The URL can be used to link to this page

270273 WHITE - CITV CLERI( COUI1C11 �� PINK - FINANGE � CANARV - DEPARTMENT GITY OF SAINT PAUL f .y' � BLUE - MAVOR File NO. . � uncil Resolution Presented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date RESOLVED, That upon recommendation of the Mayor and pursuant to Section 10.07.4 of the Charter of the City of Saint Paul, there is hereby transferred the following: From: General Government Accounts Contingent Reserve-General �536-000 Transfer or Contribution to Budget Fund $45,000 o ' To: City Planning 00140-537-000 Transfer or Contribution to Special Fund $45,000 � 'To fund a study of alternatives to the Downtown People Mover. Approved as to Funding: Approved: . CK�✓ Dir. , Dept. o Finance & Manage. B get Dire or Services COUNC[L:V[EN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nay�s Butler Hozza In Favor Hunt � Levine _ __ Against BY — Roedler �es�� Tedesco ��' '� � �� Form Approved by ity ttor y Adopte ouncil: Date — ertified Pa_<�e ouncil Secretary BY- \ Ap ro by :Vlavor: D DEc 2 a �97T Appro e Mayor for Sub � n Council By BY +�usus��o GEC 31 1977 ,_, `��;;�"1 .� December 16, 1977 Ma:, Richard E. Schroeder . Budget Director xoom 367 city xaii Saint Paul, Minnesota 55102 Dear M�r, Schroeder; I am requesting that the 1977 Capital Improvement Budget be amended to include an additional appropriation of $45,000 for the Downtown People Mnver project. The appropriation would be for a "Non-Fixed Guideway Alternative Study". I am requesting that unallocated CIB bond monies be appropriated to this required study, Th�.s study is not within the scope of the ex:�sting DPM Feasibility , Study Contract which is required by the State Legislature. 5enator Shaaf wi11 be introducing legislation next session to finance up to half of the study cost of the study. If the grant is approved, the amount received will reimburse the CIB bond monies. I asn transmitting the «iTnified Capital Projeet Request Fo�i" for this new project request. I am also attaching a copy of the proposed scope of this studp for your review. Respectful.ly requested, C'"""' ichard . c na.rr Deputy Project Director DPM Project x approve o� the request to appropriate $45,000 RAS/bw for the required study, but not with CIB bond monies as a funding source. This study is not a direct gart of the design feasibility for the CC: Cib Committee DPM and thus it would not be appropriate to use Mayor Latimer bond monies. I will take acti.on to have this Robert Sylvester study considered for funding with General Gary Stout Contingent Reserve monies. �-,�� lchard E. Schroeder udget Director December 19, 1g�'7 PINK_ ��N.N�E""- G I TY O F SA I NT P�A U L Council CI�NAIIY - OEPAI�TMENT swt - Mw�ow File N0. + � � �cil Resolution �� . . � .� Presented By Referred To Committee: Date � Out of Committee By Date WHEREAS, the City of Saint Paul and the Metropolitan Transit Area entered � into a Joint Powers Agreement dated June 21, 19T7 providing for the conduct of the preliminary engineering phase of the Downtown People Mover Transit System, hereinafter referred to as. "DPM"; and _ � WHEREAS, Chapter 454, Laws of Minnesota, 1977, provides that the preliminary engineering phase of the DPM shall include an analysis of prudent and feasible alternatives to a fixed guideway " system that will achieve the development and other goals of the DPM; and WHEREAS, those funds previously committed by the Metropolitan Transit Area and the City of Saint Paul are inadequate to pay for the analysis of prudent and feasible alternatives to, a fixed guideway system as mandated by Chapter 454, Laws of Minnesota, 19?7; and WIiEREAS, the description of the "scope of work" contained in paragraph 2 of the Agreement dated June 21, 1977 needs to be expanded to include this analysis in a more detailed form; and � ' WHEREAS, the City of Saint Paul and the Metropolitan Transit . Area desire to amend the Agreement dated June 21, 1977 to include a a�re detailed scope of work and provide additional funding therefor according to the terms and conditions of the attached Amendatory Agreement. COUNC[L1'IEN Requested by Department of: Yeas Nays Butler Hozza In Favor Hunt Levine Against By Roedler Sylvester Tedesco Form Approved by Citq Attomey � Adopted by Council: Date Certified Passed by Council Secretary BY sy Approved by Wavor: Date Approved by Mayor #or Submission to Council By Br , �K_ _ F�~�~��-" GITY OF SAINT PAUL Council VA11rr.