is learning the playground replacement
program and participating in the entire process. Mr. West indicated postcards were
sent to the neighborhoods three weeks prior to a meeting that is held for residents
to choose their playground. Demographic cards are also available at all public
meetings.
A new fall event, Teen ROC, had four high school bands play for half-an-hour each in
the ROC last year. Lights and sound people were provided; the bands only had to
plug in and play. Due to the success of the event, it may be offered in the summer
also. Ms. Abernathy has completed the summer concert line-up and is working on
hiring summer staff.
Following no questions from the Commissioners, Mr. West advised programmers and
supervisors will attend meetings to share what they do with members.
Commissioners and Ms. Abernathy shared thanks.
b. Minnehaha Creek Clean up: April 28, Knollwood Canoe Landing
Ms. Walsh advised the Minnehaha Creek Cleanup will be held on Saturday, April 28, 9 –
11 a.m., at the Knollwood Canoe Landing. Members were encouraged to attend.
c. Other
Ms. Walsh advised the Minnesota Wild will practice on Sunday, February 11, 11 a.m. –
Noon at the ROC.
St. Louis Park Boys will play against Chaska Boys in the ROC on January 30, advised Ms.
Walsh. This game was originally scheduled in the Rec Center.
Ms. Walsh indicated the 40th and France Avenue area is owned by the Cities of Edina
and St. Louis Park. On Monday evening, the City Council will be asked to adopt a
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of St. Louis Park and City of
Edina. The MOU clarifies the area each city owns and the rights and responsibilities of
each in regards to maintaining and improving the property.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4i) Page 10
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of January 29, 2018
The department is in the process of hiring a new staff person, Ms. Walsh indicated, to
oversee youth programs and help rent / market the ROC. Commission members
interested in sitting in on the hiring panel were advised to contact Ms. Walsh.
6. Member Communication
None.
7. Other / Future Agenda Items
a. Board and Commission Meeting with City Council: Monday, February 26
b. Next PRAC Meeting: Thursday, February 22, 7:30 p.m. at Westwood Hills Nature
Center (following the 6 p.m. public meeting)
c. Joint meeting with Planning Commission and Environmental and Sustainability
Commission: Wednesday, April 4
8. Adjournment
It was moved by Commissioner Hagemann and seconded by Commissioner Bluma to adjourn at 8:53 p.m. The
motion passed 7 – 0.
Respectfully submitted,
Stacy Voelker, Recording Secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Minutes: 4j
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission
February 22, 7:30 p.m.
Westwood Hills Nature Center
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rich Bluma, Tiffany Bushland, Bruce Cantor, George Foulkes, Elizabeth
Griffin, George Hagemann and Peter May.
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
GUEST(S) PRESENT: Barb Elmore, St. Louis Park Resident
STAFF PRESENT: Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center, Cindy Walsh,
Director of Operations and Recreation, Jason West, Recreation
Superintendent and Elizabeth Miller, Recording Secretary.
1. Call to order
Commissioner Bushland called the meeting to order at 7:49 p.m.
2. Presentation
None.
3. Approval of Minutes
a. January 29, 2018
Commissioner Hagemann made a motion to approve the minutes of January 29, 2018.
Commissioner Cantor seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7 - 0.
4. Business
a. Park Naming Request Discussion
Commissioners Griffin and Cantor met prior to this meeting with Barb Elmore and
friends who submitted an application requesting a park or field be renamed to honor
Marty Hammer. Ms. Elmore, on behalf of friends and family, spoke of community
member Marty Hammer’s involvement in sports and mentoring. Marty was a three
sport athlete at St. Louis Park High School. After graduation, he became active in the
City adult leagues playing in many of our city parks. Mr. Hammer passed in October of
2017 and his friends and family would like to honor him by naming a field after him.
Marty’s character and sportsmanship set him apart from others. After suffering a tragic
accident, he continued to participate in as many activities as possible. The honoring
group has received a lot of community support and have started a fundraising
campaign. The incoming support has been via donations. A golf tournament to raise
money is also planned this summer. Ms. Elmore reiterated that Marty’s character
exemplified the best of St. Louis Park. He was a friend to many and always had a kind
word to share.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4j) Page 2
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of February 22, 2018
Ms. Walsh added that during a subcommittee meeting, the group discussed ideas
regarding which park or field would be the best fit. Since Marty was an avid softball and
baseball player, the preference was to name a field at Dakota Park after him. The park
has a history of naming fields, with the baseball field currently being named after
Derrick Keller. Ms. Elmore and supporters indicated their first choice would be to name
one of the softball fields at Dakota Park “Marty Hammer Field”. Ms. Elmore and her
friends have heard the City is intending to add lights to Dakota Park. The group felt that
Marty would have been a big supporter of that since the fields at Dakota Park are used
by adults and youth.
Ms. Elmore said they would be willing to contribute all the money they raise toward the
field lights. Commissioner Griffin mentioned the subcommittee discussed a sign or
plaque with Marty’s name could be attached to the backstop or fence to recognize him.
Ms. Elmore wants to ensure Marty is remembered. Ms. Elmore will email Ms. Walsh the
website and Facebook pages to forward to the committee.
Ms. Walsh confirmed that the naming policy outlines a process by which the
Commission would discuss details and how it would look. Then they would provide a
recommendation to the City Council for formal approval. The City Council has the final
say in confirming this request. Commissioner Griffin added the next step in the process
would be to bring this request to the City Council. That would likely happen near the
end of the summer since our policy indicates that a year should pass after the death of a
person before a formal naming occurs.
Commissioners inquired on the cost of lighting; Ms. Walsh indicated lighting would be
approximately $250,000 (including electrical and earthwork). Ms. Elmore and the
Commission exchanged thanks.
After Ms. Elmore left the meeting. The Commission discussed this naming request.
Members decided to vote on the park naming request now.
Commissioner Foulkes moved to approve naming a softball field in Dakota Park
“Marty Hammer Field”; Commissioner Haegmann seconded the motion. The motion
passed 7-0.
Staff was then asked to bring this forward to the City Council in a time that coincides
with the policy which would be near the near the end of summer for the potential of an
October naming celebration.
b. Westwood Hills Nature Center Update
Ms. Walsh advised there will be another public meeting next week. The format will be
similar to the meeting just held. Ms. Walsh inquired if the Commissioners have any
comments or suggestions to change for the next meeting. Commissioner Griffin
suggested having a microphone available so all can hear. Commissioner Bushland
commented that overall there was a lot of support for the project. Staff and
Commissioners discussed sustainability and finances of the new building. The cost in
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4j) Page 3
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of February 22, 2018
taxes per year would be $34 - $37 additional per family during the duration of the
bonding as this is a new building. Staff members compared other local nature centers.
Staff noted that the costs could total $12 million dollars. Funding has been in the CIP for
years and has been planned for. The City staff created two video clips about the
Westwood Hills Nature Center project for use on social media. The Commissioners
viewed both videos.
5. Staff Communication
Ms. Walsh advised the Commission has a new youth member, Rachel Salzer.
Ms. Walsh discussed upcoming meetings. February 26 is the annual Board and Commission
meeting with the City Council. Commissioner May will provide a five minute presentation to the
Council highlighting what the Commission is and has been involved in. On February 28, another
public meeting will be held regarding Westwood Hills Nature Center. On April 4, the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Commission will meet with the Planning Commission and the Environment
and Sustainability Commission to discuss the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Staff has been asked
to provide a presentation on the Westwood Hills Nature Center project at that meeting.
Ms. Walsh was asked how long the Nature Center project has been in the CIP. She noted that it
has been for three years. Nature Center Manager Mark Oestreich mentioned that 38,000
participants of programs and outreach came through the Nature Center last year.
Ms. Walsh advised the Minnesota Wild practiced at the Recreation Outdoor Center.
Commissioner Cantor was present at the practice and told the board how nice the players were
and how fun it was. The facility worked out great. Recreation Superintendent Jason West noted
the Wild also enjoyed their time. Staff is hoping for a chance at Hockey Day Minnesota in the
future. Ms. Walsh noted that from a logistic standpoint it went quite well. Staff would like to
see more signature events at the Recreation Outdoor Center next winter and also when the turf
is in. Mr. West discussed the open parks and recreation position with members.
6. Member Communication
None.
7. Other/ Future Agenda Items
a. Board and Commission Meeting with City Council: February 26, 5:30 p.m.
b. Joint Meeting with Planning Commission and Environment & Sustainability
Commission: April 4
8. Adjournment
It was moved by Commissioner Hagemann and seconded by Commissioner Griffin to adjourn at
8:46 p.m. The motion passed 7 – 0.
Respectfully submitted,
Elizabeth Miller, Recording Secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Minutes: 4k
OFFICIAL MINUTES
Parks & Recreation Advisory Commission
May 16, 6 p.m.
Rec Center Programming Office
MEMBERS PRESENT: Rich Bluma, Tiffany Bushland, Bruce Cantor, George Foulkes, George
Hagemann, Peter May and Rachel Salzer.
MEMBERS ABSENT: Elizabeth Griffin
GUEST(S) PRESENT: Jamie Marshall, Friends of the Arts Executive Director
STAFF PRESENT: Rick Beane, Parks Superintendent, Jason Eisold, Rec Center Manager,
Mark Oestreich, Westwood Hills Nature Center Manager, Kori Shingles,
Recreation and Facilities Supervisor, Cindy Walsh, Director of Operations
and Recreation, Stacy Voelker, Recording Secretary
1. Call to order
Commissioner Bushland called the meeting to order at 6 p.m.
2. Presentation – St. Louis Park Hockey Association
Mr. Eisold advised the St. Louis Park Hockey Association had an unexpected schedule change
for the evening and will reschedule their presentation.
3. Approval of Minutes
a. February 22, 2018
Commissioner Hagemann made a motion to approve the minutes of February 22, 2018.
Commissioner May seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 7 - 0.
4. Business
a. Introduce Kori Shingles, Recreation and Facilities Supervisor
Introductions were provided by all. Ms. Shingles indicated she began working with the
city on April 9. Prior to St. Louis Park, she worked in Eden Prairie for three years as Adult
Athletics Supervisor and at the University of Minnesota for nine years prior to Eden
Prairie in facility and events. Ms. Shingles is originally from Kansas City, Kansas and
attended college at Central Michigan University majoring in sport administration. The
coolest part of the job so far are the people, Ms. Shingles indicated. She will handle
reservations for the Banquet Room, Gallery and ROC; oversee youth sports and provide
outreach in the community.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4k) Page 2
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of May 16, 2018
Ms. Walsh advised when the Westwood Hills Nature Center building is complete, Ms.
Shingles will assist with the reservations held at that location also. The Commission
members welcomed Ms. Shingles.
b. Friends of the Arts Update
Jamie Marshall, Executive Director, invited Commission members to Unity Sings, an
event being held in the ROC on Tuesday. The program is presented by Arts Midwest, an
organization that serves other small art organizations. Arts Midwest program ArtsLab
offers retreats to assist with a business model. The first retreat provided by Arts
Midwest focused on communities and people that have an interest in the sovereign arts
and culture sector in community; what can have the greatest impact on the community.
Commissioner Hagemann provided an example of the Grand Marais arts colony that
relies on tourists. St. Louis Park is on the other end of the spectrum – we rely on who is
here, who was here and where do people gather. They explore the city and review
challenges such as the economy, housing, etc. The ArtsLab assists in creating a cultural
plan, like a comprehensive plan for arts, and build the plan to see how artists and
creative thinkers can address some challenges facing the community to make a bigger
impact. Cook County has a program to provide temporary housing when they need to
host more activities to bring people in. The plan considers using a robust art sector to
address broader challenges or opportunities. It’s planning how we might develop a
cultural plan in St. Louis Park to do the same thing so Friends of the Arts isn’t just doing
projects for those interested in arts. Commissioner Hagemann feels arts can help bring
people together which is the focus of Racial Equity. The goal is to develop a draft of a
cultural plan to present to city leadership and stakeholders. Then determine a roadmap
for the next two years.
Mr. Marshall indicated part of the process is to work with daily facilitators, including
various stakeholders in community or those that have a common interest in arts. The
hope is to add an arts section to the city’s comprehensive plan, commented
Commissioner Hagemann.
Commissioner members inquired if it is funded by the city to which Commissioner
Hagemann indicated it is. The city provides funding to Friends of the Arts which is not
specified allotment so they are using for administrative expenses.
Mr. Marshall reminded members of the event being held on Tuesday in the ROC from 6
– 8 p.m. The event is a continuation for Our Town Sings which is held in the Wolfe Park
Amphitheater, and uses singing to bring the community together. It’s an opportunity for
people to come together and share a passion for singing together. Choirs from various
churches and David Hurst, Twin Cities Gospel Choir, will be at ROC in June to lead the
audience in song. It’s a great way for people to share a common connection with one
another.
In 2018, the Arts and Culture Grant program provided a grant to the Twin Cities Gospel
Choir (David Hurst) to provide a community music conference and concerts at the ROC.
Another grant was provided to Alysha Boie to implement an arts and craft fair in the
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4k) Page 3
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of May 16, 2018
ROC. The Park Theater Company used the grant awarded to them by providing a
presentation with the St. Louis Park Community Band and Meadowbrook Gospel Choir
in the ROC. The Children’s First event was also very successful. The ROC is getting great
use!
c. 2018 Capital Improvement Project Review
Rick Beane, Parks Superintendent, reviewed the 2018 Capital Improvement Projects
(CIP) with the Commission.
Staff was busy today participating in the annual Beautify the Park event which supports
the annual tree replacement budget from the CIP. The CIP budget contains $15,000 to
toward ADA accessibility connections. This may include accessibility to playgrounds or
other park amenities. The CIP includes $20,000 to replenish the woodchips in the
playgrounds annually.
Shelard, Roxbury and Birchwood Park playgrounds will be replacement this year advised
Mr. Beane. Two of the playgrounds have been installed; one will be installed later due to
the late spring. Mr. Beane advised the removed playgrounds are recycled through “Kids
Around the World”, which the residents appreciate. Ms. Walsh asked if the
Commissioners would like Paul Bierhaus, board member, to attend an upcoming
meeting; Commission members agreed. Mr. Beane stated playgrounds have a 15-year
lifespan. Ms. Hoffman inquired on the budget for playgrounds to which Mr. Beane
advised a typical playground replacement is $65,000. Larger playgrounds such as Wolfe
Park, are budgeted at $100,000. After approximately 15 years, some playgrounds do not
pass inspection. If they do not pass, parts need to be replaced or the entire structure
will need replacement. This also depends on the location and use of the structure. If
heavily used, the structure may need more repairs or replacement sooner than 15 years.
