Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987/06/15 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular (2) MINUTES PCITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA June 15, 1987 1 . Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:30 by Mayor Lyle Hanks. 2. Presentations Mayor Hanks presented a proclamation to John French, who has served for many years as a liaison between the Exchange Club and the St. Louis Park Police Department. Police Chief Mancel Mitchell also presented Mr. French with a plaque in his honor from the Minnesota Police Officers Association. 3. Roll Call The following Council members were present at roll call : Ronald Backes Larry Mitchell Thomas Duffy David Strand Allen Friedman Lyle Hanks Also present were the Assistant City Manager, City Attorney, Director of Planning and Director of Public Works. 4. Approval of minutes It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Backes, to approve the minutes of the June 1 , 1987 City Council meeting. The motion passed 6-0. ' 5. Approval of agenda It was , moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Friedman to approve the consent agenda for June 15, 1987 with the removal of items 7a and lld. The motion passed 6-0. It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Strand, to approve the agenda for June 15, 1987 with the following addition: llf. Resolution on Hwy. 18/Flag Ave. Also the Assistant City Manager requested an executive session to discuss matters of litigation. The motion passed 6-0. 1110 PUBLIC HEARINGS 6a. Reiss liquor license Application of Gregg W. Zafft for liquor license to conduct business at 6900 Lake St. W. cu rrently Reiss Restaurant) . -109- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 The Assistant City Manager said that Mr. Zafft wished to withdraw his request at this time. 6b. House of Tran Application for 3.2 beer license III There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed , with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future time. It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Mitchell to approve the application. Councilman Strand asked if there currently were a policy on the number of 3.2 licenses allowed in the City. The Assistant City Manager said there was not. The motion passed 6-0. �, 6c. St. Louis Centre Partners Special permit for shopping mall , Resolution 87-64 office buildings, hotel and parking facilities at northeast corner of Excelsior Blvd./Hwy. 100 Scott Helms, Park Nicollet Medical Center, addres9adthe Council . He listed four items which were of concern, not only to that evening's proceedings, but for future action. The center always has supported this project but felt certain areas deserved special consideration: parking will be an issue and the center is prepared in the future to participate in a public ramp for parking in the area; 39th St. traffic will become significantly altered and feels it is important enough for the City to take up at this point, both through HRA and city planning and they stand ready to work with the City to make 39th St. an appropriate trafficway; during construction, access needs to remain open to not only the medical center but other businesses which, in the past, su f fered during the construction of Hwy. 100/W. 36th St. He stated that while patients in St. Louis Park are familiar with how to get to the Center, many of the Center's patients visit the Center infrequently and therefore are not as familiar with how to get to the Center, especially under con- struction conditions. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a later date. Councilman Mitchell asked how the request before Council this evening differs from what was discussed six months ago. The Director of Planning stated the uses are identical , the square footage is ap- proximately identical , but the layout is different as the roadway through the site was originally diagonal . With later consideration by the developer, the independent traffic consultant, the developer's traffic consultant, City and HRA staffs, it was determined a road penetrating the site and connecting with 39th St. in a per- pindicular fashion would be more appropriate. A second difference is that the water reservoir has been moved from an at-the-ground reservoir at the north side of the shopping mall to a below-grade reservoir at the intersection of Excelsior Blvd. and Hwy. 100. He said another difference is that now there is a more detailed plan. It was moved by Councilman Backes, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive reading -110- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 11) and adopt Resolution 87-64 entitled, "A resolution granting special permit under Section 14-124.101 of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to permit the construction of a shopping mall , office buildings, hotel and parking facilities for property zoned PUD, planned unit development, located at the northeast corner of Excelsior Blvd. and Hwy. 100." Councilman Strand said he found himself in the position of not being able to vote for or against the special permit. He said he didn't see how he, as a Councilmem- ber, could critically evaluate this item. He said it comes to Council as a special permit request, and as such, the review the Council should give to it is that only of special permit review, and not with respect to the property or project itself. He continues to believe the project is too intense for the property and that this feeling has been communicated to the developer earlier. He felt somewhat handcuffed with the system in that the project is an HRA project, coming solely to the Council for special permit requests. He did not believe he could give it his critical re- view, nor was a critical review at this time fair to the developer. Therefore, he would abstain on the vote. The motion passed 5-0-1 (Councilman Strand abstained). 6d. Sign: Library Lane Special permit for sign at 3240 Library Lane Resolution 87-65 There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. Councilman Mitchell asked why this item had to have a public hE•aring. The Assistant City Manager said that in accordance with the sign ordinance, any sign that is erected in a residential district that exceeds six square feet must come before the Council on a special permit. It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Friedman, to waive read- ing and adopt Resolution No. 87-65 entitled, "A resolution granting special permit under Section 14-185.04 of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to permit the construction of a sign having an area of 18 square feet for property zoned R-2, single family residence district, located at 3240 Library Lane." The motion passed 6-0. 6e. Alley vacation Vacation of alley between Natchez and Ottawa Ave. south of Highway 7 There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a later date. It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive first reading, set second reading for July 6, 1987 and authorize summary publication. 