-OEPAI�TM[NT JE �MAYON . . � FIIC NO. '` Y Council Resolution � esented By Referred To Committee: Date Out of Committee By Date _2_ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the attached Amendatory Agreement is hereby approved and the proper City officials are authorized and directed to exaute said Agreement. COUNC[LMEN Requested by Department of: eas N ays, - Butler Hozza In Favor Hunt 1�n� Against By Roedler Sylvester Tedesco Form prov d by Cit rney ,dopted by Council: Date ertified Passed by Council Secretary By By pproved by �layor: Date App o ed by Mayor Eor issiqn to Council By By ��6� AMENDATORY JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT DOWNTOWN PEOPLE MOVER TRANSIT SYSTEM. PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , 1977, by and between the METROPOLITAN TRANSIT AREA, a public corporation and political subdivision of the State of Minnesota, acting by and through its governing body, THE METROPOL- ITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION, hereinafter referred to as "MTC" , and the CITY OF SAINT PAUL, a municipal corporation of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as "City" . WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City and MTC entered into a Joint Powers Agree- ment dated June 21, 1977, providing for the conduct of a preliminary engineering phase of the Downtown People Mover Transit System, hereinafter referred to as "DPM" ; and WHEREAS, Chapter 454 , Laws of Minnesota, 1977, provides that the preliminary engineering phase of the DPM shall include an analysis of prudent and feasible alternatives to a fixed guideway system that will achieve the development and other goals of the DPM; and WHEREAS, those funds committed by the MTC and City are inadequate to pay for the analysis of prudent and feasible alterna- tives to a fixed guideway system as mandated by Chapter 454 , Laws of Minnesota, 1977; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the agreement of June 21, 1977 to include a more detailed scope of work and additional funding therefore; and WHEREAS, the City and MTC pursuant to Minn. Stat. Section -2- 471.59, have the authority to enter into this Amendatory Agreement and to do and perform the things herein agreed. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties do hereby mutually agree as follows : 1. TERM - This Amendatory Agreement shall take effect upon execution by both parties and shall remain in effect according to the term set forth in the agreement dated June 21, 1977. 2 . SCOPE OF WORK - Attached hereto and made a part of this agreement as Exhibit A-1 is a study design for non-fixed guideway alternatives. 3. COMPLETION OF TASKS - The MTC and City shall assume respon- _ sibility for the completion of the tasks to which they are assigned under Exhibit A-1. 4. CONSULTANT SELECTION - The economic consultant previously selected under the agreement dated June 21, 1977 shall perform services for the conduct of tasks assigned to consultant under Exhibit A-1. 5. CONSULTANT CONTRACT - The MTC shall continue to be the con- tractor with the economic consultant, previously selected, for the completion of consultant tasks under Exhibit A-1. 6. FUNDING - CITY: The City shall provide Forty-five Thousand Dollars ($45,000. 00) in cash to compensate the economic consultant for work to be performed under Tasks 7 and 8 of Exhibit A-1. The City shall also provide services in lieu of cash for the completion of tasks which it assumes under Exhibit A-1. To the extent the City provides such services, a credit shall be given to the City toward its contribution of One Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150, 000.00) committed in the agreement dated June 21, 1977. , -3- FUNDING - MTC: The MTC shall provide services in lieu of cash for the completion of those tasks which it has responsibility under Exhibit A-1. 