All 43 playground structures are inspected and documented at least monthly.
Commissioner Cantor indicated it is nice to know they are inspected monthly and feels
residents should be aware also. He suggested adding this information to the Park
Perspective, along with pictures of the playgrounds in their new locations. Mr. Beane
advised St. Louis Park pays for some employees to become certified playground
inspectors. Since the United States cannot install refurbished playgrounds, they are
installed in other countries. Many kids in other countries have never seen a playground
before and they love it!
This year, Mr. Beane advised, the courts at Wolfe Park, Shelard Park, Roxbury Park and
Aquila Park will be resurfaced. The general lifespan of a court is 5-10 years. The first
repaint of the park buildings was in 2002 so a lot of the building need repainting. This
year staff will focus on Aquila, Birchwood, Browndale, Carpenter, Cedar Knoll (re-side
and new doors), Dakota, Fern Hill, Louisiana Oaks, Nelson, Northside and Oak Hill Parks.
The parking lots will be resurfaced at Cedar Knoll, Creekside and Nelson Parks. The
shelter at Jackley Park needs to be reworked. In Louisiana Oaks Park, staff will install
taller poles and LED fixtures. Field lighting at Aquila and Dakota Parks is also in the CIP.
Staff hopes to start the 2018 project prior to the end of June.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4k) Page 4
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of May 16, 2018
Mr. Beane reviewed the Aquila Park project. The fields in the park will be reconfigured
and a storage garage will be built. The Girls’ Fastpitch Association will get covered
dugouts and have two scoreboards. Peterson Company hopes to begin construction this
week, with substantial completion by August 15, 2018. The fields will be seeded so they
can be utilized in 2019. The construction will begin after school ends. It includes new
light poles and LED lights. The poles on the south side of the park will remain wood
poles. Ms. Hoffman inquired on the cost of field lights at Dakota Park. Mr. Beane
advised $280,000 which includes the service. Musco Lighting is providing the work. The
lights and poles were able to be purchased directly via a national contract which is more
cost effective. Staff is researching two different scoreboards for the fields. Both say
Oriole Fastpitch. Staff is working closely with Girls’ Fastpitch Association so both the
high school and association get recognition. Ms. Hoffman inquired if the Association was
donating toward this project. Mr. Beane indicated the association has mentioned it.
Originally they wanted scoreboards that were $25,000 apiece. They have now agreed on
scoreboards that cost $8,000 each. They have a new president and have been great to
work with.
Ms. Walsh advised Commissioner Griffin is having conversations with residents
regarding designated pickle ball courts. A number of courts are stripped and in the 2019
CIP, additional stripping of pickle ball courts has been added since the activity has
increased in popularity. Commissioner Foulkes reiterated the popularity by indicating
they may have 30 – 40 people at the Middle School on Tuesdays and Thursdays to play!
Mr. Beane advised staff has included adult fitness in a future CIP, which would tie in
with pickle ball.
Mr. Bean mentioned the skate park at Carpenter, which was a CIP project, has been very
well received. There will be a drinking fountain installed soon. Maintenance staff loves
the skate park as it is maintenance free. The users love it also!
The Oak Hill Park Splash Pad will open Friday, May 25. Last year the about ground
equipment was replaced along with the UV filters. The filters were replaced as the issue
was smelly water; UV filters assist with off gassing of water. Regardless of the smell, the
water is safe.
d. Westwood Hills Nature Center Update
Mark Oestreich, Manager of Westwood Hills Nature Center, presented an update on the
Westwood Hills Nature Center project. Staff met with the school principals, PTO and
school leaders last night. It was a good discussion and opened up ideas to pursue. The
schools want to utilize the nature center for education but the cost of bussing students
is a barrier. Options were discussed.
The Commissioners viewed the latest plan that was approved Monday. The following
changes were made to the original plan shown: one less raptor mews(three versus four;
one mews is larger so could subdivide and have two small birds in the space); lowered
roof on west end of building reduces glue lam beams and vaulted roof which reduces
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4k) Page 5
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of May 16, 2018
expenses and surface patio on back of building versus wood. Staff explored more
exhibits, an outdoor screen utility area on the west side and a diesel generator versus
natural gas as less expensive. Mr. Oestreich indicated they want to pursue adding birds
and provide more outreach. It would be great to have a fleet of birds so can choose
which two to take on the outreach programs.
It was decided to keep the building in the same proposed location versus moving it due
to soil conditions. Tested geo thermal and ran conductivity tests; all tests indicate this is
the system to use for heating.
The landscape architect provided a view of the design details including mowing,
plowing, trail width, etc. The trails are ADA accessible. The landscaping will create a
buffer next to the classroom on the north side of the building. Low to medium bushes
will separate trail from classroom; potentially prairie type bushes, indicated Mr.
Oestreich. The draining water will be funneled to the turtle pond on the north side of
the building. Mr. Beane advised the biggest concern is snow storage so will discuss
making the trail to the east of the parking area larger to allow room for snow when
plowed. Discussed water drainage, melting snow with debris and best location for
storage.
The crosswalks through the parking lot to the playground will remain. The number of
trails connecting on the north side of the building are undecided. Staff is talking with the
Rotary group about the wooden structure overlooking the turtle pond in regards to
what they’d like to do when it’s replaced (in CIP). It was discussed to replace with a
different structure and add in a fire pit area.
Commissioners viewed an empty rendering of the exhibit space. Mr. Oestreich indicated
the city is working with Split Rock Studios to design the exhibits, which will be located in
the middle. The exhibits will focus on four main features that are found on the
Westwood property: natural pollinator area, woodland features, prairie and wetland.
The exhibit area will include an exhibit wall, sitting areas, standing areas, terrace which
flows outside, text written at an 8th grade level plus interactive discovery areas. Each
main exhibit will have a seasonal changeability as seasonal panels will be made.
The exhibit may also include an interactive area where visitors will hear critter sounds
when stepping on certain spots. Staff will go to the City Council on Monday to discuss
the design phase; Commission members invited to attend. Mr. Cantor inquired on the
timeline. Mr. Oestreich indicated if the City Council approves the discussion on Monday,
construction documents can begin and be ready in early September. Bids can be
received September, October of November. Ms. Walsh indicated the city generally uses
GO bonds for funding for this type of a project.
Ms. Walsh and Mr. Oestreich thanked the commission members in the process. Once
the exhibits are enhanced, an update will be brought to the Commission.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4k) Page 6
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of May 16, 2018
e. Commission Sponsored Appreciation Luncheon Discussion
Commission members discussed and decided to hold the luncheon on Thursday,
September 27, 11:30 a.m. – 1 p.m. at Oak Hill Park. Discussed other options for food
prep, potentially chicken. Ms. Voelker will email last year’s list.
5. Staff Communication
Jason Eisold, the Rec Center Manager, advised the ROC ice was rented slightly less than 750
hours and collected approximately $80,000 revenue (projected revenue was $45,000 annually).
The ROC ice was rented mostly every evening and weekend days. People skated on the ice
regularly when not rented. Ms. Walsh commented – One of best things is the ice was open and
free to users when not reserved. A mixture of all ages and abilities skating. The ROC was also a
big hit at the recent ice arena managers meeting and the Hockey Association promoted within
itself. The ROC is a huge asset! Moving forward, staff’s goal is hosting a significant event once
per month to showcase the ROC.
The ROC was turf March 15 through May 12, advised Mr. Eisold. Approximately 250 hours of
turf was rented and provided $5,000 revenue. The turf was busy evenings and sporadic rentals
occurred on weekends. The groups that rented the turf include Lacrosse and baseball
particularly due to the late spring conditions. They asked for it to remain in place longer than
May 12! Staff, in conjunction with Discover St. Louis Park, is interested in holding more events
on the ROC turf. Mr. Oestreich advised the extra turf was taken and used at the Nature Center.
Mr. Eisold explained to transition from ice to turf, the slab under the ice was heated. It took just
over 24 hours to clear the ice, one day to dry, one day to roll out the turf and two days to
remove the dasher boards. The transition schedule will remain basically the same annually.
Customers have asked to transition the ice to turf for a weekend then back to ice, it is so
popular.
This year the roof above the east rink and commons area will be replaced through the Capital
Improvement Program. The roof, which is a great space as it is flat, will be prepped for potential
solar use in the future. The budget for the project is $500,000. The front entrance of the Rec
Center will be renovated to include motion doors this fall.
The main drive areas of the Rec Center parking lot were recently repaved, indicated Mr. Eisold.
The entire lot is slated to be redone in two to three years in conjunction with the Belt Line /
Monterey Drive intersection project. Ms. Walsh advised the Engineering Department is looking
at reconstructing the intersection, potentially with a roundabout, to allow traffic go in and out
of the Rec Center at the Monterey Drive / Belt Line Boulevard intersection.
Recently the Aquatic Park filters were replaced, advised Mr. Eisold, which was also a CIP
project. Staff will begin filling the Aquatic Park tomorrow or Friday with the new regenerative
filters in anticipation of the June 2 opening. The new filters dump a lot less water, save
chemicals and are consistent with climate action plan.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4k) Page 7
Title: Parks & recreation advisory commission meeting minutes of May 16, 2018
Mr. Eisold indicated the lights in the Banquet Room and Gallery will be replaced with LED this
year. Once complete, most lights in the building will be LED. When the parking lot is redone, the
lights there will also be switched to LED. LED saves energy and is part of the climate action plan.
Mr. Eisold encouraged Commission members to view the completed mural by the ROC.
6. Member Communication
Commissioner Cantor inquired what happened to the baseball dedication request for Marty
Hammer. Ms. Walsh advised the naming policy indicates a year must pass after a person is
deceased prior to naming. Marty Hammer’s support group will host a golf tournament this
summer to acquire funds toward the lights at Dakota Park as it was agreed to dedicate one of
the softball fields at Dakota Park to Mr. Hammer. The naming recommendation will go to the
City Council in September.
Commissioner Hagemann mentioned there is evidence of spiking on the bike trail between
Nelson Park and Louisiana Avenue. There were sharp objects strewn on the trail, which a
resident picked up. Mr. Beane asked for photos to forward on to Three Rivers Park District and
the Police Department to make them aware.
Commissioner Hagemann indicated the City Council received a report at Monday’s Council
meeting for an update on dockless bicycles, which the Cities of Edina and Golden Valley have.
Commissioner Hagemann is working with the Engineering Division on what the City Council
wants to do, ensuring public process and determining the city’s response if dockless bicycles are
left in the city, who to call, etc. There are a lot of variables to work through. Mr. Beane advised
dockless bicycles were recently discussed at a meeting and many concerns were expressed.
Commissioner Foulkes inquired on the success of the Minnehaha Creek Clean up. Over 40
people attended, Mr. Beane advised, and a lot of garbage was picked up.
7. Other/ Future Agenda Items
a. Next Meeting – June 20, 2018
b. No meetings held July and August due to lack of quorum
8. Adjournment
It was moved by Commissioner Hagemann and seconded by Commissioner Cantor to adjourn at
7:46 p.m. The motion passed 7 – 0.
Respectfully submitted,
Stacy M. Voelker
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Minutes: 4l
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
AUGUST 15, 2018 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Matt Eckholm, Jessica Kraft, Claudia Johnston-Madison,
Lisa Peilen, Joe Tatalovich, Alanna Franklin
MEMBERS ABSENT: Carl Robertson (unexcused)
STAFF PRESENT: Jacquelyn Kramer, Gary Morrison, Sean Walther
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of July 18, 2018
Commissioner Eckholm made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner
Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
Commissioner Peilen arrived at 6:10 p.m.
3. Public Hearings
A. Conditional Use Permit – Wat Promwachirayan (Wat Prom)
Applicant: Mark Snyder, Construction Results Corp.
Location: 2544 Highway 100 S.
Case No.: 18-32-CUP
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. He explained
that Wat Prom anticipates three phases of development. The conditional use permit is
for Phase 1 to expand the parking lot, construct storm drainage and to export more than
400 cubic yards of material. Mr. Morrison explained that phases two and three will
require separate major amendments to the conditional use permit.
Mr. Morrison discussed details of the proposed retaining wall and fence.
Mr. Morrison summarized comments received at two neighborhood meetings.
Mr. Morrison said the applicant is willing to connect their privacy fence with the
neighbor’s privacy fence to the north to prevent people from cutting through their
property.
Mr. Morrison said due to a neighborhood concern the temple is willing to make a
change and provide revised drawings for council consideration. This change is to the
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 2
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 15, 2018
yard along Vernon Avenue South where nine parking spaces would be removed and the
retaining wall moved 16 feet to the east. This would provide approximately 30 feet of
space between the sidewalk, and fence which is more consistent with the front yards of
the area. This would also provide more space for landscaping.
Mr. Morrison reviewed all recommended conditions for approval of the conditional use
permit.
Commissioner Kraft asked for clarification of trees planted for Phase I.
Commissioner Carper asked about landscaping other than trees.
Commissioner Carper asked why such a large parking lot is needed.
Mr. Morrison responded that the parking lot is being sized for the future. Building it all
now is the most economical way to do it, especially since the stormwater retention will
be constructed underneath the parking lot.
Commissioner Carper asked about the usage of the parking lot.
Darin Troftgruben, project manager and temple member, spoke about the current
outdoor Sunday market from 10 a.m. – 4 p.m., cultural events and large religious events
which would use the expanded parking lot. He said there are not many evening events.
He spoke about LED lighting in the parking lot. He said the lighting could be put on a
timer to address neighborhood concern. He noted the lot has also been lowered to
reduce illumination from the lot.
Mr. Walther spoke about the need for security lighting which property owners often
determine with the police department.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the public hearing.
Dale Anderson, 2700 Vernon Ave. S., said he was a charter member of the Reformation
Church and has deep roots there. He discussed how he thought most of the parishioners
were able to walk to the church and he didn’t understand there were also traffic
problems until five years ago. He said he spoke with a minister who thought it’s a
terrible site for a church because of ingress and egress problems. People had to go
through the neighborhood to enter and leave the site which could result in tremendous
traffic problems to 27th St., Vernon and Webster streets. Mr. Anderson said he’s
concerned about traffic. He spoke about Reformation Church and the synagogue across
the highway having traffic problems, unless people were able to walk there. He said he’s
pleased to see that two of the issues he brought to the neighborhood meeting were
mitigated; ugly sight lines and traffic noise from Hwy. 100 coming into the
neighborhood. He said so far Wat Prom has been an excellent neighbor but he’s
concerned about long term plans dramatically increasing services and events and the
impact it will have on traffic in the neighborhood.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 3
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 15, 2018
Sharon Lehrman, 2610 Vernon Ave. S., said they greatly welcome Wat Prom into the
neighborhood. She said Wat Prom is an amazing neighbor. She said her concern is
about the loss of so many trees, especially with Phase I. Her request is that as many
trees as possible be retained before Phase II starts. Plans can change and if Phase II
didn’t occur, losing all of those trees would be terrible. She said the trees also serve as a
noise barrier from Hwy. 100.