11111 The motion passed 6-0. 6f. Special permit : Oak Trail Special permit for 164 units of mul- tiple family housing at 3400-3450 Oak Trail -111- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 Mayor Hanks asked the City Planner to walk the Council and audience. through the proposed project. The following members of the audience addressed Council expressing their concern and/or opposition to this project: Sharon Mueller, 7601 Minnetonka Blvd. , said she had attended all the Oak Hill Park association meetings back in 1973. She said there was a lot of heated discussion about how the property was to be developed: density, access and so forth. She said that the City has abided by what they said they would do at that time. She said that now there is a proposal for 1500 cars per day coming into the proposed development. She said they have a quiet residential neighborhood with parkland, sports facilities and wildlife and this kind of vehicular traffic will make it unsafe for kids and ruin the quietness of the neighborhood. Earling Platt, 3432 Rhode Island, presented a petition asking Council to deny and permit which would make 35th St. the access to the proposed project. He commented it was already highly traveled with plenty of accidents. Florence Flugaur, 3320 Louisiana Ave. , asked if the plan developed some 12 years ago couldn't be reconsidered at this time. Although it appeared o.k. back then, she said that now it doesn't fit the quality of life the Council wants for the residents. She felt there would be too many people in this area. She said many people buying at 3300 On the Park were told the open space was dedicated park land. She said we're losing open land with the attendant loss of wildlife, flowers and vegatation. 11111 Councilman Strand asked Mrs. Flugaur if she were willing to have her property taxes raised slightly because the assessed valuation across the park is less in the event the Council decided, as a policy matter, that there ought to be more open space in this community. Mrs. Flugaur said that personally she would be in favor but could not speak for other residents of the condo. Rita Flugaur was concerned that one of the proposed buildings was going to be built on a swamp. She noted this year was the first time that area had been dry in some time and questioned the feasibility of building there. Jay Herwig stated that putting 35th St. through to the project will present a definite hazard, particularly to the children in the area. Mary Ruloff, property owner at 3300 On the Park, said she was not told this was part of the planned unit development plan. When her husband called the City to verify the zoning of the property, no mention was made of the Comprehen- sive Plan or PUD plan. She said they were told that if anything were to be done to this property, it would probably be ten years before the Pollution Control Agency approved it for development, and the only thing being considered was a par 3 golf course. With regard to trees being planted on berms to hide the buildings, they were told perhaps. She said she'd like to see something that says this is going to be a reality. She was also opposed to any entrance All/off of Louisiana Ave. which would reduce their quietness. -112- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 Ron Razley, 3300 On the Park, agreed with Mrs. Flugaur about the increase 11111 in taxes in order to keep the land open. Also, he questioned if the development was really needed. He said several developments were currently under construction which address the multiple family situation, Newport on Seven for example. Robert Holsey, 3300 On the Park, asked that the tax situation be carefully scrutinized. He said many residents go south in the winter and up north in the summer, limiting their use of city services. He said many of them feel they're paying more taxes for a reduced use of governmental services. Bernie Glass commented that if he had wanted to live in a high density area, he would not have moved out of Minneapolis. , Del Nordstrom, 3404 Quebec Ave. , said his favorite walk is through this area. He would like to see it preserved so , adults and children can continue to enjoy it as it currently is. Frank Closecar, 3300 On the Park, said there were vacancies all over the City because of over-building throughout the community. , A. C. Gavea, 3501 Rhode Island, asked if this project indeed was going in, was it in the planning stage, was 35th St. definitely to be the main access or what exactly was the status of the project. Mayor Hanks responded that a decision would be made by the Council which was the reason for taking all the input that evening. He said as of this JIIIP time the project is a concept plan contained in the City's Comprehensive Plan. He said it does meet the planned unit development zoning. Grace Johnson asked the developer if the proposed project would have children. She did not think it wise for children to be raised in such a dense area. Also, she said residents look to the City Council for their quality of life and she hoped that that would be considered, not just the money involved. Steve Cox, representing the developer, said the project is intended to be rental apartments. He felt it important to note that the density is significantly less than at the 3300 On the Park condos. Councilman Strand asked about the demographics of the proposed project. Mr. Cox responded 10-15% will be retired couples coming probably out of the surrounding neighborhoods; 30% will be singles, young professionals; and the balance will be couples. Incomes will range from' $32,000-$45,000. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right' of Council' to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. Councilman Backes asked that staff review the traffic, elements of the concept particularly as it relates to 35th St. 111, The Director of Planning said access was proposed through the remnant of Oak Trail which was platted on the subdivision back in the mid-1970s, coming out to the corner of 35th and Pennsylvania. At that point, traffic could go toward Texas on 35th or south on Pennsylvania. -113- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 Councilman Strand asked if the City has done any study of this since the plan was put together in the 1970s to assess the impact of the existing41111 development on traffic generation plus the impact of the Newport on Seven project. The Director said the surrounding projects have been on the mark as anticipated: Louisiana Ave. has been constructed as a divided roadway and is now considered the main north/south thoroughfare; Oak Park Village Drive carries the traffic as envisioned, up to 1000 cars per day; the cul-de-sac to 3300 On the Park carries approximately 1300 vehicles per day; Walker St. has not increased as a direct result of this area except for park/open space usage. He said trip demand is virtually equal to 12-13 years ago. What has happened in between was a reduction in the trip demand when the energy crisis was at its peak. Councilman