7. CONTRACT CONTINUATION - All terms and conditions of the agreement dated June 21, 1977 shall remain in full force and effect and its terms will apply to this Amendatory Agreement unless speci- fically modified or superceded by this agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this agreement to be execut�d by their duly authorized representatives as of the day written above. APPROVED AS TO FORM CITY OF SAINT PAUL By Its Mayor BY Its Director, Department of Finance and Management Services BY Its City Clerk METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION By Its Chief Administrator BY Its C airman By Its Director o Finance an Administration � a . � � . �'��."��_� EXHIBIT A-1 DRAFT STUDY DESIGN FOR NON-FIXED GUIDEWAY ALTERN�TIVES TO REVITALIZE ST. PAUL METRO CENTER (A Supplement to DPM Preliminary Engineering Study) CITY OF ST. PAUL METROPOLITAN TRANSIT COMMISSION November 10, 1977 PREFACE Many discussions of this new transportation circulation concept, Downtown People Mover" (DPM) have focused on its major purpose--the revitalization of the central area in St. Paul or the Metro Center Area. The question is asked: could some non-fixed guideway action accomplish the same revitalization? This supplemental study will examine both non-transportation and non-fixed guideway transportation elements that could enhance the metro center area. In the conduct of this study, duplication of tasks in the basic DPM study will be avoided. In particular, the transportation elements ' contemplated as supplementary to any DPM will be analyzed i.n the DPM study. This supplemental study will address primarily the issues of development potential of the several elements. -i- BACKGROUND The 1977 Minnesota Leqislature required the Downtown People Mover (DPM) Preliuninary Engineering Study include "an analysis of the prudent and feasible alternatives to a fixed guideway transportation system that will achieve the development and other goals of the people mover project." The DPM Steering Couunittee has concluded that the following transportation and non-transportation alternatives should be analyzed: TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES a. Shuttle bus in traffic b. Shuttle bus in exclusive lanes c. Dime fare zone system d. Free fare zone system e. Skyway extensions f. Skyway extensions with moving sidewalks g. Van pools, car pools and shared ride taxis with preferential treatment h. Downtown bus transfer at fringe (between shuttle bus and regular route service? i. Public improvement program; i.e. , streets, parking, mall computerized signals, garking restrictions, waiting areas, etc. NON-TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES j. Staggered work hours k. Land assembly program for private development 1. New development tax subsidies m. Low interest development plans -1- This study outline contai.ns the plans to be used in analyzing these alternatives. It was agreed the test to be used could be a sia►ilar state contribution (equivalent to the 20� local share of the DPM or $11.2 million) to any, or a combiriation of;��the��above' '�non-fixed guideway" alternatides, that�would' � achieve the same development and other goals of the DPM project. A preliminary analysis using existing reports l� and data suggests alternatives a, b, c, g, h, and j could not singularly attract enough development. However, these alternatives in combination, or with others, might produce a viable alternative. MTC and City Staff will be responsible for the analysis of and reporting on alternatives a through �, while the economic consultant will be responsible for alternatives k through m. Alternatives a through � are elements of the "Transportation Systems ' Managements (TSM) Program" being developed in this metropolitan area by the TAB/TAC process. UMTA's approval of the DPM project requires completion of the TSM element during