Diane Steen-Hinderlie, 2829 Yosemite Ave. S., said she is alarmed that the sanctuary
square might be torn down. She said a dozen people worked very hard on preserving
the structure. She said she was so happy to have Wat Prom move in as neighbors, until
she read this plan. She spoke about the book Lost Twin Cities. She said mid-century
modern architecture is now a very important architectural element for preservation.
She showed a photograph from the book regarding Reformation Church complex. She
said it shouldn’t be altered other than surface things. Ms. Steen-Hinderlie said the
acoustic elements of the square building should be saved as these elements were the
prototype for Minneapolis’ Orchestra Hall. She suggested this space could also be
rented as it has perfect seating for community concerts. She said the city should have a
heritage preservation commission.
Tom Schmitz, 2571 Vernon Ave. S., a 22-year resident, said there is a natural barrier
between the frontage road and commercial. Phase I, 2 and 3 will open up that barrier.
He said we can’t talk about Phase 1 without considering Phases 2 and 3. Why would you
build a large parking lot if Phases 2 and 3 weren’t going to happen? The neighborhood is
concerned about loss of buffer and facing commercial. He said the garden has been a
great asset and should be preserved. He said he wishes the city could purchase the
garden.
Sue Wolfe, 2600 Vernon Ave. S., lives directly across from the path. She said she and her
husband each owned businesses in the city. She said she was a founding member of
Friends of the Arts and she started Day One at the high school. She said the
neighborhood process has been extraordinary and the temple is a wonderful neighbor.
She said she shares concerns about losing green space, trees and the buffer from Hwy.
100. The meetings have been productive and she assumes they will continue being
productive. She said her concern is that the Planning Commission decision tonight
would not inhibit future changes. Many things can change. She asked if Phase 1 is
approved is it possible to amend it along the way as changes are made. Neighbors have
mentioned being interested in purchasing trees for the property. She is concerned
about the maintenance of the parking lot. She said currently the temple has no paid
staff and operates with volunteerism. She said she and her husband do take care of the
path, mow across the street, and try to keep it looking good. She has concerns about
how the large parking lot will be maintained over the years.
Lisa Robinson, 2575 Vernon Ave. S., said she agreed with many speakers that the
process has been very good and the temple has been a great neighbor. She said Vernon
is a residential street and the integrity of the residential street needs to be maintained.
The larger setback will help. She spoke about connecting the fence. Ms. Robinson said
she would like a completion date of when the parking lot will be done to make sure
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 4
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 15, 2018
trees are planted, escrow for trees is provided, and making sure the project gets
finished. She said she doesn’t want to see the area left in disarray for a long time,
waiting for funding.
Kathryn McKeen, 2834 Vernon Ave. S., said her concern is traffic. She said currently
drivers exit Hwy. 100, back up on the frontage road by the dealership and come through
the neighborhood very fast. She said she is often unable to back out of her driveway
because of cut through traffic. Ms. McKeen said if 200 more vehicles are trying to get
into that space the traffic will get worse. The traffic is already problematic.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Peilen commented that many people walk to Beth El Synagogue on the
Sabbath. She added that for any major service the Beth El parking lot is packed, many
people park on Salem Ave., and there is driving through the neighborhood. She said the
point made about preserving trees until Phase 2 is good.
Mr. Morrison responded due to the grading and excavation for the parking lot most of
the trees must be removed. Trees on the south side will be saved until Phase 2 is
constructed. The intent is to get new landscaping in as soon as possible so that when
Phase 2 starts there will be 10 years of growth. The intent is to plant the area with
coniferous trees with year round screening.
There was a discussion about Mr. Schmitz’ concern about loss of barrier to the
residential side at Phase 2.
Mr. Morrison said the intent is to minimize the impact on Vernon Avenue South by
having the fence and building meet the same setback required for the homes. Additional
landscaping will provide green space along that area. During Phases 2 and 3 there will
be a public process, so additional modifications can be made at that time.
Commissioner Peilen asked about the 10-year gap between Phase 1 and 2.
Mr. Morrison responded it is about fund raising.
Commissioner Eckholm asked if any trees might be saved by the retaining wall being
moved to the east.
Mr. Morrison said that will be evaluated. Construction of the wall itself will require
some digging to anchor the wall. Grading also needs to be done for sidewalk.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending approval of the conditional use
permit. Commissioner Eckholm seconded the motion.
Commissioner Peilen said her level of discomfort is about the 10 years between Phase 1
and 2. What happens if Phase 2 doesn’t materialize?
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 5
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 15, 2018
Commissioner Tatalovich said he agreed.
Commissioner Peilen asked why not raise more funds now and begin a few years down
the road.
Mr. Troftgruben said the phased approach was presented to the temple by the city
because the parking lot needs to be replaced now. Repairing it today means handling
stormwater, sewer, utilities, access and lighting. He commented that a lot of the traffic
isn’t just about people coming. It is about them trying to find parking spots. He spoke
about outdoor activities being their largest fundraisers. He said if they don’t have a large
parking lot to accommodate those activities it affects Phases 2 and 3.
Commissioner Carper said the conditional use permit is for a parking lot. The applicant
has the right to build a parking lot and do nothing other than build a parking lot. He said
there are conditions and there is no reason to deny it based upon future activities.
The motion recommending approval of the conditional use permit passed on a vote of
6-0.
B. Urban Park Apartments
Applicant: Ben Delwiche, KaasWilson Architects
Location: 3601 Phillips Parkway
Case Nos.: 18-33-CUP, 18-34-VAR, 18-35-VAR, 18-36-VAR
18-37-VAR, 18-38-VAR
Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. The applicant requests
a conditional use permit for import/export of soil and material associated with
construction, and five variances to build a second apartment building.
Ms. Kramer reviewed vehicular parking. She provided a zoning analysis and noted two
conditions of approval required for the parking variance: 1) all off-street parking spaces
on the site will be made available to residents in both buildings; and 2) a parking
management plan will be required as a condition of approval for the parking variance.
Ms. Kramer reviewed conditional use permit requirements and provided an analysis of
the variance requests.
Ms. Kramer stated construction is anticipated to begin in January 2019 and will last
approximately one year. She said Phillips Parkway and the regional trail will remain
open throughout construction.
Ms. Kramer discussed the public input process. Concerns of the 10 residents attending
the August 8, 2018 neighborhood meeting regarded parking. The property manager
discussed a proposed parking permit system at that meeting. The staff report included a
letter in opposition to the project from a community member.
Commissioner Peilen said the applicant is about 35 spaces short of the requirement.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 6
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 15, 2018
Ms. Kramer stated based on the code requirements they are short, but the applicant
argues that based on the demand that is experienced in the current building there
wouldn’t be a parking shortage.
There was a discussion about parking management plans mitigating impacts on a
neighborhood. In response to questions, Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning
Supervisor, stated that parking management plans establish the approach management
will take to effectively use the parking available and reduce problems. It can be an
enforcement mechanism if complaints are received.
Ben Delwiche, applicant, KaasWilson Architects, spoke about the proposed parking
management plan. He discussed the balance of the unit mix on the site and how that
affects parking needs. Smaller units are proposed for the new building. He stated how
the requested variances provide consistency with the look of the existing building, site
and the trail.
Mr. Delwiche stated that originally the applicant proposed a larger new building. They
were urged by staff to reduce that size which has resulted in a plan that provides
building consistency, creates vast improvements to the site, and improves resident
amenities.
Commissioner Peilen asked if each unit would be guaranteed a permitted parking spot,
but not necessarily more than one.
Mr. Delwiche said every unit is guaranteed a parking stall. He discussed available
alternate means of transportation. He added that the city requires 10% parking be set
aside for guests. This is managed by signs on the site.
Brenda Hvambsal of Steven Scott Management said they manage Urban Park
Apartments. She noted that they also manage and do lease-up for Ellipse, e2, and
Shoreham developments. They are very familiar with parking management plans. She
discussed details of a plan. Ms. Hvambsal stated they are already in the process of using
parking permits at Urban Park Apts. She said there would be a spot guaranteed per unit,
not per bedroom.
Commissioner Eckholm discussed safety concerns bicyclists using the regional trail have
at the curb cuts at the parking lot because of landscaping and drivers pulling out rapidly
from the parking lot.
Mr. Delwiche responded that one of the things they’ve been working on is increasing
site lines of those particular entrances. He also spoke about temporary safety measures
at the trail that will be made during construction.
Commissioner Eckholm suggested doing more than increasing site lines; perhaps a
physical way of stopping cars rushing straight up to the street. He discussed raising the
trail area.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 7
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 15, 2018
Mr. Walther said staff and the applicant will explore this and have a solution or proposal
when the application is presented to City Council.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the public hearing.
Donna Rock, 3601 Phillips Parkway, said she is a 30 year resident of St. Louis Park. Her
letter was included in the staff report. She said the south end of the proposed building
and the pool will take over a natural habitat. Currently there is a grill, seating, space for
dog walking, and wildlife. The best thing about living in Urban Park is the aspect of park
that is still there. There will be a major loss of trees. Ms. Rock said she has concerns
about the parking variance. Currently she doesn’t have to worry about parking for her
guests. She spoke about street parking not being available when Sholom, located across
the street, has events. Street parking isn’t always available. She said she is concerned
about the variance and the loss of green space between the trail and the existing
parking lot. She is concerned about safety for bikers and drivers during the year of
construction as one entrance/exit of the parking ramp will be closed during that time.
She said that will be particularly difficult in the winter because of ice and the inclined
driveway.
Ron Donacik, campus administrator, Sholom Senior Living, 3600, 3610, 3620 and 3630
Phillips Parkway thanked Urban Park Apts. management and tenants. He said they have
been great neighbors. He stated that the 400 plus Sholom residents are concerned
about parking. He said the evening and nighttime parking situation at Sholom is
relatively fluid. Weekday hours the parking lot is heavily congested. Weekday hours
along Phillips Pkwy is also heavily congested. He said Sholom is worried about their
parking lot being used for parking by Urban Park residents and guests. He stated that
having accessible and close parking for Sholom’s elderly residents is critical. He is
concerned about the ability of fire and police to get in and out of the area. Mr. Donacik
said all Sholom is asking is that there is a thorough parking plan to ensure that any
potential parking issues relative to Sholom are mitigated.
The Vice Chair closed the public hearing as no one else was present wishing to speak.
Commissioner Peilen said in this instance she would feel better if she could see a
parking management plan. She said she is quite familiar with the Sholom campus and
has been to the campus numerous times and parking is tough. Commissioner Peilen
commented that transit isn’t fully developed in St. Louis Park and isn’t necessarily an
option for everyone. She stated she is concerned about the parking variance.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said she feels it is a very tight project. She said she believes
parking is a huge issue and doesn’t feel she can support the application.
Commissioner Carper said he isn’t comfortable about the parking either. He said it
seems unusual not to include on-street parking in the parking count. He said he doesn’t
recall the Commission or the city ever refusing something based upon the lack of on-
street parking. He said he has heard some reasonable explanations on how the
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 8
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 15, 2018
apartment management will control parking and make this work based upon past
experience. He said he will support the request to move forward.
Mr. Walther explained that the off-street parking ordinance allows for any on-street
parking that is adjacent to a site to allow a reduction in off-street parking on a one-for-
one basis. He explained how that could reduce the variance request. Staff is familiar
with the site and is aware of the pressure for parking during the day in the area. That
drove staff’s decision to encourage the applicant to downsize the proposal. Mr. Walther
said staff was very conservative in not including the on-street parking. They took this
approach because of the unusual narrow site and historic use of the on-street parking
by the neighboring use. He said the city has good experience with parking plans and the
management company. The recommendation was also based upon Urban Park’s current
experience with parking.
Commissioner Carper spoke about time of day considerations between Sholom and
Urban Park Apartments. He said he didn’t think the Commission should disqualify a
good project that adds more housing to the city, housing that would be more
affordable.
Commissioner Kraft said she’s concerned about parking but the project is taking a
challenging site and putting in a variety of housing types that aren’t available in their
existing building. She said the applicant is adding some other amenities, and due to its
location it might appeal to a group of people that might not all have cars. She said we
should be open to thinking about it in those terms.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison said she can support the request now that she
understands that three-bedroom units wouldn’t all have 3 cars.
Ms. Rock stated that the party room holds 30-50 people. There would be no parking for
those guests. She added that management isn’t available outside of business hours to
deal with parking problems. Regarding the three-bedroom units, she said the younger
urban professionals who are roommates do have 3 vehicles. She said she doesn’t know
how many of the three-bedroom units are occupied by families.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending approval of the conditional use
permit and variance with conditions. Commissioner Eckholm seconded the motion, and
the motion passed on a vote of 5-0-1 (Peilen abstained).
C. Westwood Hills Nature Center
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Location: 8300 Franklin Avenue
Case No.: 18-31-CUP
Jacquelyn Kramer, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. The conditional use
permit is requested for import/export of soil and material associated with construction
of a new interpretive center at Westwood Hills Nature Center.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4l) Page 9
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes August 15, 2018
Ms. Kramer reviewed the haul route for excavation, construction hours, construction
duration, and tree replacement. She stated the application meets conditional use
permit general requirements and zoning requirements. She discussed the
neighborhood meeting held on July 31, 2018 and resident feedback.
Vice Chair Johnston-Madison opened the public hearing.
Jay Jaffee, 2521 Princeton Ct., spoke in support of the new interpretive center, calling
the nature center a true gem in the community.
Commissioner Carper spoke about the importance of continuing to support the nature
center and the entire recreation and parks system.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending approval of the conditional use
permit with conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Eckholm seconded the
motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 6-0.
4. Other Business
5. Communications
Mr. Walther said two public hearings for zoning text amendments will be held at the
September 5, 2018 meeting. A development tour is planned to follow the regular
meeting.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Minutes: 4m
OFFICIAL MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 5, 2018 – 6:00 p.m.