Strand ' asked what the Housing and Redevelopment Authority has been up to as regards this property over the past year. The Director responded that approximately two years ago, the site was offered for sale. The Authority had to decide if they were to seek many proposals or identify the six or seven best developments in the city and seek proposals. The 'latter course of action was taken. The proposals were seen, narrowed down and one finally selected. Financing was achieved, a purchase agreement executed and the development has slowly been progressing since that time. Councilman Strand asked what recourse the Council has to affect any PUD once it's been established. The Director responded that the PUD is a zoning ordinance change requiring two-thirds majority vote of the Council . He said the plan he showed on the overhead was the same plan adopted by Council in 1976 and did represent a commitment to the amount of open space -- even the ponding area was designated back in 1976. To change it at this point would require an appropriate finding that the existing ordinance is not proper and a change would again require a two-thirds vote of Council after Planning Commission review and recommendation. Councilman Strand asked the City Attorney by "proper" ordinance, what is the scope of Council 's review at this point to determine if it can be amended or not. The City Attorney responded that rezoning is a legislative decision and the scope of review is limited. He said the Supreme Court recently ruled what could or could not impact what is called down-zoning which is an argument which could be made relative to this piece of property. He said rezoning is limited to judicial review, but a limited scope of review. He said asit relates to the special permit pending before Council , the Council has less discretion. Special permits are permits to undertake action consistent with current zoning and uses governing the property. He said that while Council may impose reasonable conditions as part of a special permit, denial on grounds that are not related to reasonable conditions or denial without establishing a record for denial would be subject to judicial review and ' the court's independent determination as to whether or not a council acted 41111 arbitrarily or capriciously. Councilman Duffy asked what obligation the City has to bond holders -114- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 on the property. He said when the prospectus went out with the bonds, it IIIII showed the proposed development with the number of units being proposed. The City Attorney said there were two separate legal entities involved here: the City of St. Louis Park, which is reviewing a special permit coming to it under an application of the developer with the consent of the property owner, and the HRA, the second legal entity. He said he was the attorney for the City, not the attorney for the Authority. He said he had not reviewed the bonds and therefore would be unable to answer Councilman Duffy's question until he had reviewed them. The Planning Director said, that in his capacity as Executive Director of the Authority, the Authority did work out an agreement with the Council at the time of the bond sale and pledged repayment of the bonds through land sale and tax increment generated by the new development. At the time of the bond sale, he said the identical plan he had shown earlier was the exact plan used in selling the bonds - it identified the uses of the property, the density, the open space, the pond, Louisiana Ave. , various access points and a projected development schedule. It also projected anticipated revenues to be seen from the development. Whether there was any possibility of changing this now would be dependent upon a basis for finding you wanted to deviate from that original plan. He said that retirement of the bonds is certainly an important ingredient in the basic economics of the City and the rating the City carries. 111) Councilman Duffy asked if the bonds were sold by the City and not the Authority. The Direcrtor said that was correct. He said the bonds were sold by the City but that there was an agreement executed between the City and the Authority. However, the bonds are the City's obligation, not the Authority's. Mayor Hanks asked if it were correct that the developer doesn't necessarily have to put into the development everything as originally projected; rather, what the City has to do is guarantee that what is developed is paying off the bonds. The Director said that was correct. Councilman Strand asked that at the time the plan was being considered by the Authority, about two years ago, how extinsively did the HRA consider the nine-year old plan that was in the Comprehensive Plan, or was it merely a matter of moving ahead because it was already in the Comprehensive Plan. The Director replied it was a status-type report. He said there had been several visits to the site by the Authority. He said there had been a general review about every six months by the Authority of the general status, character and development going on and what was happening in Oak Park Village itself. He said the original plan underwent a substantial amount of testing and discussion initially before it was decided upon and adopted in April of 1976. Mayor Hanks asked when the concept plan was first brought to Council . The Director said that in December of 1985, the Council looked at a plan and was made aware that several proposals had been evaluated for development of the site. He said that Council at that time was looking more at the financial -115- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 implications of the development with respect to the Consent Decree settlement. To what extent Council examined the details of the plan, he could not say. Councilman Strand felt Council was getting this proposal at the wrong time 41111 and in the wrong context. He felt the special permit before Council was a narrow scope of review. It was not a review of whether this proposal makes sense to the community or not. If this were being done right, in his mind, Council would be evaluating an 11-year old plan to see if it now makes sense to the community in light of recent development in that area and what is projected long-term. He felt the situation now was that the neighborhood obviously doesn't 'want this project, or at the least to see it minimized. On the other hand, there is a developer who has spent some two years developing the project and has brought it to the point of getting ready to build a quality development. He said Council was now being asked to decide if the trees, access and a few other things make sense, but the main point was not being addressed, i .e. does the project make sense in light of the development on this property over the past ten years. It didn't make any sense to him why the Council was restricted to this narrow review at this point. He said he did not agree with the system and was very frustrated dealing with the concerns of the neighborhood while at the same