preliminary engineering and funding for the analysis of these elements are included in the MTC's and City's TSM budgets. The analyses of alternatives k through m will cost approximately $45,000. The City of St. Paul, aided by the State, will provide these funds. These alternative analyses will be coordinated by the DPM Project Coordination Team, working with the economic consultant. Results will be presented to the DPM's Technical Task Force, Community Advisory Committee and the Urban Development Committee for their review and comment after which the Coordination Team will present these analyses to the DPM Steering Committee for review and concurrence. 1/ Transit, Transportation, Parking and Development Studies Conducted by the MTC, St. Paul and Others. -2- i For analysis purposes, the alternatives have been gzouped as follows: TASK 1 - SHUTTLE BUS - This includes shuttle bus in traffic, shuttle bus in exclusive lanes and downtown bus transfer at fringe. TASR 2 - FARE ZONE - This includes dime and free fare zones. TASK 3 - SKYWAYS - This includes skyway extensions with and without moving sidewalks. TASK 4 - PARATRANSIT - This includes the use of commuter vans, car pools and shared-ride taxis and associated preferential treai�nent. TASK 5 - PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS - This includes street improvements, parking, mall, computerized signals, parking restrictions, waiting areas, etc. TASK 6 - STAGGERED WORK HOURS _ TASK 7 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - This includes land assembly for private development, new development tax subsidies and low interest development plans. TASK 8 - SUMMARY REpORT - This would include a compilation of viable alternatives or parts thereof that represent an alternative way of utilizing state funds in combination with federal funds to revitalize the St. Paul Metro Center. -3- TASK 1.0 - SHUTTLE BUS OVERVIEW This task will exmmtine the use of shuttle buses �in:mixed tsaffic and:`ia - . .� exclusive lanes and the use of shuttle buses for downtown collection and distribution in conjunction with fringe bus terminals where aeost, if not all, regularly scheduled buses would terminate prior to entering the downtown area. Considerable work has already been conducted during the past several years, including the following: . The Circulation of People in the St. Paul Central Area, March 1974 . Improving Transit Operations and Facilities in Downtown St. Paul, October 1976 . A Study of Alternatives to Reverse Flow Bus Lanes in Downtown - Minneapolis, February 1976 . Third Avenue North Distributor (Minneapolis) Parking Feasi.bility Study, December 1976 . Seventh Place Is Happening, October 1976 . Downtown St. Paul QT Bus System, November 1972 Through May 1974 SUBTASKS 1.1 Review the above background reports and other applicable local, state and federal reports relating to downtown bus circulation systems. 1.2 Develop preliminary shuttle bus system for the DPM alternative alignment selected by the DPM Steering Committee for comparative ana2ysis. 1.3 Prepare detailed operating plans (routes, schedules, vehicles, etc.) , estimate capital and operating costs, and describe benefits, constraints and problems. Include as appropriate, shuttle systems in mixed traffic, operating on exclusive lanes, preferential treatment and other bus related road improvements needed, including costs thereof. -4- 1.4 Analyze and document fringe bus terminals and associated shuttle bus system. 1.5 E�timate costs and describe benefits, constraints and problems associated with fringe terminals. 1.6 Prepare memorandum report on Shuttle Buses. RESPONSIBILITY MTC staff will assume responsibility for the conduct of this task, with support from the City of St. Paul. TASIC 2.0 - FARE ZONES O�VERVIEW This task will examine the benefits and problems associated with downtown dime and free fare zones. In addition to the experience already available from downtown St. Paul and Minneapolis, experience from other cities (such as Seattle) will be solicited and reported. SUBTASKS 2.1 Document MTC experience with the dime zone. 2.2 Research and document non-Twin City experience with special and free fare systems. 