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
MEMBERS PRESENT: Claudia Johnston-Madison, Jessica Kraft, Lisa Peilen, Carl Robertson,
Joe Tatalovich, Alanna Franklin (youth member)
MEMBERS ABSENT: Lynne Carper (excused), Matt Eckholm (unexcused)
STAFF PRESENT: Sean Walther, Gary Morrison, Jennifer Monson
1. Call to Order – Roll Call
2. Approval of Minutes of August 1, 2018
Commissioner Peilen made a motion to approve the minutes. Commissioner Tatalovich
seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 5-0.
3. Public Hearings
A. Zoning ordinance amendment – educational facilities in the R-4 Zoning
District
Applicant: Yeshiva of Minneapolis
Case No.: 18-39-ZA
Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, presented the staff report. Yeshiva of
Minneapolis, 3115 Ottawa Ave. S., is requesting an amendment to the zoning ordinance
to allow dormitories at schools located in the R-4 Multiple-Family Residence district. He
provided background on the high school and dormitories. He discussed the anticipated
expansion to the facilities. He explained that proposed improvements will require
several zoning applications. The first step would be to amend the zoning ordinance to
increase the maximum number of students allowed to live at the school. Mr. Morrison
reviewed proposed conditions to the amendment.
Commissioner Peilen asked about parking.
Mr. Morrison said parking would be located along the south of the property, across the
street in an existing parking lot, and in the back of the school. He said parking required
for a school is based on teachers in classrooms. A higher formula is required for a high
school. However, students are not allowed to have cars at Yeshiva. Mr. Morrison added
that parking could be reviewed in depth with the future applications that come forward.
Chair Robertson asked about R4 zoning adjacent to the site.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 2
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes September 5, 2018
Mr. Morrison stated there is RC high density multiple family to the west, R3 to the north
and east, and the Belt Line development area to the south.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked Mr. Morrison for a map showing the area.
Mr. Morrison presented a zoning map indicating the zoning of the parcel and adjacent
properties.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked what would happen if Yeshiva chose to change
the rules to allow cars.
Mr. Morrison responded the applicant would then have to come forward to amend the
conditional use permit, as this is included as a condition of the approval.
Shlomo Kutoff, dean and founder, Yeshiva of Minneapolis, spoke about the school’s
growth. He said they have no intention of allowing students to have cars. He said it
would be a tremendous addition if they could house more students. Mr. Shlomo stated
the school currently has 45 out-of-town students that are housed at the site and 35 local
students.
Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, he
closed the public hearing.
The Chair said he was comfortable that the planned proposal would not be spot zoning.
Commissioner Peilen made a motion recommending approval of the zoning ordinance
amendment pertaining to education facilities in the R-4 Multiple-Family Residence as
recommended by staff. Commissioner Tatalovich seconded the motion, and the motion
passed on a vote of 5-0.
B. Zoning ordinance regarding home occupations
Applicant: City of St. Louis Park
Case No.: 18-43-ZA
Sean Walther, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, presented the staff report. He stated
that the city council directed staff to explicitly prohibit firearm sales as a home
occupation. He discussed the home occupation land use description currently in the
zoning code. He explained the purpose of the proposed amendment is to clarify that
the rules apply to both for-profit and not-for-profit home occupations and to also
explicitly prohibit certain additional home occupational uses. He stated those uses
include firearm sales, currency exchange, payday loan agency, sexually-oriented
business and high impact sexually oriented businesses. All of these uses are currently
required to be separated from residential uses when located in a commercial district.
Chair Robertson and Mr. Walther discussed the difference between a firearm sale and a
retail sale.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 3
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes September 5, 2018
Commissioner Peilen asked about a ban on retail sales. She said there are any number of
women’s clothing lines that are sold in the home. She described these sales as occurring
approximately four times a year. Samples are shipped back to the retailer and items
purchased are shipped directly to the customer.
Mr. Walther said the type of activity as described by Commissioner Peilen is not prohibited.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said many multi-level marketing businesses are run
out of homes. Product is being stored in homes. She said she didn’t think those
businesses could be construed as retail sales.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked city council’s intent in prohibiting firearm sales
as a home occupation.
Mr. Walther responded it came up when council asked how the city currently regulates
firearm sales and where they are permitted.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if any Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) are
selling firearms from their homes today in St. Louis Park.
Mr. Walther stated he believed there are approximately six current FFLs operating as
home occupations at this time.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison noted for the record that she didn’t appreciate some
of the wording in the emails received from the public on the proposed amendment.
She asked about the procedure of licensing.
Mr. Walther said he doesn’t know all the details of how the licenses are issued. He said
the zoning division is asked whether or not that use is allowed in the zoning ordinance.
That is asked initially when a license is being obtained and again when it is renewed.
The zoning division is asked if the FFL meets the local regulations.
The Chair said he would like more definition about firearm sales as a primary home
occupation or as a related home occupation like gunsmith. He said sometimes
gunsmiths will make a sale of a custom item that was manufactured on site.
Mr. Walther said the city will have to look at every case individually. He said he doesn’t
believe gunsmith would meet current regulations for home occupations. He added that
conditions for home occupations as an accessory use in each district are noted in the
zoning code.
Chair Robertson said with gunsmith there seems to be a gray area that a firearm might
be produced off site but modified on site. He went on to say this is a complex item and
he doesn’t have enough information such as wording and definitions to feel comfortable
voting on the item. He suggested holding the public hearing and tabling the vote.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 4
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes September 5, 2018
Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she agreed. She said she doesn’t have enough
information and also wants background information on why this is being proposed.
Mr. Walther asked the commission to provide him with specific questions.
Commissioner Peilen said she would not vote to table. She said she doesn’t think guns
have any business being sold in private residences.
The Chair said he would like to sit down with the six FFLs and see how they do business.
He said he doesn’t see the purpose of the extra proposed step.
Mr. Walther said there are approximately six FFL holders that operate as a home
occupation. He’s spoken with one FFL holder who primarily does internet sales of
collector antique firearms. He explained how the proposed amendment would limit new
future home occupations.
Chair Robertson said he sees zero issue with this and doesn’t see why it should be
prohibited.
Commissioner Kraft asked what surrounding cities are doing about this.
Mr. Walther responded it varies from city to city. Conditions are similar but there are
differences in each city. He added that the city attorney attended the city council study
session where the issue was discussed and the attorney’s opinion is that cities can place
reasonable limits upon firearm sales, including the proposed zoning code amendment.
Chair Robertson opened the public hearing.
Rob Doar, political director and vice president of MN Gun Owners Caucus, 716 County
Hwy. 10, Minneapolis, distributed his letter opposing the proposed ordinance to the
commission. He said commissioners’ questions were good. He said the question of why is
important as state statute specifically protects firearms dealers, and requires that any
ordinances to be enacted be reasonable, non-arbitrary and non-discriminatory. He stated
there has to be a very significant justification of why the ordinance would be enacted.
Mr. Doar said the major function of FFLs is firearm transfers. He said FFLs have to renew
their license every three years which includes a federal inspection. He said many
gunsmiths are often FFL dealers. He stated the vast majority of FFL dealers sell at gun
shops and gun shows and are not handling customer traffic at their front doors. Mr.
Doar said there are important distinctions of the functions of what FFL dealers do that
go beyond the scope of the intent of retail sales. He said prohibiting those functions
would be discriminatory and arbitrary.
Mr. Walther noted that email correspondence opposing the proposed amendment and
comments on 2nd amendment rights had been received and distributed to the
commission at the beginning of the meeting. Email correspondence opposing the
ordinance was received from David H. Anderson, Robert J. De brey, Ryan Daniels, James
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 5
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes September 5, 2018
Guertin, Taylor Jones, Kevin S., Thomas Knute, Marc Olivier, Matthew Race, Rocky
Vandal and James Allison, 5639 Nicollet Ave., Mpls. Emails were received by city staff
after 3:30 p.m. on September 5, 2018.
The Chair closed the public hearing as no one else was present wishing to speak.
Chair Robertson stated he understands the logic of separating gun sales from
neighborhoods, but a retail gun sale with transfer is different. This kind of firearm sale
is already separated from the neighborhood. He said he wouldn’t vote to approve the
amendment as it seems discriminatory and he doesn’t see that there is an issue. He said
his understanding is that the federal regulations are pretty strict and guns aren’t being
sold out the door. He added that to force someone to rent an office space to do their
business is burdensome and he isn’t comfortable with it.
Commissioner Peilen said she isn’t comfortable with storage and distribution of guns
from homes.
Commissioner Johnston-Madison remarked that she wants to receive more information.
She wants a good reason for the amendment that is definable and explainable. She
stated she wants facts. She referenced a gun study in one of the emails. Commissioner
Johnston-Madison said she’d like to see the item tabled.
The Chair asked Commissioner Franklin, youth member, for her thoughts about gun
issues.
Commissioner Franklin responded that students are scared. She said students aren’t
fully educated about this issue. She said the ones who are fully educated about the issue
are speaking up about their fears. She said she would like to know more about the
proposed amendment.
Commissioner Tatalovich stated that none of the emails received appeared to come
from St. Louis Park residents.
Commissioner Tatalovich made a motion recommending tabling the request. He added
that his opinion on this subject is much closer to Commissioner Peilen’s. Commissioner
Johnston-Madison seconded the motion, and the motion to table passed on a vote of 4-
1 (Peilen opposed).
In summary, the Chair requested information on what the city is trying to fix and if there
is an issue to be addressed. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked to know why the
council is recommending this and if there are any studies that we should be aware of.
Commissioner Peilen added that details regarding home based sales need to be
developed.
Mr. Walther asked commissioners in clarifying the ordinance broader restrictions on
retail sales if they wanted it to be more restrictive or less restrictive than the current
rules.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 4m) Page 6
Title: Planning commission meeting minutes September 5, 2018
The Chair responded it needs to be more defined.
Commissioner Tatalovich spoke about finding a certain threshold the city should be
looking at in terms of home occupations and retail sales.
Commissioner Peilen said a lot of people could be put out of business so a greater
definition of what is allowed and what isn’t allowed needs to be determined.
4. Other business
5. Communications
Mr. Walther discussed the adoption of the moratorium on the former Sam’s Club
property at 3745 Louisiana Avenue for the purpose of reviewing land use and zoning
regulations for property. He discussed changes for the property which are proposed in
the 2040 Comprehensive Plan.
He noted that the next Planning Commission meeting will be held on October 3, 2018.
6. Adjournment
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.
Study Session – Tour
The regular meeting was followed by a study session tour of AC Hotel by Marriott, 5075 Wayzata
Boulevard, and a walking tour of the West End to observe window transparency examples and
pedestrian scale amenities.
The tour was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Nancy Sells
Recording Secretary
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Public hearing: 6a
Executive summary
Title: Rasoi, LLC dba Taste of India – on-sale wine and 3.2% malt liquor license
Recommended action: Mayor to open public hearing, take public testimony, and close public
hearing. Motion to approve application from Rasoi, LLC dba Taste of India for an on-sale wine
and 3.2% malt liquor license for the premises located at 5617 Wayzata Boulevard.
Policy consideration: Does the applicant meet the requirements for the issuance of an
on-sale wine and 3.2% malt liquor license?
Summary: The city received an application from Rasoi, LLC dba Taste of India for an on-sale
wine and 3.2% malt liquor license for the property located at 5617 Wayzata Boulevard. Taste of
India is an existing, licensed restaurant in St. Louis Park. The current owner has entered into an
agreement to sell the business to the applicant, Rasoi, LLC. The applicant, Sahib Singh has
served as the on-site manager at Taste of India for several years and has been responsible for
the day-to-day operations of the restaurant. Mr. Singh will continue to serve as the on-site
manager of the restaurant after the transfer of ownership. During his tenure as manager there
have been no reported issues related to alcohol service at the restaurant and all compliance
checks have been passed successfully. No material changes to the restaurant have been
proposed at this time.
The police department conducted a full background investigation, and nothing was discovered
that would warrant denial of the license. The application and police report are on file in the city
clerk’s office. The required notice of the public hearing was published on October 4, 2018. If the
license is approved, nothing will be issued until all requirements have been met with the city
inspections department, Hennepin County, and the State Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement
Division.
Financial or budget considerations: Fees include $500 for the background investigation and a
pro-rated fee for the on-sale wine and 3.2% malt liquor license for the period from October 1,
2018 through March 1, 2019.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: None
Prepared by: Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Reviewed by: Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Public hearing: 6b
Executive summary
Title: Assessment of delinquent charges
Recommended action: Mayor to open the public hearing, solicit comments, and close the
public hearing. Motion to adopt resolution to assess delinquent water, sewer, storm water,
refuse, abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees and other
miscellaneous charges.
Policy consideration: Does the City Council desire to collect outstanding fees and charges
through the special assessment process?
Summary: The City certifies delinquent charges to Hennepin County as a means to collect on
these accounts. The certification is done via the special assessment process, and becomes a
lien on the individual properties that is due over the next year or several years, depending upon
the type of charge. Information on the 2018 certification process is provided in the following
discussion.
Financial or budget considerations: Collection of these charges is vital to the financial stability
of the City’s utility systems and to reimburse the City for expenses incurred in providing
services.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Sample certification letter
Resolution
Prepared by: Mark Ebensteiner, Finance Manager
Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6b) Page 2
Title: Assessment of delinquent charges
Discussion
Background: Each of the customers involved in this special assessment process received a City
service. Subsequently, the customers were then billed through our regular billing process. The
invoice(s) is/are now past due, and the recommended method of collecting the past due
amounts is through certification as a special assessment to the property for the next year or
years taxes depending on the delinquency. In advance of the public hearing date, individual
letters were mailed to property owners and tenants, if applicable, advising them of the
assessment and their right to be heard before the City Council. Per Council policy, all
delinquent utility accounts have been assessed a $15 administrative fee. This fee is not
included in the 2018 amount below so as to provide consistent comparative data. The table
below shows comparison data from 2014 - 2018 in relation to number of letters mailed and
value of delinquent amounts.
Year Number of Letters Delinquent Amounts Final Certification
Amounts
2018 1413 $832,955 N/A
2017 1894 $952,953 $528,208
2016 1866 $964,642 $531,078
2015 1768 $900,558 $507,410
2014 1810 $929,886 $516,290
Each year there are a number of residents who pay their delinquent amount(s) before the
certification deadline, thereby reducing the final amount certified and sent to Hennepin
County. In addition, during the month of October, there are several hundred property owners
who contact the City with questions about their outstanding balance(s) and the certification
process. The delinquent balance was $681,842 as of the close of business on October 9, 2018.