time cognizant of the time and cost the developer has put into this project. Councilman Duffy said there had been some discussion about alternate access to the site, whether it be along what we refer to as Block 8, running south from the site onto Walker St. , or the alternate directly east of the site to Louisiana Ave. He asked if either one of those was feasible. The Director responded that one difficulty of going south is the hill that11111 exists there. Using this route would require the roadway going into the parkland resulting in a dimunition of parkland and the esthetics of the park which is highly used. He said it would be a possibility, albeit a more costly option and would traverse undesirable soils. He said another option would be to come in from Louisiana, an option the residents of 3300 On the Park are opposed to. This option would bisect the park, interfere with the flow and activity of people north and south through the park area and introduce an activity which is not very consistent with the park usage and design. In answer to a question from Councilman Friedman, the Director explained how residents would get to Highway 7 from the site. Councilman Friedman said he was distressed by the issues under consideration. He said that from the letters and comments he's received, it would appear that some of the people were led to believe by the developer that this would all be parkland with nothing further built on it. He expressed his concern about the amount of traffic going through any neighborhood and being disruptive, which in this case can't help but occur. He said it may be well and good to specify X number of units, but it is a fact that people tend to move into newer buildings, the rents in the older buildings get less and maintenace decreases and consequently an undesirable area occurs. He believed that times change and nothing is static. He was not influenced by the fact that there is a eleven year old concept plan, and he concurred with Councilman Strands concerns and believed they deserved to be addressed better than they have been addressed in the past. He was concerned about 41111 open space in the area and concerned about taxes. He pointed out that if citizens were willing to have an increased tax base to preserve what -116- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 they believed to be the quality of life, that's one thing; however, an increase would have to be extended to the entire city. He asked that the City Attorney look into this point and address the question of whether or not there was anything illegal or misleading about the way representation was made on a piece of property, and also see if there is in state law any way to penalize anyone selling property within this City for making statements that are untrue or false and people buying property on that basis. Councilman Backes asked if Councilman Friedman intended Council to look at the last point he brought up. Councilman Friedman said that was his intent. Mayor Hanks said that when the City bought this property, one of the major concerns was that we had hoped to get development on the property to pay off the bonds. Since then, he believed things have slipped by himself and the Council in looking at the proposed development. He agreed with the woman expressing her concern about traffic coming out into the neighborhoods from the proposed development and said he had a major concern with the platted street. He also had a concern with the number of units proposed, but did feel the development has been designed to leave as much open space as possible. He said that no matter what the developer or any realtor had told the people, there are 20 out of the 80 acres specified as dedicated park land which is a high ratio of development to park space. He felt it was appropriate to go back to the drawing board and review such items as , access and the number of units. Another concern he hoped Council would ' take a hard look at is proposed development on the southeast corner of the property. He was under the impression nothing was going to be developed on the land in that corner. Councilman Mitchell asked if the suggestion was for the item to be tabled or continued. The City Attorney said continuing would mean until the next Council meeting or a future specified Council meeting. He said this public hearing would have to be reopened for a motion to table. Councilman Backes asked what was the time period within which Council must act relative to special permits. The Director responded 60 days from this meeting date. It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Friedman, to reopen the public hearing and continue it to July 6, 1987. Councilman Strand added with specific direction to staff to review the number of units involved in the project and research the question of alternative access to the site as opposed to the present proposal . could be Councilman Backes if added to the motion/ the question of what are the impacts and what are the mitigating opportunities in the likelihood of directional traffic flow and what kind of regulatory devices might help solve some of the problems should that alternative be considered. Councilman Friedman said he'd like to see some kind of figures relative to long-range planning for apartment and condo units and their concentration. -117- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 _ Councilman Strand said he concurred with that, but he'd rather have it as a second motion which he would be agreeable to seconding. Councilman Friedman wondered if there was adequate time for staff to gather _ all the requested information, adequate time for Council to review it and adequate time for notification to the residents to let them know how Council was proceeding. Mayor Hanks suggested putting it on the second meeting in July. Councilman Mitchell suggested an alternative of preparing the information for July 6 and have a discussion of that informtion on July 20. In that way, Council could have the information for two weeks and the neighborhood could also have time to review it. Councilman Strand felt it was too long a time to July 20, some five weeks. He would be willing to take Councilman Mitchell 's suggestion with the proviso that Council was really setting a certain time. He would not want to come back in five weeks and not know where Council was going. Mayor Hanks felt that in all fairness a decision was due the developer. Councilman Mitchell said he felt there were some questions not totally refined yet. He felt a brief discussion on the 6th and then voting on the 20th would be the way to proceed. He felt this would afford an opportunity for Council to ask additional questions and , give some time for thought before voting. Mayor Hanks asked the City Attorney if the public hearing should be continued to July 6. The City Attorney responded that the Council would have, the discretion at that point to continue the hearing to another date if they chose not to act on the item. Or, they could also have it on July 6 as a discussion