2.3 Identify those efforts needed to improve the utilization of special fare zones, such as marketing, signing, re-routing, the implementation of associated fringe parking facilities, etc. 2.4 Prepare draft memorandum report of experience, benefits and problems, as well as the policies and facilities needed to improve the utilization of special fare zones. 2.5 Prepare final memorandum report. -5- RESPONSIBILITY MTC staff will assnme responsibility for the conduct of this task, with - . . : support .from the. City of St. :Paul and M�/DOT. . , • r . . . . .. .. . TASK 3.0 - SKYWAYS OVERVIEW This task will examine skyway extensions with and without moving sidewalk assistance as a primary downtown people circulation system and as a distribution and collection system for transit systems (excluding the DPM as this is already covered in the preliminary engineering scope of work) . SUBTASKS 3.1 Research the numerous St. Paul reports that contain plans and policies relating to skyway extensions. 3.2 Develop a comprehensive skyway plan taking into account previous planning. 3.3 Determine the feasibility of utilizing moving sidewalks within existing or proposed extensions. 3.4 Where feasible, incorporate moving sidewalks into proposed skyway • system or develop alternative skyway plan that utilizes moving sidewalks. 3.5 Prepare meinorandum report that includes costs, tentative schedule, usage estimate, benefits and problems. RESPONSIBILITY St. Paul staff will assume responsibility for the conduct of this task, with support from the MTC. _ TASR 4.0 - PARATRANSIT C7VERVIEW This task will examine the feasibility and benefits, including development benefits of supplementing regular route transit within paratransit including -6- commuter vans, car pooling and shared-ride taxis. Preferential treatment in the routing and parking of paratransit vehicles wiZl also be considered. SUBTASKS 4.1 Document local and non-local experience on the use of paratransit for downtown areas. 4.2 Consider preferential treatsnent opportunities in routing and parking paratransit vehicles. 4.3 Consider a paratransit plan that supplements and complements regular transit service that includes reco�nendations relative to the utilization of each option in a cost and service effective manner. 4.4 Examine the impacts of paratransit on the transportation system presently serving the downtowns. 4.5 Estimate benefits including development benefits. 4.6 Prepare final memorandum report. RESPONSIBILITY MTC staff will assume responsibility for the conduct of this task, with support from the City of St. Paul and Mn/DOT. � TASK 5.0 - PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS d�IERVIEW This task will examine street and pedestrian related improvements that could lead to improved surface travel in downtown St. Paul. The task will � address items such as downtown street improvements (one-way streets, restricted turns, bus lanes, turning lanes, etc.) , revised parking policies (long-term, short-term and on-street parking and parking restrictions) , pedestrian malls, computerized signals, preferential treatment, waiting areas, and bus shelters. SUBTASKS 5.1 Review St. Paul Downtown Transportation Plans and Policies. -7- 5.2 Develop a surface transportation plan that considers pedestrian and �� transit needs such as pedestrian malls, shuttle bus routes, fare zone, paratransit and skyway connections, bus shelters, etc. 5�.3 Develop cos�s. � . . . . . . � . 5.4 Identify benefits and problems. 5.5 Prepare final memorandum report. RESPONSZBILITY St. Paul staff will assume responsibility for the conduct of this task with support from the MTC and Mn/DOT. TASK 6.0 - STAGGERED WORK HOURS OVERVZEW The MTC recently completed a study titled, "Variable Work Hours in the + Twin Cities Metropolitan Area." This task will examine that study to determine if potential exists to i.mprove traffic flow, bus productivity, etc. SUBTASKS 6.1 Review study, especially as to how its findings could benefit downtown St. Paul. 6,2 Prepare draft memoraruium that estimates development and other benefits. 