Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999/09/13 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session CITY OF 1 ST. LOUIS OFFICIAL MINUTES _IfiPARK CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION September 13, 1999 The meeting convened at 7 00 p m Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Chris Nelson, Jim Brimeyer, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Robert Young, Ron Latz and Mayor Jeff Jacobs Staff present City Manager (Mr Meyer), Director of Community Development (Mr Harmening), Economic Development Coordinator(Mr Anderson), Planning Coordinator(Ms Erickson), Housing Supervisor (Ms Schnitker), Housing Programs Coordinator(Ms Kathy Larsen), Director of Inspections (Mr Hoffman), Director of Public Works (Mr Rardin), Public Works Coordinator (Mr Merkley), Superintendent of Engineering (Mr Moore), and City Clerk (Ms Cindy Larsen) 1. Mn/DOT Noise Wall Beth Noondorf and Jim Hanson of MnDOT presented to Council the project, construction issues, and proposed timetable They stated that funding has been allocated and construction is proposed to begin in the year 2000 Ms Noondorf and Mr Hanson also presented a map of the proposed construction site Councilmember Brimeyer asked what criteria was used to determine where the noise wall should be placed Mr Hanson stated that 811 areas around the state were used in the study The criteria for determining noise wall priorities were decibel levels, density of homes, and noise barrier construction The overall cost for each area was determined and priorities were set Discussion continued on traffic noise and whether a sound wall would make a noticeable difference Mr Meyer asked how MnDot determines the consensus of the neighborhoods Mr Hanson stated that MnDot would like at least a 60% agreement with the plan A neighborhood meeting will be held on September 28th at the Rec Center at 6 30 p m On January 22, 2000 a letter will be sent out to the residents of the affected neighborhoods Mr Moore suggested residents living with a block and a half on the east side of the noise wall should be invited to an educational meeting and there will be a meeting in January with residents on the west side 2. Stormwater Utility Fund Councilmember Brimeyer pointed out that the rate for commercial property was significantly 111 higher than residential Mr Merkley stated that the rates were determined for each property class based on projected run off Mr Merkley said that a rate had been set that could provide payback in five to ten years Study Session Minutes -2- September 13, 1999 Discussion turned to how the average sum of land use is calculated Councilmember Nelson asked what capital projects could be undertaken with the fund and if the prospective income could pay for future needs Mr Rardin stated that the fund would be subsidized in the beginning111 from the general fund and eventually become self-sustaining Councilmember Sanger asked if the City has information on public reaction in other communities Mr Merkley responded that they did not Councilmember Sanger wondered if it was sensible to increase the rates to deal with additional flooding problem areas Mr Merkley stated that after the funding for current projects was secure they could look at modifying the rate Discussion concentrated on how current sewer operations are funded and possible changes the Council might see in the General Fund requests The impact on businesses was also discussed Councilmember Santa was concerned about the impact on commercial properties in her ward and asked if the rates would be revisited in a few years Councilmember Sanger replied that once the bonds were issued the rates could not be revisited Mr Meyer asked if Council agreed on several points He asked if there was support for the utility, were the rates good, and are the charges comparable The Council agreed that all of those were correct Mr Merkley stated that even if the rate were reduced, maintenance projects would still be done and paid for out of the utility fund Mr Rardin believed that there was limited capacity for the Public Works department to complete all projects due to previous commitments to complete the sidewalk and trails plan and Park Commons Council reached the conclusion that it would be best to implement Option two, which would adopt the proposed stormwater utility ordinance and fee suggestions Mr Meyer said that staff would be returning with a proposed public participation and education process Mr Merkley stated that he would bring forward a draft ordinance 3. Project for Pride in Living—Louisiana Court Mr Harmening began by giving a brief background of the item Ms Kathy Larsen was introduced as the new Housing Programs Coordinator Mark Ruff, Ehlers and Associates, Inc , presented the plans for possible financing of the renovation and rehabilitation Barb McCormick, Project for Pride in Living, was also in attendance Mr Ruff stated that the City could enter into the project with an adequate amount of security and that the plan was fiscally feasible Study Session Minutes -3- September 13, 1999 Councilmember Brimeyer wanted to ensure that condemnation would not be pursued as an 111 option Mr Harmening asked Council if condemnation should be considered if the circumstances warranted Councilmember Young stated that he did not see the budget capacity to undertake this project He was concerned that the physical improvements of the project would not reach the improvement goals they had hoped for Councilmember Brimeyer asked why the Park Commons TIF was used as security for the bond Mr Ruff replied that it was to provide additional security to the lender issuing the bonds He reminded Council that Park Commons is only one of several options Councilmember Sanger suggested that the Council view other properties maintained by Project for Pride in Living Councilmember Young was concerned about the consequences if the housing project became non-affordable Councilmember Nelson was in support of the project but was concerned about the fiscal aspect Councilmember Young asked if a more aggressive inspection program would improve the development Barb McCormick of PPL responded that the inspection program does not address management issues She added that PPL has proven that they can bring change to the social climate and improve management decisions Councilmember Young questioned whether changing the management standards should be financed by the City Councilmember Brimeyer stated that someone must change to benefit the community and that government should deal with social issues Councilmember Sanger asked PPL how other properties have fared in terms of improved social condition Ms McCormick stated that it may take weeks to months to remove undesirable tenants She added that the physical changes would come quickly, within the first year Also cash flows, physical and social structures will improve The standards will be visibly raised within three to four years Mayor Jacobs concluded that there was a consensus to go forward Mr Harmening stated that first the preliminary development agreement between PPL and the City of St Louis Park would be drawn up and then the status of the Met Council,grant would be looked into 4. Business Subsidy Policy Mr Harmening explained that though the city already had policies in place, new legislation is requiring all cities to adopt the policy as proposed by the state He did not feel there were conflicts between the two 111 s. Railroad Study Dick Koppy stated that the City of Hopkins was reluctant to implement the strategic plans He also said the City of Minnetonka had already reconciled the situation He asked the Council if St Louis Park would like to take a similar action Study Session Minutes -4- September 13, 1999 Mr Meyer stated the City should try to accomplish the removal of the second blockage Mr Koppy replied that all blocking will be done in Hopkins He added that the railroad company was willing to accept the short-term solution Mr Koppy informed the Council that he would be visiting the City of Hopkins the following day with a consultant Mr Meyer raised the issue of the funding source Council consensus supported the short-term solution 6. Rec Center Financing The Council agreed with the staff recommendation to transfer funds from the Public Improvement Revolving Fund, to set an annual transfer amount for the Rec Center bonds, receive future Zamboni payments as revenue, and that additional funds should come from the Matured Special Assessment Fund 7. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10 10 p m J6 • A - - - ,/ _ /L1 % lerk • I