item and continuing the public hearing to July 20 when it would be their intention to take final action. Councilman Friedman said he would remain as the seconder with the understanding that it is Council ' s intent to discuss it on the 6th with the distinct possibility of its coming up on July 20. Councilman Mitchell said if he understood the City Attorney correctly, Council had two options: to continue the item to July 6 at which time Council can decide what they want to do -- make a decision whether or not to continue it to a future date; or option two is to continue it to July 20 with a discussion on July 6. Councilman Strand said it was agreeable to him to amend the motion to continue the hearing to July 20 with discussion of the item on July 6. Councilman Backes said he would oppose the motion because he was opposed to any limitation on the Council 's ability to act on the 6th. The motion passed 5-1 (Councilman Backes opposed) . _ -118- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 6g. Refunding Oakmont Refunding Oakmont $8,715,000 Housing Development Revenue Bonds 11111 There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and return it at a future date. Dan Nelson, bond counsel for Holmes and Graven, tock a minute to describe this item, stating no action was required by Council . He said this public hearing was required under the provisions on the new Internal Revenue code and something the City will have to do each time a refunding bond issue comes up. He said once the deal has been put together and the financing is in place, bond counsel will have to come back to the City for a final resolution authorizing the issuance of the refunding bonds. Councilman Mitchell asked if this were an obligation bond for the City. Mr. Nelson said it was a revenue obligation, not payable from any City taxes. 6h. Service station: 6329 Lake St. Special permit for a service station Resolution 87-66 at 6329 W. Lake St. Councilman Mitchell asked why this item was on the agenda. Mayor Hanks said it was because this service station was not in compliance with the current ordinance. 1111 The Director of Planning said this service station existed when the ordinance was adopted in 1973 and that they never submitted a plan for compliance with the special permit requirements in that ordinance. Their plan now meets the requirements but there are some exceptions which do meet the standards for approval in that the size and shape of the property would prevent the , station from fully complying with all of the provisions. They have met the spirit and intent of the ordinance. Jody Berg, applicant, asked about a sidewalk extension being required by the Planning Commission. The Planning Director explained this was brought up by the commission and added as a condition to the special permit. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 87-66 entitled "A resolution granting special permit under Section 14-156(15) of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to permit a service station on property zoned B-2, business district, located at 6329 W. Lake St. " The motion passed 6-0. 6i . Grading in floodplain Special permit for grading and excavation Resolution 87-67 in the floodplain: Lake St./Louisiana Ave. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. -119- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 87-67 entitled "A resolution granting special permit under Section 14-123. 100(2) of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to permit grading and excavation of material in conjunction with the expansion of a storm water ponding area for property zoned I-1 , industrial district, and F-2, floodplain district, located at Lake St. and Louisiana Ave." The motion passed 6-0. • 6j. Outside gas storage Amendment to special permit to construct Resolution 87-68 a facility _ for outside storage at 7115 W. Lake St. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilman Mitchell , seconded by Councilman Strand, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 87-68 entitled "A resolution rescinding Resolution 86-76 adopted on June 16, 1986 and granting special permit under Sections 14-123.100 and 14-171 (6) (z) of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to allow the expansion of a manufacturing and warehouse facility for property zoned I-1 , industrial district, and F-2, floodplain district, at 7115 W. Lake St." The motion passed 6-0. 6k. Building addition: Sandoz Amendment to special permit for building Resolution 87-69 addition at 5320 W. 23rd St. Violet Meckler, 5724 W. 25i St. , said it has come to her attention Sandoz is apparently running a night shift and the noise is keeping the nearby residents awake. She wondered if there were some way for the project not to be permitted. In answer to a question from the Mayor, the City Attorney responded that the Council could impose new or reasonable conditions as part of an amendment to a permit or on its own action. For the addition of a condition such as suggested by Mrs. Meckler, he said he would have to look further into the existing uses already approved. He said if there were noise-related issues independent of the special permit which violate recently enacted noise standards, a separate course of action would need to be taken. Mayor Hanks noted that if the night shift at Sandoz did not violate the noise ordinance at night, Council would not have much to stand on if they made that a special condition. The City Attorney said that would be one way the court could look at the reasonableness of the City's restrictions. Mrs. Meckler said that when her neighborhood opposed 'this development some ten years ago, they were assured it was going to be light industry with no evening or weekend noises or fumes. She said there has been a serious fume problem from their drying plant. She asked that the Council look into that and take it under consideration. -120- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 Lois Solomon, 5800 W. 252 St. , said she was concerned about what the proposed structure will do to the water table. She said there have been ongoing problems with the drainage system which was very frustrating. She said she and her neighbors have apple trees in their yards whose roots are rotted away from high water. Mayor Hanks asked if the proposed structure was ,not going to be on the east side in the current parking locality and not in water storage, to which the Director said that was true. Mayor Hanks said sometime back there was a study for a potential drainage plan for this area which included a holding reservoir and asked if that were still in the discussion stage. The Director said it was and that an outside consultant was involved in the process and a report was expected within30 days or so. Councilman Mitchell said that an addition to this property had been dealt with a number of times. He was curious as to how much more expansion is planned on this site. The Director said the currently a' prDxi :a.21�j 40 percent of the property is vacant and if you deducted 10-15% for wetland purposes, there would be expansion available of 40%. 