Staff will provide the delinquent amount balance as of the close of business on October 15,
2018 at the Council meeting. Customers have until October 26, 2018 at 4:30 p.m. to pay the
delinquent amount. The amounts shown do not include interest, the $30 per account
administrative fee, or the $75 penalty for utility accounts that are being certified for the second
consecutive year. Of the 709 accounts certified last year, 421 received this additional penalty
of $75 for being certified in consecutive years. A copy of the assessment roll is on file with the
City Clerk’s office for review.
Next steps: After conducting a public hearing, the City Council is asked to direct the assessment
of delinquent water, sewer, storm water, refuse, abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/
injection, false alarm fees and other miscellaneous charges against the benefiting property.
Staff will continue to collect payments related to the delinquent accounts and work with
residents to resolve issues related to their delinquent accounts. All delinquent accounts
outstanding as of October 26, 2018 at 4:30 p.m. will be certified to Hennepin County for
collection as part of the owner’s property tax bill. Upon certification, the delinquent amounts
will become a lien on the individual properties.
At this time, the Finance Division has not received notice of anyone wanting to speak at the
Public Hearing.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6b) Page 3
Title: Assessment of delinquent charges
Date of Notice: September XX, 2018
Mailing Address Line 1
Mailing Address Line 2
Mailing Address Line 3
Mailing Address Line 4
RE: Charges Owed: For Delinquent Utility Account:
Service Address: (ADDRESS)
Delinquent Amount: (AMOUNT)
Account Number: XXXXXXXX - XXXXXXXXXX
Property I.D. Number: XXXXXXXXXXXXX
The City of St. Louis Park encourages its customers to remain current in the payment of their bills. When
accounts become delinquent, according to Minnesota law, they may be certified to Hennepin County to
be collected with property taxes payable in the next year.
City of St. Louis Park records show this account was delinquent as of September XX, 2018. By receiving
this letter, this account has been moved into certification, and has received an administrative fee of $15.
In an effort to avoid the account from being certified to property taxes, the City is requesting that
payment in full be received at City Hall by Friday, October 26, 2018 at 4:30 p.m. If payment in full is not
received by that date and time, the outstanding delinquent amount plus an administrative fee of $30,
and interest at a rate of 4.00% for 13 months will be sent to Hennepin County for collection with the
property taxes in 2019 (total administrative fee is $45). If this account was certified in the prior year, a
$75 administrative penalty fee will also be assessed to the account (total administrative fee is $120).
The City Council will consider final action on all delinquent accounts at a public hearing during the
regular Council meeting on Monday, October 15, 2018 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers. A written
appeal may be presented to the Council at that time, or appeals may be made to Mark Ebensteiner –
Finance Manager, 5005 Minnetonka Blvd., St. Louis Park, MN 55416. The City would like to avoid the
certification process, as it adds additional costs to all parties.
There are several options available when making a payment; in person via cash, check or credit card at
City Hall. Payments may also be made by mailing a check to City Hall, paying with a credit card or
checking account at www.invoicecloud.com/stlouisparkmn or over the phone by calling 952.924.2111
and select option 1. If you wish to speak with someone about this notice or have questions about
making a payment please call 952.924.2111, Monday through Friday 8:00 – 4:30. We are happy to assist.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Mark Ebensteiner
Finance Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6b) Page 4
Title: Assessment of delinquent charges
Resolution No. 18-___
Levying assessment for delinquent utility accounts, grass/weed cutting, tree
removal/injection, false alarm fees and other miscellaneous charges
Whereas, the City Council has heretofore determined by ordinance the rates and charges for
water, sewer, storm water and refuse services of the city and has provided for the abatement of
tree removal/injection, grass/weed cutting and other miscellaneous charges to a home or business
shall be at the expense of the owners of the premises involved; and
Whereas, all such sums become delinquent and assessable against the property served
under Section 18-153, Section 18-154, Section 22-19, Section 32-34, Section 34-52, Section 34-56,
Section 32-97, Section 32-153, Section 34-111, and Section 34-112, of the St. Louis Park City Code and
Minnesota Statutes Sections 415.01, 366.011, 366.012, 429.061, 429.101, 443.015, 410.33, and
444.075; and
Whereas, Finance has prepared a list of unpaid charges to be certified against each tract
or parcel of land served by water, sewer or storm sewer, or against which all other miscellaneous
charges remain unpaid at the close of business on September 1, 2018; and
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that said
assessment rolls are hereby adopted and approved, there is hereby levied and assessed against
each and every tract of land described therein an assessment in the amounts respectively
therein, and the City Clerk is hereby authorized to deliver said assessment roll for amounts unpaid
at the close of business on October, 26, 2018, to the Auditor of Hennepin County for collection of
the assessment in the same manner as other municipal taxes are collected and payment thereof
enforced with interest from the date of this resolution at the rate of four percent (4 %) per annum;
and
It is further resolved that said unpaid charges are hereby certified to the Auditor of
Hennepin County, and the Chief Financial Officer is hereby authorized to deliver said list of unpaid
charges to the Auditor of Hennepin County, for collection in the same manner as other municipal
taxes are collected and payment thereof enforced with interest from the date of this resolution.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Public hearing: 6c
Executive summary
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Recommended action: Mayor to open the public hearing, take testimony, and close the
hearing. Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance adopting fees for 2019 and set
Second Reading for November 5, 2018.
Policy consideration: Are the proposed fees commensurate with the cost of the various
services the city provides?
Summary: Each year our fees are reviewed by departments prior to renewal and as part of our
budget process. Some fees must be set and adjusted in accordance with our ordinance; other
fees are allowed to be set administratively. All fees are reviewed each year based on
comparison to other cities in the metro area, changes in regulations, and to make sure our
business costs are covered for such service. At the October 8, 2018 Study Session, Council
received a written report which included all proposed citywide fees for 2019. Answers to
questions made by the council are included in the discussion section of this report. Council only
acts on the Appendix A item as those are within our city code; the other fees are set
administratively.
Next steps: The second reading of this ordinance is scheduled for November 5, 2018. If approved,
the fee changes will be effective January 1, 2019.
Financial or budget considerations: The proposed fee changes have been incorporated into the
preliminary 2019 budget.
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Discussion
Proposed ordinance
Ordinance summary
Study Session Fee Schedule
Prepared by: Mark Ebensteiner, Finance Manager
Reviewed by: Tim Simon, Chief Financial Officer
Nancy Deno, Deputy City Manager/HR Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 2
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Discussion
Background: Each Department Director has reviewed fees listed in Appendix A of the City Code.
The Administrative Services Department has worked with individual departments and their
recommendations are included in the attached ordinance.
Present considerations:
Summary of Proposed Ordinance Fee Changes
The Administrative Services, Community Development, Engineering, Fire, Inspections,
Operations & Recreation and Police Departments have each reviewed and analyzed the
proposed fee adjustments, and/or additions, or removals that are the shown in
Appendix A (attached). The 2019 proposed fee adjustments reflect the increased
administrative costs of providing services.
Questions from October 8, 2018 Study session
-Pool fees – Should there be a family pass?
o We do not have a family pass in place as our system is currently not capable of showing who
is listed in the same family when the physical pass is scanned. We also have individual
passes to deter season pass holders from allowing free entrance to additional patrons that
are not part of their immediate family. Revenues may be reduced with a family pass.
-Rental of ROC vs. Park Shelters – why is the rental of the ROC cheaper than the rental of a picnic
shelter?
o The rental rates at the ROC are intended to be affordable to all and to make sure the space
is rented. Unlike the park buildings, the ROC is not air conditioned or heated and there are
natural elements that can occur in this covered outdoor venue. Also please remember that
anyone renting the ROC for an event also have to rent tables, chairs, etc. separate from the
rental fee. Just for a comparison…it’s approximately $25/hour to rent the Oak Park Main
Shelter and $30-$35/hour to rent the dry floor of the ROC.
-Skate park rental cost – are the fees competitive with other cities and under what circumstances do
we rent out?
o Other city communities we contacted do not have a private rental fee for their Skate
Parks. We instituted a rental fee primarily for residents who wanted exclusive use of the
skate park and for non-resident groups who wanted to hold a large skate event…i.e. XGames
or a videographer was doing a photo shoot, etc. A larger fee was set as to keep the park
primarily open for the public.
-Cost for body camera footage – When would this charge come into play?
o The fee only is charged when we provide video to the requesting party. The fee covers the
cost of duplicating the media and the cost of the media storage device it is saved on. Those
who qualify to obtain videos have the right to view it at our office for free. The free
viewing and cost of duplication of the video is compliant with the Minnesota data
practices law.
Next steps: The second reading of this ordinance is scheduled for November 5, 2018. If approved,
the fee changes will be effective January 1, 2019.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 3
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Ordinance No. ___-18
Ordinance adopting fees for calendar year 2019
The City of St. Louis Park does ordain:
Section 1. Fees called for within individual provisions of the City Code are hereby set by
this ordinance for calendar year 2019.
Section 2. The Fee Schedule as listed below shall be included as Appendix A of the City
Code and shall replace those fees adopted November 6, 2017 by Ordinance No. 2526-17 for the
calendar year 2018 which is hereby rescinded.
ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES
Chapter 4 – Animal Regulations $50
Chapter 6 – Buildings & Building Regulations
Chapter 6, Article V – Property Maintenance Code $100
Chapter 8 – Business and Business Licenses $100
Chapter 12 – Environment $50
Chapter 12, Section 1 – Environment & Public Health
Regulations Adopted by Reference
$100
Chapter 12, Section 157 – Illicit Discharge and Connection $100
Chapter 12, Section 159 – Wetland Protection $100
Chapter 14 – Fire and Fire Prevention $100
Chapter 14, Section 75 – Open burning without permit $100
Chapter 20 – Parks and Recreation $50
Chapter 22 – Solid Waste Management $50
Chapter 22 – Solid Waste Management – Multifamily &
Commercial
$100
Chapter 22, Section 35b – Contagious Disease Refuse $200
Chapter 24 – Streets, Sidewalks & Public Places $50
Chapter 24, Section 24-43 – Household Trash & Recycling
Containers blocking public way
$50
Chapter 24, Section 50 – Public Property: Defacing or
injuring
$150
Chapter 24, Section 51 – Sweeping leaves or snow into
street prohibited
$100
Chapter 24, Section 151 – Work in public right-of-way
without a permit
$100
Chapter 24-342 – Snow, ice and rubbish a public nuisance
on sidewalks; removal by owner
Residential $25 first time, plus $10 each subsequent offens
Commercial $25 first time, Fee shall double for each
subsequent violation, with a maximum fee of
$200 for SFR and $400 for all others. Doesn't
reset annually. Does reset for new owners.
Chapter 26 – Subdivision $100
Violation of a condition associated with a Subdivision
approval. $750
Chapter 32 – Utilities $50
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 4
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Violation of sprinkling ban. $25 $50 first time, Fee shall double for each
subsequent violation, with a maximum fee of
$200 for SFR and $400 for all others. Doesn't
reset annually. Does reset for new owners
Chapter 36 – Zoning $50
Chapter 36, Section 37 – Conducting a Land Use not
permitted in the zoning district
$100
Violation of a condition associated with a Conditional Use
Permit, Planned Unit Development, or Special Permit
approval
$750
Repeat Violations within 24 Months up to a maximum of $2,000
Double the amount of the fine imposed for the previous
violation, up to a maximum of $2,000. For example, if
there were four occurrences of a violation that carried a
$50 fine, the fine for the fourth occurrence would be $400
(first: $50; second: $100; third: $200; fourth: $400).
Fines in addition to abatement and licensing inspections
Fines listed above may be in addition to fees associated
with abatement and licensing inspections.
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
Domestic Partnership
Registration Application Fee $50
Amendment to Application Fee $25
Termination of Registration Fee $25
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Comprehensive Plan Amendments $2,150
Conditional Use Permit $2,150
Major Amendment $2,120
Minor Amendment $1,150
Fence Permit
Installation $20
Grant Technical Assistance (DEED, Met Council, Hennepin
County, etc.)
$3,000 ($2,000 non-refundable)
Numbering of Buildings (New Addresses) $50
Official Map Amendment $600
Parking Lot Permit
Installation/Reconstruction $75
Driveway Permit $25
Planned Unit Development
Preliminary PUD $2,150
Final PUD $2,150
Prelim/Final PUD Combined $3,200
PUD - Major Amendment $2,150
PUD - Minor Amendment $1,150
Recording Filing Fee
Single Family $50
Other Uses $120
Registration of Land Use $50
Sign Permit
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 5
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Erection of Temporary Sign $30
Erection of Real Estate, Construction Sign 40+ ft $100
Installation of Permanent Sign without footings $100
Installation of Permanent Sign with footings $150
Special Permits
Major Amendment $2,150
Minor Amendment $1,150
Street, Alley, Utility Vacations $900
Subdivision Dedication
Park Dedication (in lieu of land)
Commercial/Industrial Properties 5% of current market value of the unimproved
land as determined by city assessor
Multi-family Dwelling Units $1,500 per dwelling unit
Single-family Dwelling Units $1,500 per dwelling unit
Trails $225 per residential dwelling unit
Subdivisions/Replats
Preliminary Plat $1,000 plus $150 per lot
Final Plat $600
Combined Process and Replats $1,200 plus $150 per lot
Exempt and Administrative Subdivisions $375
Temporary Use
Carnival & Festival over 14 days $1,500
Mobile Use Vehicle Zoning Permit (Food or Medical) $50
Time Extension $200
Traffic Management Plan
Administrative Fee $0.10 per sq ft of gross floor
Tree Replacement
Cash in lieu of replacement trees $135 per caliper inch
Variances
Commercial $500 $550
Residential $300
Zoning Appeal $300
Zoning Letter $50
Zoning Map Amendments $2,100 $2,150
Zoning Permit
Accessory Structures, 120 200 sq ft or less $25
Zoning Text Amendments $2,150
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
Installation/repair of Sidewalk, Curb Cut or Curb and
Gutter Permit
$12 per 10 linear feet
Base Fee $60
Permit Parking- High School and Medical Need No Charge
Right-Of-Way Permits
Excavation or Obstruction Permit
Base Fee $60
Hole in Road/Blvd (larger than 10" diameter) $60 per hole
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 6
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Trenching in Boulevard $200 per 100 linear feet (minimum $200)
Trenching in Roadway $400 per 100 linear feet (minimum $400)
Delay Penalty 2 times total permit fee
Small Cell Wireless Facility Permit
Permit Fee $1,500 per antenna
Rent to occupy space on a city-owned wireless support
Structure $150 per year per antenna
Maintenance associated with space on a city-owned
wireless support structure $25 per year per antenna
Electricity to operate small wireless facility, if not
purchased directly from utility (i) $73 per radio node less than or equal to 100
max watts; (ii) $182 per radio node over 100
max watts; actual costs of electricity, if the
actual costs exceed the amount in item (i) or (ii)
Delay Penalty 2 times total permit fee
Temporary No Parking Signs (for ROW permit work) Deposit of $25/sign (minimum $100 per permit
Temporary Private Use of Public Property $350
Dewatering Permit
Administrative Fee (all permits) $250
Discharge to Sanitary Sewer Charge based on duration/volume of discharge
Erosion Control Permit
Application and Review – single family $200
Application and Review – other applicants $450
Deposit – single family $1,500
Deposit – other applicants $3,000 per acre (min. $1,500)
FIRE DEPARTMENT
False Fire Alarm Residential Commercial
1st offense $0 $0
2nd offense in same year $100 $100
3rd offense in same year $150 $200
4th offense in same year $200 $300
5th offense in same year $200 $400
Each subsequent in same year $200 $100 increase
Fireworks Display Permit Actual costs incurred
Service Fees
Service Fee for fully-equipped & staffed vehicles $500 per hour for a ladder truck
$325 per hour for a full-size fire truck
$255 per hour for a rescue unit
Service Fee of a Chief Officer $100 per hour
After Hours Inspections $65 per hour (minimum 2 hrs.)