6.3 Review with downtown development advisory com�ittee. 6.4 Prepare final memorandum report. RESPONSIBILITY MTC staff will assume responsibility for the conduct of this task. -8- TASR 7,0 - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Overview This task will evaluate the effects on reinvestment of leveraging state and local fimds in St. Paul's economy through alternative channels rather than through the construction of the Downtown People Mover (DPM). The basic assumption is that the same amount of state and local funds that represent the nonfederal share of the proposed DPM project (approximately 511.2 million) would be deployed in other ways to stimulate economic development within the metro center area. The economic development potentials generated by the two alternative approaches -- with and without the DPM -- would be compared in terms of quantitative measurements of cost and benefits to the city. The study of _ economic development potentials generated by the DPM investment is already underway under an UMfA feasibility grant. This task will supplement that ongoing work and provide outputs in comparable terms so that a meariingful comp arison might be made. Under the DPM alternative, it is assumed not only that federal con- struction money and "Yoimg amendment" money (for station area development) would be available from UMTA to supplement state and local investments in the system, but also that other federal economic development money for which St. Paul is eligible would be available for local economic development activities. Under the non-DPM alternative evaluated in this task, the UMTA money would not be available, but the other federal economic development funds would still be available to supplement state and local funds in eligible development projects. Subtasks 7.1 Evaluation of the St. Paul Economy a. Analysis of existing structure of employment in the city and metro center and definition of economic functions. b. Evaluation of the relationship of the metro center economic fimctions and activities to those of the city, Minneapolis and the 'Il�vin Cities region. -9- . - � � c. : 'Analysis of past. trends in employment, economic activities, �: '� � - • labor force and population in St. Paul, Minneapolis and the remainder of the region. 7.2 Analysis of the primary forces affecting past trends and future development opportunities in the metro center based upon the broader St. Paul economy. a. Assessment of the city�s positive assets and resources (labor force, ma.rket locations, public services and infrastructure, private sector capabilities, etc.). b. Assessment of the city�s major problems and restraints � (obsolescence, security, limited land area, municipal t�es j and service costs, etc. ). ; I c. Assessment of the major exogenous or "outside" forces affecting I the city's economy (competition, changing industrial patterns, inflation, federal policies, etc.). 7.3 Evaluarion of inetro center's overall development prospects. a. Determination of specific types of economic activities for which the metro center has the greatest development potential in the future. b. Analysis of the necessary conditions under which these deveYopment I potentials might be realized. i c. Projection of baseline conditions imder ass�ptions of: 1) current � conditions persist; and 2) maximwn use is made of likely future federal (other than UMTA) programs, but without stimulus of $11.6 million additional in state and local money. 7.4 Identification of specific development project opportunities in the metro center that might be stimulated by public investments for economic development, such as: a. Industrial development on unused or wzderused land. b. Riverfront and river-related projects. I c. Housing and neighborhood revitalization d. CBD office and service fimctions -10- e. Institutional and public developments. f. Retention and expansion of existing enterprises. 