1110 Councilman Strand asked if there were a restriction on night shifts currently in force for this type of activity. The Director said there was not; however, the noise ordinance would apply. Councilman Strand asked if complaints re noise had been received on this facility. The Director said not that he was aware of. Mrs. Solomon said there was supposed to be a buffer zone separating their property from Sandoz. The Director said that was so indicated on the design plan. John Nelson, representing Sandoz Nutrition, stated he would like to address the complaints of noise and odor. He said in the past there have been complaints about Sandoz and upon investigation it was determined they were not the culprit. He noted that the raquet club to the north had some air conditioning problems on the roof which turned out to be the source of noise. Also, he said they were aware of Win Stephens Buick have unloaded trucks but he was not aware if they were permitted to do that at night. He said the spray dryer did operate 24 hours. Councilman Mitchell referred to the odor problem, smell of chocolate and other odors. Mr. Nelson was aware of these complaints and they have assigned an engineer 11111 to investigate what the problem may be. They have installed a new type filter and are curious as to why there still is an odor problem. He said the liquids to be brought in are milk, corn syrup and vegetable oil . Councilman Friedman asked if this addition would increase the capacity of the plant. Mr. Nelson said it would, but primarily their intent is to relieve -121 City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 a dirty condition in that this is a liquid receiving facility and they are replacing a wetting process. They are trying to eliminate the messy situation of powder being all over everything. Councilman Friedman asked if they are increasing capacity, is this indicattve of their adding staff and hours to increase their product line. Mr. Nelson said the individuals in the current wetting process will now be doing the liquid receiving activity, and does not necessarily mean they will be increasing manpower. . There being no further questions, the 'Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilman Backes, seconded by Councilman Strand, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 87-69 entitled "A resolution rescinding Resolution 85-223 adopted on Dec. 16, 1985 rescinding Resolution 84-81 adopted on June 4, 1984, rescinding Resolution 6943 adopted on Sept. 8, 1981 and granting special permit under Section 14-124 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to zoning to allow construction of an office, processing and warehouse addition on property located in the DDD, diversified development district, at 5320-5330 W. 23rd St." The motion passed 6-0. Councilman Friedman asked if Council could be privy to the report that Sandoz brings back relative the hours, the noise and what they find out. 0111 and if they could do it in a reasonable length of time, perhaps within 30 days and then we would make that available to the residents. 61 . Timothy O'Toole's Amendment to a special permit Resolution 87-70 to change the use at 4600 Excelsior Blvd. from restaurant to retail sales and to permit the expansion of Timothy O'Toole's Pub Gerda Holmes, 4530 W. 38th St., presented a petition opposing this special permit. She said directly across the street from her 72-unit condominium is a municipal parking lot along side of which is Jenning's Red Coach, Timothy O'Toole's Pub and what was Maggie's Pizza. She said everyone coming to these places parks in the municipal parking lot, but they come early and stay late and that there are cars and motorcycles roaring around, police cars there, and noise that wouldn't be believed. Then when the places close, a good number of these people wander into the condominium's parking lot and indulge x, in various activities, generally causing more noise and Titter. Phillip Pickett, 3755 Ottawa Ave. , said that over the past 5-10 years, he has seen a great improvement of the conditions around Jenning's and Timothy O'Toole' s. He felt that Jenning's runs a tight ship; they are very cooperative with the neighborhood. He was concerned about the traffic to be generated by the watertower project on Hwy. 100 and W. 36th. He felt the complaints of the condominium owners represented more of a housekeeping problem. He thought the relocation of the liquor store to the Maggie's property would assist in relieving the parking congestion problems. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing -122- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilman Backes, seconded by Councilman Strand, to waive reading and adopt Resolution No. 87-70 entitled "A resolution rescinding Resolution 6467 adopted on January 7, 1980 and rescinding Resolution 7390 adopted on May 16, 1983 which amended Resolution 5652 adopted December 20, 1976 and granting special permit under Section 14-124. 101 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit an off-sale liquor store at 4600 Excelsior Blvd. and two Class I restaurants at 4606-4630 Excelsior Blvd. in the PUD, planned unit development district. " Councilman Strand acknowledged that a surrounding neighborhood was bound to have some measure of problems when living adjacent to this type of commercial business. He would support the special permit because it involved a shifting of uses without any additional gross and net square footage involved. He didn't feel that allowing the special permit would aggravate the current situation. Councilman Duffy said he had also heard complaints. He felt that the situation could be controlled in good measure through the efforts of the Police Department. He said there has traditionally been a problem with parking all along Excelsior Blvd. He said a move was now being made toward making it better in that in the present special permit request there was a reduction in parking from 34 to 26 percent - perhaps only a space or two, but a step in the right direction. Ilk The motion passed 6-0. 6m. A-ABCO Sandblasting Special permit to construct a Resolution 87-71 facility for outside storage of sand at 7000 Oxford St. There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Backes, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 87-71 entitled "A resolution granting special permit under Section 14-171 (6) (z) of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating to zoning to permit for the construction of a facility for the outside storage of sand for property zoned I-1 industrial district located at 7000 Oxford St." The motion passed 6-0. 6n. Motec Service Center Amendment to special permit to Resolution 87-72 , permit modifications to an automotive service center at 5125 Minnetonka Blvd." Ill, There being no one wishing to speak, the Mayor declared the hearing closed with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue to a future date. In answer to a question from Councilman Mitchell , Mayor Hanks said a letter had been received from Motec asking for a study of a potential amendment -123- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 , to the zoning ordinance. 