Tent Permit
Tent over 200 sq. ft. $75
Canopy over 400 sq. ft. $75
INSPECTIONS DEPARTMENT
Building Demolition Deposit
1 & 2 Family Residential & Accessory Structures $2,500
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 7
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
All Other Buildings $5,000
Building Demolition Permit
1 & 2 Family Residential & Accessory Structures $180
All Other Buildings $300
Building Moving Permit $500
Business Licenses
Billboards $165 $170 per billboard
Commercial Entertainment $285 $290
Courtesy Bench $60 $65
Dog Kennel $165
Environmental Emissions $330 $340
Massage Therapy
Massage Therapy Establishment $370 $375
Massage Therapy License $120 $125
Therapists holding a Massage Therapy Establishment
License
$35
Pawnbroker
License Fee $2,000
Per Transaction Fee $2
Investigation Fee $1,000
Penalty $50 per day
Sexually Oriented Business
Investigation Fee (High Impact) $500
High Impact $4,500
Limited Impact $125
Tobacco Products & Related Device Sales $590 $600
Vehicle Parking Facilities
Enclosed Parking $245
Parking Ramp $195
Tanning Bed Facility $300
Certificate of Occupancy
For each condominium unit completed after building
occupancy
$100
Change of Use (does not apply to 1 & 2 family dwellings)
Up to 5,000 sq ft $450 $500
5,001 to 25,000 sq ft $750 $800
25,001 to 75,000 sq ft $1,000 $1,200
75,001 to 100,000 sq ft $1,400 $1,600
100,000 to 200,000 sq ft $1,700 $2,000
above 200,000 sq ft $2,200 $2,500
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy – Single Family
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy – All other
occupancies
$85 $90
$150
Certificate of Property Maintenance
Change in Ownership
Condominium Unit $150 $155
Duplex (2 Family dwellings) $325 $335
Multi-Family (apartment) Buildings $255 $300 per building + $15 $17 per unit
Single Family Dwellings $235
All Other Buildings:
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 8
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Up to 5,000 sq ft $450 $500
5,001 to 25,000 sq ft $750 $800
25,001 to 75,000 sq ft $1,000 $1,200
75,001 to 100,000 sq ft $1,400 $1,600
100,000 to 200,000 sq. ft $1,700 $2,000
above 200,000 sq. ft $2,200 $2,500
Temporary Certificate of Property Maintenance
SF Residential $85 $90
All others $200 $250
Certificate of Property Maintenance Extension $60 $65
Construction Permits (building, electrical, fire protection,
mechanical, plumbing, pools, utilities)
Building and Fire Protection Permits Valuation
Up to $500 Base Fee $65
$500.01 to $2,000.00 Base Fee $65 + $2 for each additional
(or fraction thereof) $100 over $500.01
Construction Permits (cont.)
$2,000.01 to $25,000.00 Base Fee $95 + $15 for each additional
(or fraction thereof)
$1,000 over $2,000.01
$25,000.01 to $50,000.00 Base Fee $440 + $10 for each additional
(or fraction thereof)
$1,000 over $25,000.01
$50,000.01 to $100,000.00 Base Fee $690 + $7 for each additional
(or fraction thereof)
$1,000 over $50,000.01
$100,000.01 to $500,000.00 Base Fee $1,040 + $6 for each
additional (or fraction thereof)
$1,000 over $100.000.01
$500,000.01 to $1,000,000.00 Base Fee $3,440 + $5 $5.50 for each
Additional (or fraction thereof)
$1,000 over $500,000.01
$1,000,000.01 and up Base Fee $5,940 $6,190 + $4.50 $5.00 for each
additional (or fraction thereof)
$1,000 over $1,000,000.01
Single Family Residential Exceptions:
Reroofing – asphalt shingled, sloped roofs only
House or House and Garage $140 $145
Garage Only $70 $75
Residing
House or House and Garage $140 $145
Garage Only $70 $75
Building Mounted Photovoltaic Panels $250
Electrical Permit
Installation, Replacement, Repair $60 $65 + 1.75% of job valuation
Installation of traffic signals per location $150
Single family, one appliance $60 $65
ISTS Permit
(sewage treatment system install or repair) $125
Mechanical Permit
Installation, Replacement, Repair $60 $65 + 1.75% of job valuation
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 9
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Single Family Exceptions:
Replace furnace, boiler or furnace/AC $70 $75
Install single fuel burning appliance with piping $70 $75
Install, replace or repair single mechanical appliance $60 $65
Plumbing Permit
Installation, Replacement, Repair $60 $65 + 1.75% of job valuation
Single Family Exceptions:
Repair/replace single plumbing fixture $60 $65
Private Swimming Pool Permit Building permit fees apply
Public Swimming Pool Permit Building permit fees apply
Sewer & Water Permit (all underground private utilities)
Installation, Replacement, Repair $60 $65 + 1.75% of job valuation
Single Family Exceptions:
Replace/repair sewer or water service $95 $100
Water Access Charge $750 $800 per SAC unit charged on new or
enlarged water services.
Competency Exams Fees
Mechanical per test $30
Renewal - 3 year Mechanical $30
Contractor Licenses
Mechanical $105
Solid Waste $210
Tree Maintenance $100
Dog Licenses
1 year $25
2 year $40
3 year $50
Potentially Dangerous Dog License – 1 year $100
Dangerous Dog License – 1 year $250
Interim License $15
Off-Leash Dog Area Permit (non-resident) $55
Penalty for no license $40
Inspections
After Hours Inspections $250 plus $75 $90 per hour (minimum 2 hrs.)
after the first hour
Installation of permanent sign w/footing inspection Based on valuation using building
permit table
Re-Inspection Fee (after correction notice issued and has
not been corrected within 2 subsequent inspections) $130
Insurance Requirements A minimum of:
Circus $1,000,000 General Liability
Commercial Entertainment $1,000,000 General Liability
Mechanical Contractors $1,000,000 General Liability
Solid Waste $1,000,000 General Liability
Tree Maintenance & Removal $1,000,000 General Liability
Vehicle Parking Facility $1,000,000 General Liability
ISTS Permit
Sewage treatment system install or repair $125
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 10
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
License Fees - Other
Investigation Fee $300 per establishment requiring a business lice
Late Fee 25% of license fee (minimum $50)
License Reinstatement Fee $250
Transfer of License (new ownership) $75
Plan Review - 50% of amount due at time of application.
Exception: Single Family Residential additions,
accessory structures and remodels.
Building Permits 65% of Permit Fee
Repetitive Building 25% of Permit Fee for Duplicate Structure
Electrical Permits 35% of Permit Fee
Mechanical Permits 35% of Permit Fee
Plumbing Permits 35% of Permit Fee
Sewer & Water Permits 35% of Permit Fee
Single Family Interior Remodel Permits 35% of Permit Fee
Rental Housing License
Condominium/Townhouse/Cooperative $95 $100 per unit
Duplex both sides non-owner occupied $180 $185 per duplex
Housing Authority owned single family dwelling units $15 per unit
Multiple Family
Per Building $240 $250
Per Unit $16 $17
Single Family Unit $130 $135 per dwelling unit
Temporary Noise Permit $70
Temporary Use Permits
Amusement Rides, Carnivals & Circuses $260
Commercial Film Production Application $100
Petting Zoos $60
Temporary Outdoor Retail Sales $110
Vehicle Decals
Solid Waste $25 $26
Tree Maintenance & Removal $10
OPERATIONS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
Permit to Exceed Vehicle Weight Limitations (MSC) $50 each
Winter Parking Permit
Caregiver parking $25
No off-street parking available No Charge
Off-street parking available $125
POLICE DEPARTMENT
Animals
Animal Impound
Initial impoundment $40
2nd offense w/in year $60
3rd offense w/in year $85
4th offense w/in year $110
Boarding Per Day $30
Dangerous Dog Annual Review Hearing $250
Potentially Dangerous Dog Annual Review Hearing $250
Criminal Background Investigation
Volunteers & Employees $5
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 11
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
False Alarm (Police) Residential Commercial
1st offense $0 $0
2nd offense in same year $100 $100
3rd offense in same year $100 $125
4th offense in same year $100 $150
5th offense in same year $100 $175
Each subsequent in same year $100 $25 increase
Late payment fee 10%
Solicitor/Peddler Registration $150
Lost ID Replacement Fee $25
Vehicle Forfeiture
Administrative fee in certain vehicle forfeiture cases $250
Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2019.
First Reading October 15, 2018
Second Reading November 5, 2018
Date of Publication November 15, 2018
Date Ordinance takes effect January 1, 2019
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council November 5, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest: Approved as to form and execution:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk Soren Mattick, City Attorney
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 6c) Page 12
Title: Public hearing to consider first reading of 2019 fee ordinance
Summary
Ordinance No. _____-18
An ordinance adopting fees called for
by ordinance for calendar year 2019
This ordinance sets 2019 fees as outlined in Appendix A of the City Code of Ordinances. The fee
ordinance is modified to reflect the cost of providing services and is completed each year to
determine what, if any, fees require adjustment. This ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2019.
Adopted by the City Council November 5, 2018
Jake Spano /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: November 15, 2018
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Action agenda item: 8a
Executive summary
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution accepting the project report, establishing
Improvement Project No. 4019-1100, approving layout 1 and authorizing a contract with
Bolton and Menk, Inc. for the design of final plans.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to continue to pursue the proposed street
rehabilitation project scope identified in this report?
Summary: In 2019, road improvements are proposed on Cedar Lake Road between Kentucky
Avenue and Quentin Avenue. This road is classified as an Urban Minor Arterial and is
designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) road which makes it eligible for state funding (gas
tax dollars).
In order to qualify for funding, the road needs to be constructed to state aid standards. Given
work load demands, the city engaged the consulting firm, Bolton & Menk, Inc., to complete the
traffic study and preliminary design of Cedar Lake Road.
The scope of the city’s project currently includes:
•Replacement of all pavement between Kentucky Avenue and Quentin Avenue
•Bike facility
•Sidewalk construction
•Streetlight replacement
•Signal rehabilitation (Park Place Boulevard)
•Removal of the existing signal at Zarthan and construction of a new roundabout.
•Watermain replacement between Kentucky Avenue and Zarthan Avenue.
•Miscellaneous utility rehabilitation
Financial or budget considerations: The engineer’s estimate for this project is $8,607,391.
Construction - $7,349,350, Engineering and Administration - $1,258,041. This project is
included in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2019. Funding will be provided by a
combination of MSA, Utility Funds, and General Obligation Bonds (Sidewalks and bikeways).
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
Resolution
Location map
Preliminary layouts available at: www.stlouispark.org/cedar-lake-road
Resident petition
Resident comments
Prepared by: Joseph Shamla, Sr. Engineering Project Manager
Reviewed by: Debra Heiser, Engineering Director
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 2
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
Discussion
Background: In 2019, Cedar Lake Road between Kentucky Avenue and Quentin Avenue is
proposed to be rehabilitated. This road is an Urban Minor Arterial, and approximately 12,500
vehicles per day use the corridor. It is designated as a Municipal State Aid (MSA) road which
makes it eligible for state gas tax funds. In order to qualify for funding, the road needs to be
constructed to state aid standards. Cedar Lake Road was last reconstructed in the 1950’s, with a
mill and overlay in the 1990s. In order to ensure that the improved Cedar Lake Road will meet
the needs of the City for another 50 years, staff is taking a look at existing and future
transportation needs of the corridor.
Street rehabilitation: Operations and Engineering Dept. staff collaborated to determine the
pavement technique recommended for Cedar Lake Road. After reviewing the condition of the
road, staff recommends that the city remove and replace all pavement. Retaining walls in poor
condition will also be replaced.
The curb on the north side of the road is in good condition and is proposed to be saved. The
curb on the south side of the road will be removed and replaced between Kentucky Avenue and
Zarthan Avenue due to watermain replacement. All curb ramps within the corridor will be
upgraded to meet the requirements of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Cedar Lake Road design: A corridor study was completed to guide the design of Cedar Lake
Road. Using existing and forecasted traffic data and input from residents, the consultant
developed 2 layouts for the city council’s consideration. The 2030 Comprehensive Plan
designated Cedar Lake Road as a 3-lane road section where the 2-lane road is located today.
The current corridor study indicates that the 3-lane section is not necessary for safety or traffic
flow. In addition, adding a third lane would require a significant amount of right of way
acquisition.
The Connect the Park plan designates a bike facility on Cedar Lake Road. In addition, a bike
facility is also proposed on Edgewood Drive, which intersects with Cedar Lake Road. The
Edgewood Drive bike facility will be designed by the same consultant designing the pedestrian
bridge over the railroad by Peter Hobart School. The final plans for the Cedar Lake Road project
will be developed in close collaboration with the 2019 Connect the Park bridge project and the
2019 Pavement Management project.
Our consulting firm, Bolton & Menk, completed a parking study to understand the extent and
frequency of on-street parking in the corridor. They visited the site a total of 27 times to
determine how many parking stalls were being utilized on Cedar Lake Road. The counts were
completed at different times of the day, at night, and on weekends to get an accurate parking
analysis. The parking counts show 4 or less cars parked along the entire corridor during 27 site
visits. The parking analysis is available on the website at: www.stlouispark.org/cedar-lake-road
Sidewalks: Existing sidewalks throughout the corridor will be repaired as needed. In addition, all
pedestrian ramps will be upgraded to meet the requirements of ADA.