7.5 Formulation of public development approaches to realize feasible project potentials in the metro center. a. Analysis of the conditions that must be provided to assure project development and private investment. b. Definition of specific project "packages" with public (state and local) investment and policy requirements. c. Evaluation of the feasibility, timing and anticipated performance of all projects. d. Identify relative and, where possible, absolute leverages gained from $11.2 million i.n state and local fimds when used for: a) land assembly; 2) tax abatement; 3) low interest loans; or 4) other _ incentives to be identified during the research. 7.6 Assessment of the costs and benefits of the economic development investments stimulated by state and local fimds. a. Estimates of new jobs, private investments, and tax revenuas to be directly generated. . b. Estimates of the indirect benefits (in the same quantitative terms) to be generated by the public investment activities. c. Evaluation of the effects of these development activities on the overall economic structure of the city and on the prospects for continued viability in the future. 7. 7 Comparative evaluation of the costs and benefits of the two alternative economic development strategies (DPM and non-DPM). a. Sensitivity analysis of the comparative potentials for optimwn performance and results of the two approaches. b. Quantitative comparisons over comparable time periods (jobs, investments, tax returns) . -11- i c. Comparison of the potential effects of the alternative approaches on specific economic sectors or types of activities within the city . _ , (central business district, inner-city neighborhoods. and coaanercial districts, housing for different income groups, addaptive use of existinq buildings, business retention, etc.) . RESPONSIBILITY The economic consultant will be responsible for the conduct of this task with support from the City of St. Paul. TASK 8.0 - SUMI'�IARY REPORT OVERVIEW This task will examine the previous memorandum reports, select the u►ost _ viable alternatives or portions thereof, and combine them in a coordinated manner that would produce a mechanism designed to assist in revitalizing the St. Paul Metro Center. SUBTASKS 8.1 Review the findings of Tasks 1 through 7 and select those elements that w�ould complement one another or in fact are needed to increase the viability of the individual alternatives. 8.2 Develop a strategy that integrates these alternative elements. 8.3 Estimate costs and benefits of this strategy. 8.4 Identify the policies, financial support and schedule needed to implement this strategy. 8.5 Prepare interim report of recommendations. 8.6 Prepare a comparative analysis of the costs and benefits of the DPM and this alternative developmental mechanism. -12- .� '� . 8.7 Prepare final report incorporating Task 8.6. RESPONSIBILITY The City of St. Paul and the� financial consultant will be responsible for the conduct of this task. -13- � PROGRAM BUDGET TASK MAN-DAYS MTC City CONSULTANT 1 1� 2 2 5 1 3 3 10 4 10 2 5 5 5 6 5 5 � 200 8 15 10 25 T�T�' S8 35 225 SOURCE OF MANPOWER AND FUNDS St. Paul is scheduled to analyze the elements contained i.n this program Plan as part of their contribution to the DPM ESI task such that the analysis can be used for both DPM Preli.minary Engineering and this study of alternate ways to revitalize the St. Paul Metro Area. MTC staff will contribute manpower under the Low Capital Alternatives, Project No. 203 (estimated at $11,600) . St. Paul's cash contribution for the economic consultant will be $45,000. -14- ! . , , � . . �� ' ..�3 PROGRAM SCHEDULE WEEKS AFTER START 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. . 35 36 37 1.0 SHUTTLE BUS 2.0 FARE ZONE 3.0 SKYWAY 4.0 PARATRANSIT I 5.0 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS 6.0 WORK HOURS -- --- ---- --- � 7.0 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 8.5 INTERIM REPORT 8.7 FINAL REPORT * Task will require an elapsed time for five more months; however, some substantive conclusions should be available within 10 weeks. -15- . . . . . � . �.r �r..