41111 Councilman Mitchell asked if Council had directed the Planning Commission in context of the overall zoning ordinance. The Assistant City Manager said this was a special permit request, separate from the rezoning request that Council had received from Motec. These were two separate issues. The request referred to the Planning Commission concerned - the amount of time cars could remain in their parking lot. It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Mitchell , to waive reading and adopt Resolution 87-72 entitled "A resolution rescinding Resolution 7320 adopted on Jan. 17, 1983 granting a five-year special permit under Section 14-156(18) of the St. Louis Park ordinance code relating- to zoning to allow an automotive service center for property located in the B-2, business district, at 5125 Minnetonka Blvd." Councilman Strand said he was going to vote no. He felt this proposal was on a collision course with the neighborhood and that by extending the special permit for the number of years being talked about and also allowing different types of business on the property, Council was sending the wrong message to the applicant. He believed if they continue to grow and be as successful as they are, there was going tobeareal problem in what he considers to be a residential neighborhood. The motion passed 5-1 (Councilman Strand opposed) . Councilman Backes left the chambers. 6o. Improvement 87-04 Improvement hearing, Project 87-04, paving of Jordan Ave. from W. 16th St. to the cul-de-sac. Vern Peterson, owner of home at 1410 Jordan. He was curious as to the timing of this project - was it tied into the 1-394 construction. The Director of Public Works said it was insofar as the City held back on the- project until sure what was going on with I-394. Nevertheless, the street is in need of repair. Mr. Peterson asked about properties being indirectly benefitted by the project. Mayor Hanks responded that matters of project payment are addressed at the assessment hearing. He told Mr. Peterson the Council 's policy on all street improvement assessment is $16.00/front foot, and the City picks up the rest. The benefitted property generally refers to side streets and the property owner picks up a share of the corner lot, which pays more because that property has streets on both sides` but not the full $16.00/ft. for the side street. That is apportioned halfway down the block. You pay for your driveway apron. The Director said that in this particular project side street assessment is not an issue. . Mr. Peterson wondered if it wouldn't be wise to postpone this project until41/11 the impact of I-394 is seen. -124- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 11111 The Director said that the issue of the impact of I-394 is fairly well defined and staff has plannedthe Jordan Ave. project so that it would fit with the I-394 improvement. He said any impact of I-394 would be negligible as Jordan is a long street with a cul-de-sac. Mr. Peterson asked if there were a plan for sound barriers. The Director said the sound barrier matter was an 1-394 issue and that the neighborhood, , some number of years ago, elected not to have sound barriers. However, there will be retaining walls to hold back grade differences between the frontage road and Jordan Ave. area. Mrs. Allen Anderson, 1420 Jordan Ave. , asked if it was in the plans that the west side would have shrubs and landscaping on their side of Hwy. 18. She said at a meeting on this project, the east side of Hwy. 18 wanted sound barriers, but that the west side did not. She said her neighborhood was promised there would be landscaping and shrubs put in the west side to replace the sound barriers. She asked is this were still on the agenda. The Director responded that this issue does relate to I-394 for noise attenuation. He said staff has approached MnDOT relative to that and was told there would be a separate landscaping contract for the corridor. MnDOT is still in the designing stage and under consideration. He said staff will be on top of this as it moves along. There being no one further wishing to speak, the Mayor, closed the hearing with the right of Council to thereafter reopen and continue it at a future date. It was moved by Councilman Mitchell , seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive reading and adopt resolution ordering in the project. In the absence of Councilman Backes, Mayor Hanks asked for a motion to continue. It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Mitchell to continue the hearing to July 6, 1987. The motion passed 5-0. 6p. Improvement hearing 86-30 Improvement hearing, Project 86-30, paving of 3300 block of Wyoming, Xylon and Yukon Dave Himmer, 3321 Wyoming Ave. So. He said he had looked at the curb and gutter situation on Wyoming and felt there was no sufficient deterioration of the street warranting complete curb and gutter replacement. He didn't see any roots heaving up the curb/gutter, displacing it; the only deterioration he noticed is that some two years ago the water hydrant at the end of the street was opened which deteriorated the end of the street at 34th. This has never been repaired. 11111 Julie Steber, 3314 Wyoming Ave. , expressed her concern about the trees. She wondered if the proposed project would affect or necessitate removal of any of the trees. -125- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 The Director of Public Works responded there would be no trees removed. It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Mitchell , to continue the public hearing to July 6, 1987. The motion passed 5-0. 6q. Improvement 87-05 Improvement hearing, Project 87-05, paving of Drew Ave. from W. 24th to east City limits. It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Mitchell , to continue the hearing to July 6, 1987. The motion passed 5-0. PETITIONS, REQUESTS, COMMUNICATIONS 7a. Communication from HRA Traffic studies: Hwy. 100/W. 36th St. project Councilman Strand referred to the City's consultant 's traffic report and the projected traffic by 1995. He hoped the Council was aware of the existing numbers of cars on the streets: Monterey just about doubles; Quentin picks up 1 ,000 cars, Wooddale picks up a couple of thousand. He felt that if the improvements suggested are made, the traffic impact on the neighborhood was going to be 'tremendous. He felt very strongly the suggested improvements be instituted. He asked if there were any improvements suggested in the4111 traffic reports that were not being contemplated to be carried out. He wondered who was going to pay for the major improvements at the Wooddale, Excelsior, Hwy. 100 intersection. The Executive Director of the HRA said it was contained in the transmittal from the Housing and Redevelopment Authority Item No. 1 under immediate improvements. This would be fully funded and made operable by the redevelopment process. Councilman Duffy expressed his concern over the proposed huge increase in traffic on W. 38th St. He felt something major was going to have to be done whether it be a one-way street or what. Councilman Strand asked whose responsibility it will be to determine whether this study is actually implemented as part of the overall plan, i .e. will that fall within the HRA' s jurisdiction. Mayor Hanks was of the opinion everything would be brought to the Council as it was developed. Councilman Strand said that if this project is going to fall within the HRA's jurisdiction, at least to make sure it's moving along, he moved that the City Council encourage the HRA to consider and adopt the recommendations of this traffic study as part of the proposed Excelsior/Hwy. 100 development. 41/11 Councilman Duffy seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. -126- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES -11111 8a. Hausken Addition Subdivision bond release Resolution 87-73 By consent, Council adopted Resolution 87-73 entitled "Resolution reducing performance bond for Hausken Addition." 8b. Temporary use, City property Resolution granting temporary use of Resolution 87-74 City property By consent, Council adopted Resolution 87-74 entitled "Granting temporary use of City property" (fireworks at Aquila Park on July 4) . REPORTS FROM OFFICERS, BOARDS, COMMITTEES 9a. Parkwoods Rd. parking restrictions Traffic study 370: Parking restrictions R6 solution 87-75 along Parkwoods Rd. It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Duffy, to waive reading and adopt Resolution 87-75 entitled "Resolution authorizing installation of traffic control signs along both sides of Parkwoods Rd. from the point where currently no parking anytime restrictions are in effect to the northerly property lines of 2341 and 2348 Parkwoods Rd." 1110 The motion passed 5-0. 9b. Residential Home Energy Conservation By consent, the following two Resolution 87-76, 87-77 resolutions were adopted by the Council : Resolution No. 87-76 entitled "Home Energy Checkup Program: Residential Energy Conservation; and Resolution 87-77: Resolution authorizing the submittal of an application for grant funding to the Minnesota Department of Energy and Public Service for ,Fiscal Year 1987-Cycle III" (designating City of Plymouth as lead unit of government) . 9c. Cable TV Advisory Commission minutes 9d. May financial report 9e. Planning Commission minutes Items 9d, 9d, 9e ordered filed by consent. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 10a. Boards and Commissions It was moved by Councilman Friedman, seconded by Councilman Strand to accept the resignation of Ted Martz from the Cable TV Advisory Commission and direct staff to send him an appropriate letter of thanks for his service on this commission. The motion passed 5-0. -127- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 NEW BUSINESS lla. Food vending machines Amendment to ordinance re food1111 vending machine licenses It was moved by Councilman Duffy to waive first reading, set second reading for July 6, 1987 and authorize summary publication. The motion passed 5-0. lib. Bid tab: Spray booth Construction of paint spray booth at Municipal Service Center By consent, Environmental Systematics was designated as the lowest responsible bidder for construction of a paint spray booth at the Municipal Service Center at an amount not to exceed $53,650. llc. Well improvement contract By consent, a time extension was granted to Layne-Western Company, Inc. for the completion of work on Wells 13 and 14 under contract 1798. lld. Refurbishing of City Hall Bid tabulation Councilman Friedman noted that the budget allowance for this project was $5,000 and that staff is asking for a contract of $13,277.30. He asked about the discrepancy. The Assistant City Manager explained that this was anticipated to be done41111 over a three-year period of time. Staff was proposing that the allocation be spread over three budgets. Councilman Friedman asked if the Council were able to budget two years in advance. He questioned the legality of such an action. He said he was not willing to commit to such an allocation when it wasn't in the budget and no hearing had been held. Councilman Mitchell said if the selection process was as firm as it seemed to be, perhaps the way to proceed was an adjustment to the budget. Mayor Hanks noted the necessary votes were not available that evening for that type of action. It was moved by Councilman Strand, seconded by Councilman Mitchell , to defer the item to July 6, 1987. The motion passed 5-0. lle. Pulltabs , Cystic Fibrosis Foundation By consent, an application by the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation to sell pulltabs at the Ambassador Hotel lounge was approved. llf. Parcel at Hwy. 7/Flag Ave. Councilman Strand said he has received a number of calls from residents in this area concerned about activity going on on this piece of land. It turns out the activity was City staff doing some soil testing. -128- City Council meeting minutes June 15, 1987 It was his understanding the Planning Department was working on a site 11111 plan. At the time Council passed a resolution relative to this piece of land, Councilman Strand said it was his intent that before a plan is -developed, Council ought to sit down and talk about what they would like to see happen on that land and then go forward having given staff its input. be pled Councilman Strand asked that this item /on an upcoming study session for further discussion. Councilman Mitchell seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-0. MISCELLANEOUS 12a. Claims Mildred Petersen By consent, the claim was referred to the City Clerk and City Attorney. 12b. Communication from Mayor Mayor Hanks said Party in the Park was moving forward and that there would be a queen contest on the weekend of June 28. He said relative to fireworks, he alluded to the letter received from the VFW. In the future, if the community does want fireworks, the insurance is becoming a financial burden. The City will have to look at what its contribution will be should the fireworks continue. 12c. Communications from City The Assistant City Manager gave a brief update on what is planned for the first anniversary of granular activated carbon treatment plant. BIDS, APPROPRIATIONS, CONTRACT PAYMENTS 13a. Verified claims By consent the list of verified claims, prepared by the Director of Finance dated June 15, 1987 in the amount of $238,589.53 for vendor claims and $12,320.01 for payroll claims be approved and the City Manager and City Treasurer be authorized to issue checks in the appropriate amounts. 13. Final payment Northern N General Contracting Resolution 87-78 By consent, Resolution 87-78 was approved, entitled "Resolution accepting work on sedimentation basin, City project 87-14." 14. Adjournment It was moved by Councilman Duffy, seconded by Councilman Strand to adjoun the meeting at 10:45 p.m. °Iy14146, (v. /44yuk....--- ecording Secretary