There are two Connect the Park sidewalk segments near Cedar Lake Road proposed to be
constructed with this project. The first segment is on the west side of Zarthan Avenue between
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 3
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
W. 16th Street and Cedar Lake Road. The other segment is located on the south side of Cedar
Lake Road between Zarthan Avenue and the east entrance into Sunset Ridge.
Staff is recommending that the following sidewalks be installed as a part of this project to close
gaps in the sidewalk network:
• Cedar Lake Road (south side): a new sidewalk between Kentucky Avenue and Zarthan
Avenue along the south side of Cedar Lake Road. This section of sidewalk is a gap in the
community sidewalk network. Adding this section of sidewalk will make it safer and
more comfortable for residents to walk along Cedar Lake Road to access destinations,
including bus stops, parks, schools, and commercial centers. In addition there are
crosswalk enhancements being installed at intersections, discussed in the next section.
Providing a sidewalk on both sides of the street will guide walkers to these improved
crossings.
• Ridge Drive: a new sidewalk is proposed to be installed along Ridge Drive to connect the
multi-family housing to the Cedar Lake Road community sidewalk. Adding this section
of sidewalk will make it more comfortable for residents to walk to Cedar Lake Road,
accessing destinations, including bus stops, parks, schools, and commercial centers.
Intersection traffic control: Based on the results of the traffic study, staff is recommending the
following intersection modifications.
A. Rehabilitation of the signal system at Park Place Boulevard.
Due to the amount of traffic at the intersection of Park Place Boulevard and Cedar Lake
Road, the signal would need to be replaced with a 2 x 2 roundabout. A 2 x 2 roundabout
has two lanes of traffic approaching the intersection in each direction. For reference,
the roundabouts at Louisiana Avenue and Highway 7 are each 2 x 1 roundabouts.
Why is a signal recommended at Park Place Boulevard?
1. The current signal operates efficiently with little vehicle delay.
2. There would be an increase to vehicle delay with a 2 x 2 roundabout at this
intersection, increasing carbon emissions.
3. MnDOT’s roundabout study completed in 2017 reported a 146% increase in crashes
from the conversion of a signalized intersection to a 2 x 2 roundabout.
4. The conversion to a roundabout at this intersection would cost significantly more
than the rehabilitation of the signal.
B. Removal of the signal at Zarthan Avenue – Installation of a roundabout.
Advantages of the roundabout at this intersection:
1. Vehicle delay will be reduced at the intersection which will result in a reduction of
carbon emissions. On average, each car which travels through the intersection will
save 3.25 seconds. Total idle time reduced at the intersection on an average day is
almost 15 hours, saving residents time, money and is better for the environment.
2. MnDOT conducted a study of 144 roundabouts in Minnesota in 2017. According to
their study the switch from a traffic signal to a single lane roundabout results in an
average of 83% reduction in serious injury crashes along with a 27% reduction in
total crashes.
3. Pedestrians will only cross one lane of traffic at a time.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 4
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
4. Vehicles will need to slow down through the roundabout making it safer for
pedestrians.
5. A single lane roundabout has fewer pedestrian conflict points than a traffic signal.
Please refer to diagram below to visualize the conflict points for each intersection.
C. Pedestrian crossing improvements:
1. Dakota Avenue: A rapid flashing beacon is proposed at the intersection of Dakota
Avenue and Cedar Lake Road. This traffic control device flashes to let drivers know
that a pedestrian is ready to cross. This location was chosen to provide a connection
between the Elliot neighborhood and the bike / pedestrian bridge proposed on
Edgewood Drive to cross the railroad tracks by Peter Hobart School.
2. Hampshire Avenue: A rapid flashing beacon is also proposed at the intersection of
Hampshire Avenue and Cedar Lake Road. This location has an existing crosswalk.
Pedestrian and bicycles within a roundabout
A bicyclist has a two different options when entering a roundabout at Zarthan Avenue.
• Take a ramp to a multi-use trail through the roundabout and back to the bike facility on
the other side of the roundabout, or
• Use the drive lane.
The designated speed for a roundabout is typically 15 mph. Most experienced on road bikers
can maintain that speed consistently and will use the drive lane to move through the
intersection. Less confident bikers can use the ramp to the multi-use trail to go through the
intersection.
Pedestrians will cross the roundabout at crosswalks which are offset from the roundabout by
about 20 feet. This allows reaction time and space for a driver to stop for a pedestrian. Each leg
of the roundabout has a splitter island to allow pedestrians to cross one lane of traffic at a time.
In addition to the benefits discussed above, there are the following benefits of the roundabout
versus a traffic signal for pedestrians:
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 5
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
• Vehicles need to slow down to maneuver through a roundabout where they may speed
up if the light is turning red.
• The first thing that a driver sees at a roundabout is the crosswalk. Drivers can focus on
pedestrians at the crosswalk, then proceed to looking for an opening to take a right to
enter the roundabout. At a signal, a driver is looking at: pedestrians, openings in traffic
to turn left or right, other vehicles turning left or right, and the current color of the
signal light.
• At the crosswalk, pedestrians only have to look at drivers coming from one direction
and always have priority.
Financial consideration: Funding will be provided through a number of sources. Please see
table below to see how this project will be funded.
Construction
cost
Contingency
(15%) Engineering Total
Municipal State Aid (MSA) $2,896,430 $434,465 $724,108 $4,055,002
Watermain $1,325,000 $198,750 $132,500 $1,656,250
Sanitary Sewer $42,857 $6,429 $4,286 $53,571
Storm Water Utility $421,430 $63,215 $42,143 $526,788
Sidewalk gap (GO Bonds) $298,575 $44,786 $74,644 $418,005
Connect the Park (GO Bonds) $795,720 $119,358 $198,930 $1,114,008
Trail replacement (MSA) $135,720 $20,358 $33,930 $190,008
Street lighting (MSA) $367,857 $55,179 $36,786 $459,821
Upgrade rail crossing (MSA) $107,150 $16,073 $10,715 $133,938
Total $6,390,739 $958,611 $1,258,041 $8,607,391
Public feedback: Three public meetings were held for this project. The first meeting was to
collect information and comments prior to starting the preliminary design. The next meeting
was to provide layouts based on the feedback from the first meeting and the results of the
corridor study. The third meeting was a public hearing which provided residents the
opportunity to address the City Council.
Staff has been informed of 3 main concerns for Cedar Lake Road.
• Parking: A total of 29 residents informed us that losing parking was an issue. Most of
the response regarding parking was provided on the petition which is attached to this
report. The residents who live on Cedar Lake Road have informed us that they like
convenience of some parking for guests or for deliveries.
• Bicycle facility: A total of 27 people signed the petition that they did not want a bike
facility on Cedar Lake Road.
• New sidewalk: In addition, there are 25 people who signed the petition that they did not
want sidewalk on the south side of Cedar Lake Road.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 6
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
Layouts:
The consultant has developed two layouts for consideration based on feedback from the public.
The difference between the two layouts is that Layout 1 has 15 parking stalls on Cedar Lake
Road and Layout 2 has no parking on Cedar Lake Road. In addition, Layout 1 has a cycle track on
the south side of Cedar Lake Road and Layout 2 has a buffered bike lane. The cycle track is 5
feet in width and is located behind a drive over style curb. The bike lane is 5 feet in width and
has a buffer of 1.5 feet. In both layouts, a bike lane will be installed on the north side of Cedar
Lake Road. The reason a bike lane was chosen for the north side of Cedar Lake Road is because
the existing curb line is not being replaced and it would cost significantly more to change the
north side of the road to a cycle track.
The removal of parking on Cedar Lake Road will provide more green space which also decreases
the amount of directly connected impervious surface, reducing runoff to our lakes, ponds and
streams.
Staff recommendation:
Staff has reviewed both layouts and believes that either layout will provide a safe corridor for
pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles.
Staff is recommending Layout 1 for approval by the city council which includes 15 parking stalls
on Cedar Lake Road. This option provides on-street parking within 200 linear feet of each
residential property. The on-street parking may be on Cedar Lake Road or a side street. The
feedback from residents during the public process was that they were concerned about losing
all of the parking on Cedar Lake Road.
The proposed Connect the Park segments are included in both layouts and are recommended
to be constructed with this project. This includes:
• A bike facility from Kentucky Avenue to Quentin Avenue.
• Sidewalk on the west side of Zarthan Avenue from 16th Street to Cedar Lake Road
• Sidewalk on the south side of Cedar Lake Road from Zarthan Avenue to the existing
sidewalk near Ridge Drive
Staff is recommending that the following sidewalks be installed as a part of this project to close
gaps in the sidewalk network, making it safer and more comfortable for residents to walk along
Cedar Lake Road to access destinations, including bus stops, parks, schools, and commercial
centers:
• Cedar Lake Road (south side): a new sidewalk between Kentucky Avenue and Zarthan
Avenue along the south side of Cedar Lake Road. This section of sidewalk is a gap in the
community sidewalk network. Also, providing a sidewalk on both sides of the street will
guide walkers to improved pedestrian crossings.
• Ridge Drive: a new sidewalk is proposed to be installed along Ridge Drive to connect the
multi-family housing to the Cedar Lake Road community sidewalk.
Consulting Contract Amendment:
Bolton & Menk, Inc. was awarded the original contract for this project on June 18, 2018 for
$248,126. This contract was for preliminary design (30% plans) and did not include final design
services. The reason for not including final design with the original contract is due to not having
a defined scope of work. At the time of the original contract we did not know if the third traffic
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 7
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
lane was going to be necessary or how the project may change due to public input. Approval of
the preliminary layout defines the project scope. The consultant has provided amendment to
the contract to provide consultant services through final design. Please see contract total
below.
AMOUNT
Original Contract $248,126
Amendment #1 $576,150
Total Contract Amount $824,276
The estimated construction cost for this project is $6,390,739. The contract for design services
with this amendment will be 13% of the estimated construction cost. Industry standard for
engineering costs on construction projects can range from 20% to 35% depending on the
complexity of the project. This includes design and construction services. The cost for
construction services is dependent on the final design and will be determined when it is
complete.
Staff has a high expectation from the consultant for resident support and responsiveness. The
consultant will be meeting with individual property owners to address final design questions.
Cedar Lake Road is a Municipal State Aid street, there are many facets of the project that will
require coordination with MnDOT, utility companies, and businesses. As a result, we believe
that the contract cost is consistent with the scope and demands of this project.
Proposed schedule: In order to ensure there is enough time to construct the improvements in
2019, staff needs direction on which layout should proceed to final design. A significant amount
of work is required to complete the final plans, acquire easements, and bid the project prior to
the start of the 2019 construction season.
The following is the proposed schedule:
60 percent plans November 2018
90 percent design open house
Approve plans and specs and authorize ad for bid
Award contract
January 2019
January 22, 2019
March 4, 2019
Construction April – Nov 2019
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Page 8
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100
Resolution No. 18-____
Resolution accepting the project report,
Establishing improvement project no. 4019-1100,
Approving layout 1 and authorizing a contract with
Bolton & menk, inc for the design of final plans
Whereas, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the
Project Engineer related to the Municipal State Aid Project - Cedar Lake Road – Project No.
4019-1100:
Now therefore be it resolved by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota,
that:
1. The Project Report regarding Project No. 4019-1100 is hereby accepted.
2. Such improvements as proposed are necessary, cost effective, and feasible as detailed in
the Project Report.
3. The proposed preliminary Layout 1 is hereby approved.
4. An amendment to the preliminary design contract of $576,150 with Bolton and Menk, Inc. is
approved for a total contract amount of $824,276.
Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager
Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk
?úA@
%&e(
14th Street West
26th Street Wes t
Par k woodsRoadCedarLakeR oadLouisianaAvenueSouthPark Place BoulevardP a r k d a le
D
r iv e
Franklin AvenueWest
Ga m b le Drive
25th
Street Wes t
Wayzata
B
oulevard
Douglas Avenue
WebsterAvenueSouthF orest RoadZarthanAvenue SouthHampshireAvenueSouth28th Street West ParklandsRoad
GeorgiaAvenueSouthC eda r wood
R
oadKentucky Avenue South27th Street West
Kentucky
L
a
n
e18th Street West
25 1/2 Street West
22nd Street West
24th Street W
e
st
IdahoAvenueSouthFloridaAvenueSouthUticaAvenueSouthDakotaAvenueSouthEliot View RoadAvondaleRoad
Fairlawn WayMontereyAvenueSouthQuentinAvenueSouthRaleighAvenueSouthSalemAvenueSouthToledoAvenueSouthMarylandAvenueSouthNevadaAvenueSouthLouisiana C
ourtYosemiteAvenueSouthStateHighway100FrontageRoadNatchezAvenueSouthSunsetRid g e
23 rd S tre e tWestBarry Street
VernonAvenueSouthXenwoodAvenueSouth16th Street West
EdgewoodAvenueSouthAlabama Avenue SouthColoradoAvenueSouthKiplingAvenueSouthJerseyAvenueSouthLynn Avenue SouthRidge DriveMap Document: \\arcserver1\GIS\STLP\C18116699\ESRI\Maps\STLP_8X11L_CedarLakeProject.mxd | Date Saved: 8/24/2018 1:46:46 PMCedar Lake Road
Project Area
0 0.25MilesSource: Hennepin County, MnGeo
Cedar Lake Road
City of St. Louis Park
Project Area Map
August 2018
Legend !I
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 9
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100Page 10
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100Page 11
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100Page 12
Public Open House #1 – July 25, 2018
2019 Cedar Lake Rd Improvements
Summary of Public Input Received
St. Louis Park Neighborhood Meeting – 7/25/18
2019 Cedar Lake Road Improvements
General comments before & after the presentation
•Lanes in both directions desired under bridge
5912 Cedar Lake Rd
•Can bus stop at Zarthan be relocated? Very close to unique driveway.
•Pulling in driveway can be challenging so close to signal
•Worried about access during construction. Very difficult access
6410 Cedar Lake Rd
•Does not want signal at Edgewood
6610 Cedar Lake Rd
•Concerned with parking
•Wants signal at Cedar Lake Rd
•Water shutoff is 10’ behind retaining wall
•Only use parking on occasion
•Can cycle track only be placed on south side? Makes bus stops difficult with nowhere for
pedestrians to wait
•Prefers cycle track over bike lanes
•Concerned about people not stopping for peds at Hampshire
6701 Cedar Lake Road
•Concerned about parking and having enough room for sidewalk
•Only has single car garage and uses onstreet parking for other vehicle
6805 Cedar Lake Road
•Would like to see alternating block single lane of parking option
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 13
Public Open House #1 – July 25, 2018
2019 Cedar Lake Rd Improvements
Q&A, comments during the presentation
Q: Why is the watermain being replaced? Wasn’t some replaced not that long ago?
A: Watermain replacement is due to age. A small section was replaced on CLR more
recently and that section will not be replaced.
Q: What happens if our curb stop is in or near a retaining wall?
A: Retaining walls may need to be removed and reinstalled for water and sewer service
work. Each situation is unique. Property owners are encouraged to contact project team
if they foresee this issue or would like to discuss specific situations.
Comment: A resident spoke in favor of sidewalk on west side of Zarthan
Comment: Concerns expressed about bicyclists not staying with in bike lanes. They tend to
spread out and bike in drive lanes.
Comment: Corridor is used by cycling club
Comment: Concerns about lack of space for a new sidewalk on south side of Cedar Lake Road.
There is concern that the sidewalk will be too close to homes.
Q: Is it possible for parking to remain in place and place a slotted hourly restriction that the
bikers can use during rush hour?
A: We can consider that. It was also presented that Cedar Lake Road was identified in the
Connect the Park vision to have a dedicated bikeway installed.
Q: Is the pedestrian crossing to the east of Ridge St going to be reinstalled? That crossing is a
problem area
A: The project team is reviewing that crossing and potential relocation of bus stops to promote
crossing at other locations.
Comment: Traffic gaps along Cedar Lake Road can be too short people to pull out of driveways
Q: Was an on street cycle track considered?
A: Yes, it was and is. Typically we see those application as retrofits though, and in in this case
given the watermain work there is an opportunity to move the curb wherever we would
like it to be. Because the lane delineators can be somewhat of a nuisance for plowing, so
focus was shifted to an off-street cycle track above/behind the new curb.
Q: Will any work happen on the sidewalk on the north side?
A: To remain cost effective, our initial goal is to save the north sidewalk and curb except for
spot replacements due to condition and water service replacements. Once those are
identified though, the north curb and sidewalk will be evaluated to see if it should stay
or go in terms of what is most cost effective.
Q: Will trees be impacted, and if they are, will homeowners have a say in the new trees?
A: Homeowner will have some say in tree type if one is replaced in their yard. The project team
/ City engineering staff will coordinate with City forester and homeowners. Tree
replacement happens in the spring of the following year.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 14
Public Open House #1 – July 25, 2018
2019 Cedar Lake Rd Improvements
Comment: Preference to cycle track, removes bicycles from traffic land and can be used with
kids. Commenter is confident cyclists will not use bike lanes anyway and parents will not
let kids bike in bike lane
Q: How will access work with water trenches?
A: Special accommodations will be considered for elderly and disabled even when trench is in
front of house. Let project staff know and we will work each resident to accommodate
them. Trenches will be filled each night. Temporary access restrictions will occur during
work hours.
Q: Left turns into Lifetime Fitness can be difficult. Is this being considered?
A: Yes, it is. Cameras were recently installed and data collected at this location.
Comment: Pedestrian crossing at Hampshire is difficult. It is signed for motorists to stop for
pedestrians, but vehicles still don’t stop
Comment: Busses have a difficult left turn at Edgewood
Q: Why does the sidewalk need to be 6 feet behind the curb? Why can’t the sidewalk be
installed at the back of curb like on Louisiana Ave? If the sidewalk is that far back it
would run into my retaining wall. Will it impact trees?
A: The 6 feet of green space between the curb and sidewalk is desirable for safety of
pedestrians and to be able to plant boulevard trees. The retaining wall could possibly be
avoided if that is needed or the wall would be removed and replaced behind the
sidewalk. The City will attempt to route sidewalk around trees.
Q: What is being installed on Lake St for bicyclists?
A: Pavement markings called sharrows and signs, indicating the road is shared between
cyclists and motorists.
Q: Will we know in advance if our driveway will be blocked off and who do we hear it from
or who do we contact?
A: There will be continuous communication throughout the construction process including
door-to-door flyers, weekly email updates, monthly newsletters, and most importantly
there will be an on-site observer who will be in the neighborhood while construction is
occurring. All residents will have the on-site observer’s phone number to contact about
access concerns and project questions or updates.
Q: How does yard waste, garbage cans, and recycling work during construction?
A: It is the Contractor’s responsibility to make sure either the collection trucks can access
the cans at end of your driveway or they will pull the cans to a nearby location where
the truck will be able to access the cans and then bring them back to your driveway.
Residents just need to put there cans in their normal location on pick up days.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 15
Public Open House #2 – September 12, 2018
2019 Cedar Lake Road Improvements
Summary of Public Input Received
St. Louis Park Neighborhood Meeting 2 – 9/12/18
2019 Cedar Lake Road Improvements
General
•6610 Cedar Lake Road agrees something needs to be done with the roadway due to its
poor condition.
•6712 Cedar Lake Road resident provided the attached tabulation of resident feedback.
This resident mentioned she went door to door along Cedar Lake Road and recorded
each homeowner’s feedback regarding the project criteria.
Parking
•A resident commented that there is not much street parking available at Hampshire due
to use by those that live in the apartments.
•6712 Cedar Lake Road resident expressed significant concern about loss of parking.
Intersections / Traffic Safety
Q: Can Alabama and 16th be made into a 4-way stop? It is already stop controlled in one
direction.
A: The project team will review and consider this.
•The improved crossing and rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB) shown at the
intersection with Dakota Ave is at a good location.
•5912 Cedar Lake Road – Resident is ok with proposed right-in, right-out access as shown
due to proposed roundabout. This resident likes the proposed roundabout at the
intersection as the resident always is in fear of being rear-ended going into their
driveway under current conditions. If possible would like their bushes acting as a street
buffer and the turnaround in the driveway replaced due to their necessary removal.
Street Lighting
•Two residents requested more lighting at the Hwy 100 underpass, commenting that it is
very dark in that area and sometimes don’t feel safe. Engineer Shamla noted this is
something that may be added to the project design.
Bus Stops
•6712 Cedar Lake Road – Resident does not like limestone blocks as benches at bus
stops. Aestheitcally not attractive. Also not functional because they are too low. It can
be challenging for some users to get up from them because they are too low.
•5912 Cedar Lake Road – Resident would like to see bus stop at Zarthan relocated.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 16
Public Open House #2 – September 12, 2018
2019 Cedar Lake Road Improvements
Bicycle Facility
•6610 Cedar Lake Road – Were bicycle counts completed? Resident does not see need
for a bicycle facility beyond how the existing parking lanes function. City should consider
time restrictions on parking use to allow bicyclists to use parking lanes rather than a
dedicated bicycle facility.
•A resident provided a comment card noting they had wished they had been at the first
meeting. They also noted the liked the idea of boulevards because it is SO important for
snow removal.
Sidewalks / Pedestrian Traffic
•6610 Cedar Lake Road – Resident would rather see sidewalks replaced in full on both
sides of the roadway rather than patch work on the north side and new sidewalk on the
south side.
Utilities
Q: Can the overhead power lines be buried as part of the project?
A: This is not in the scope of the project currently, and is generally very expensive to u
undertake. Therefore, it is possible but unlikely to occur with the project.
•6610 Cedar Lake Road – Resident is ok with impacts to his retaining wall for water
service replacement. Resident understands wall replacement would be completed by
the City if it is impacted.
Trees
•1632 Zarthan Ave likes the boulevard between the sidewalk and the road and said they
are okay with the tree in front of their home being removed for a boulevard to be
installed.
Construction Phase
Q: Zarthan currently has time restrictions on when parking is allowed. During construction,
I understand parking will not be allowed at least on the west side of the street when the
new curb and sidewalk is installed. Could the time restrictions be temporarily taken off
on the east side to allow parking there during construction?
A: Potentially yes, and similar temporary allowances have been made during construction.
The project team and City will review this possibility.
Q: What will the City do for restoration of yards?
A: Disturbed areas will be restored with topsoil sod, typically. If residents desire, the City
can leave out topsoil and/or sod, or the City could install mulch for residents if they
request it in lieu of sod.
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 17
I attended the last Cedar Lake
Road Open House on July 25th
A. Yes
B. No (but I heard they had
cookies and wish I would
have been there)A.B.
6
3
POLL QUESTION POLL QUESTION
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 18
I reside…
A. On Cedar Lake Road
B. On a roadway within 6 blocks of Cedar Lake
Road
C. Elsewhere in St. Louis Park
D. Outside of St. Louis Park but work or own a
business near Cedar Lake Road
E. Outside of St. Louis Park but heard the
cookies last time were amazing!
A.B.C.D.E.
5
4
00
1
POLL QUESTION POLL QUESTION
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 19
Which two design constraints are most
important to you? (Pick two!)
A. Retaining some parking
B. Maximizing boulevard space for trees, lights,
signage, and snow storage
C. Maximizing bikeway buffers for safety
D. Off-street bicycle facility for less advanced users
E. On-street bicycle facility for advanced users
F. Minimizing tree losses
G. Minimizing private property impacts
POLL QUESTION POLL QUESTION
7 votes
4 votes
1 vote
1 vote
0 votes
1 votes
7 votes
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 20
Which alternative best serves all ages,
and all abilities?
A. Alternative 1: EB cycle track, WB bike lane,
some parking, sidewalk on both sides
B. Alternative 2: Bike lanes, no parking,
sidewalk on both sides
A.B.
2
7
POLL QUESTION POLL QUESTION
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 21
Which alternative best allows for snow
storage and amenity space?
A. Alternative 1: EB cycle track, WB bike lane,
some parking, sidewalk on both sides
B. Alternative 2: Bike lanes, no parking,
sidewalk on both sides
A.B.
6
3
POLL QUESTION POLL QUESTION
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 22
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100Page 23
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100Page 24
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100Page 25
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100Page 26
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a) Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100Page 27
From:
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 6:15 PM
To: Joseph Shamla
Cc: mikewa@bolton‐menk.com; Tim Brausen
Subject: Cedar Lake Road Improvements | St. Louis Park, MN
Hi Joe,
I just wanted to drop you a note re the planned Cedar Lake Road improvements. I
live at 2275 Kentucky Lane, right off Cedar Lake Road.
At the outset, I want to say that I am very happy to see sidewalks going in on the
south side of Cedar Lake Road and hope sidewalks will be coming to Kentucky Lane
as well. I love SLP, but our community really suffers from the lack of sidewalks and
inability to walk and connect to different neighborhoods. I understand this lack of
walkability and connectivity can be characteristic of first ring suburbs considered
mere "bedroom communities," but SLP is its own place and deserves the sense of
place conveyed by walkability and connectivity.
I would also like to cast my vote of sorts definitively for Layout #2. After reviewing
the parking study, it is difficult to understand why Layout #1 has been
recommended to the Council. Existing parking is vastly underused according to the
study, and--given the great toll that free parking has exacted on cities in general
and the fact that encouraging automobile use really cuts against walkability and
cycling--I find it difficult to understand how this recommendation was reached. The
conclusions reached by Bolton Menk in the parking study also seem to support
Layout #2 over Layout #1. No explanation for the recommendation was really
provided last night, although I understand that was likely due to lack of time.
Cedar Lake Road, although a somewhat busy street, remains a beautiful, undulating
thoroughfare. I believe it would be far better to replace the parking spaces that
aren't needed with boulevard trees that will bestow environmental, aesthetic, and
protective benefits on the community--i.e., boulevard tree are more likely to
protect pedestrians and cyclists from automobile traffic than an empty parking
space. I was talking with neighbors tonight who have lived on Kentucky Lane for
over 30 years, and, amazingly, even though I couldn't convince them that
sidewalks in general were a good idea, we agreed that trees were preferable to
parking spaces and that Layout #2 was preferable to Layout #1 (they were at the
Council meeting last night as well).
Please consider going with Layout #2 and bringing sidewalks to Kentucky Lane as
well. Regardless, best of luck with this and your other projects.
Respectfully,
2275 Kentucky Lane
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8a)
Title: Cedar Lake Road Improvement Project No. 4019-1100 Page 28
Meeting: City council
Meeting date: October 15, 2018
Action agenda item: 8b
Executive summary
Title: Gun shows at city facilities
Recommended action: Motion to adopt Resolution banning gun shows at city facilities.
Policy consideration: Does the city council wish to approve a policy that bans gun shows from
city facilities?
Summary: The city council discussed firearm sales on May 21, 2018 and July 23, 2018. On July
23, 2018 the city council directed staff create a policy banning gun shows from city facilities.
Gun shows are events where sellers sell firearms and related items at a venue for a temporary
period of time. Federally licensed dealers and unlicensed sellers can sell firearms during these
events. During a gun show, a federally licensed dealer uses the same procedures they would at
their storefront, including a criminal background check and registration of the sale. Unlicensed
sellers may sell to a private party at a gun show without any background checks or registration
of the sale, also known as the “gun show loophole.” That means that the private individuals
selling generally do not have to have a license to sell, meaning that the federally mandated
background checks for purchasers do not apply. However, sale of a pistol or assault rifle by a
private individual does require either that the buyer have a permit (which requires a
background check to obtain) or that the police department first verifies that the individual is
allowed to possess the firearm. Sale of a firearm other than a pistol or assault rifle at a gun
show does not require any type of background check or police review of the buyer.
The city has the ability to prohibit these events from city owned property. Note, the City of St.
Louis Park has not had a gun show on city owned property in the past.
The attached policy prohibits gun shows from city owned property in an effort to prevent the
“gun show loophole.”
Financial or budget considerations: None
Strategic priority consideration: Not applicable.
Supporting documents: Resolution
City Council Study Session Minutes May 21, 2018 (link)
City Council Study Session Minutes July 23, 2018 (link)
Prepared by: Maria Carrillo Perez, Management Assistant
Reviewed by: Soren Mattick, City Attorney
Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager
City council meeting of October 15, 2018 (Item No. 8b) Page 2
Title: Gun shows at city facilities
Resolution No. 18-___
Resolution Banning Gun Shows on City Facilities
Whereas, the city council wishes to adopt a policy banning gun shows on city facilities;
Now therefore be it resolved that the city council of the City of St. Louis Park approves
the following policy:
The City of St. Louis Park zoning ordinance governs the location of the sale of firearms.
Based on the conditions imposed by the zoning ordinance, there are not any city facilities that
would be allowed to host the sale of firearms. Accordingly, the City of St. Louis Park bans all gun
shows, swap meets and other like events that the main reasoning for the event is the
sale/exchange of firearms. The ban of the aforementioned events is in place for the Rec Center
Campus and at all other City of St. Louis Park facilities.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council October 15, 2018
Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager Jake Spano, Mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, City Clerk