� } A �_ — �� . . � �tM �� ' J � . f 'a'afi7 r i�� ":& � .. � .. ..� . �. , � �'�.I�',L'TCl� O�' A��1IS';�RA'1�ZV�'+ 4 � ' i"� ' i� , � , . RE Is �(� ,, . � : < , �: - . � t t � < � �:D�t1�•r T�c� �I��. 1�1�7�� ,� �, , , �3 a. ;f I�A'�t6�R �E4RGE LATZMER ! a+ ,:: F�t_ '_, BiC�aax�d �,, Sch�� . B� � Di��ets>r !�'� �- . �. . .� � �_: � ,k; , , � � �" �� ''��.�e��.e k�bv'+er F��t�ai�f�l�ty: 'N�rn�Fi� �:vd�� Ci't,��:�. S� ° '£ s _�� :�: Y i: � . � . ' , ,.., l }� t ' � . . . . :.. .. ` ; , .::. . . :.. .. .. ..:�� . -. ' ..� :..'.'� . �. ., ,, .. . .� r . . . � . . � ..- ' . : � -:.a ' _ -.- . . . .�. .. .. �' � , . , � � � ..- ,t: �. �... �. , �...� �,.. �,': .. , . . .: ::� . . .:., ' , �: ,-� .�.�. 6f'� ,.��-.; . � . . . . ..' .�, . . '' , ... ' . • ,..�v2 } ��r . . ...� . � ; . . . . ... . .. } } �� 'I��'! .�� . .. , � �;� 1. �iiryy irr r r - � .. � . `�'r�a�'i�at� �d+��r�,p�0 tc� ,��d a� study o�' a1�e�na►ti�e� tx� the L�a,qrt� ��a ��r, �� ,� . < ; �� ' ,' �5;�OE�O �iQ314 Gen@r�ll �OiOVe�1C1t A�Cf�k�t.49. �'O!1'C3�ti�ei�#"t`�$� �fl�,1"$�r:, � .. :-��, t,�+ •G:�.�y P�snri.�.�g, Ot13:s�tk-53T-Ol9L� '�'�r3h8�e1" `c��` £,E�E�"s�''h,�i,�` '�t�` ;� Y; �� - ; . .. �� _ � _ ; � - � � - ;�� : . ,.�;. :� � , ., . , . _:_ , , - .�:. ;_ - . _ '' ` � . . 4. �: �, - .. . ,.. , _ , , � . .z �, • _ PU�'f�E 1�T�� i�E' �'OR �HI�' AGTI01�1; � =�.�,..�� .�...,.., : � ��. :, : , ' . ° �tr �� 4�- i�►wss of ��sox�� 1977, ,��v3�c�:i� t�h�a� � �c�3�u�:��'�'."��e �� F.� .� `.C�ie-:-L�i# �ha1�.. ��t�rd�� anax�sa:s of pruds�� and:: f�asi:b,�e a1,�e � � �'a��.��c�+k! ; ;. � �3�a� s,y�ti�r��aa� �.1�. achieve the devel,op�e�t aan►c� �a�r �� ►� t�ie ��f1[. ci�� r� xe�taiq�t��Qr� �'�;?��}4 a�;s�ed Deaem�ier 13, 1977, a�eru�s_ the �oin� Pa��e� 2�'�� ° ; .µ `� �r��'t�ati �n��.t C�aooiassion to incl��e this �tudy in the DP� �r�� a��.�r�� ..-,' j �� iad��t��#'ies �hat'ar�8it�.�1 Cit� funding is required and d3.rect�:,�3. ti�;��a3s �� .r t�ie�:sti�; _ � 3'�`�t w� , _ . . . . ;, , � , �; . fi�+ at�ictied res�lutio� �mn�f�rs mor�e�. �a �iand �the requa.red :stud�. ';; . � • . ° , . . � jt� � � �� .. A"�'��1fiS: �,) Sc2yna�r's Deeemtaer 16, �:977, le�ei� r��ted C� �ct��..�ir�,�: #� � y ; - study , . : z�. i�� .. �� -� ' ,. � • '.'' •_•: w _:� R�Y �) CatmCil R�esolutian ��i�Y�. � 3) 14a�datt�c��r 3c�ir�t �cya�ers Agreement for DPI+�. � � � `4} ` �+M�A�x`:3A: ��udy 'l3�at�t �or required.�a�d�, -` �,�� 5 � l .. Y.�*.;N 1�� ,i� a, ��; ._ . . ��€�'�r . . µ°� �:. � . �°� �_ CITY OF SAINT P�.IIL , �' . . } � OFFIOE OF THE.GITY CO'O'I�TCIL � � N•:�- � ��: ��`��J.� .;.,,,,,.:� - ,,, ,,,... . .,►��: . , �,� Da t e : December 19, 1977 :� u . C � IViMITTEE RE POR`l' . TO : Saint Paul City Cou�cii F R O M � C o m m i t t e e O tl FINANCE, MANAGEMENT & PERSONNEL, ROSALIE BUTLER , choirman, mctk�s Phe following . report on-• C.F. C] ardinance �] Resotu t ion - . [� Ot h er � TlTLE : � At its meeting on December 19, the Committee heard and recommended approval of the following resolutions: � _ . � . . T�ransfer of $5,000 from .Contingent Reserve-General to Auditorium _ � � Theatre Study.to p,r•.ovide funds for the redesign of the proposed Civic Center Theatre : Transfer of $37,200 from Employee Insurance to Retiree Insurance to cover insurance costs for retired employees which were�greater . thah anticipated . . Transfer of $100,000 from Contingent Reserve-General to Civic � . Organization Contributions so that the American Red Cross can � administer and distribute emergency home heating funds to needy persons - Transfer of $45,000 from Contingent Reserve-General to City Planning to fund a study of alternatives to the Downtown People Mover � . ' - . Transfer of $6,500 fr.om Contingent Reserve-General to Judgmen.t & � � Compromise to compensate John Lewandowski , an employee of the - Department of Public Works who was injured while engaged in the � performance of his duties to the full amount of insurance due - - him under no fault liability , -. _ - �: - CITY FiALL SEVENTH FLOOR SAINT PAUI:, biINNESOTA 55102 .z;�.�; , .. >...�: