Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001/01/16 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular CliITY OF OFFICIAL MINUTES ST. LOUIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PARK ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA JANUARY 16, 2001 1. Call to Order and Roll Call Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:40 p.m. The following Councilmembers were present at roll call: Ron Latz, Chns Nelson, Sue Sanger, Robert Young, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Also present weie the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Scott), EDA Attorney (Mr. Bubul); Finance Director (Ms. McGann); Director of Community Development (Mr. Harmening); Planning Associate (Ms. Peterson), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Olson). 2. Presentations - None 3. Approval of Minutes CD a. City Council Minutes of December 18, 2000 LU The minutes were approved as presented with the following change. Item 7b, Paragraph 3, change "Lubor" to "Lubov". (... b. Study Session Minutes of December 11, 2000 Co The minutes were approved as presented with the following change. Item 3, Paragraph 3, change "one's" to "the median". 4. Approval of Agenda and Consent Items NOTE: Consent items are those items of business, which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regulai agenda for discussion. a. Agenda It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the agenda. The motion passed 5-0 b. Approval of Consent Items It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the following Consent Items. The motion passed 5-0. Council Meting Minutes -2- January 16,2001 1 Authorize execution of a contract extension to Contract No. 1893 with Severn Trent Services (STL—Denver) for laboratory serviced related to the Reilly Tar& Chemical Corporation groundwater sampling program through year 2001. 2. Adopt amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Campbell Knutson to reflect 2001 rates. 3. Adopt Resolution No. 01-001 designating the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor as the City's Official Newspaper for 2001. 4. Approve 2001 City Council meeting dates. 5. Adopt Resolution No. 01-002 an amendment to Resolution No 00-124 regarding issuance of on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses in the City. 6. Adopt Resolution No. 01-003 amending section 11-1003 and 11-004 of the St. Louis.. Park Municipal code related to false alarms and approving resolution setting false ala lee, approve the summary and authoiize its publication 7 Accept the following reports for filing: a. Planning Commission Minutes of December 6, 2000 b. Housing Authoiity Minutes of December 18, 2000 c. Vendor Claims 5. Public Hearings 5a. Competitive Cable TV System Franchises Public Hearing It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to continue the public hearing to February 19, 2001. The motion 5-0. 5b. Park Commons Tax Increment Financing (TIF) District and Business Subsidy Hearing. Resolution No. 01-004 Tom Kleve, Economic Development Coordinator presented a staff report and recommended approval. He stated that the Park Commons TIF district is being created to help facilitate the redevelopment of the Park Commons East project. He explained the construction phases relating to the TIF plan for the Park Commons East development and indicated that Phase 1 must be completed by February 2003. He stated that he received a letter from Hennepin County that will be added into the pubic record as Exhibit A. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. Steve Buffington, Minnikanda Vista Neighborhood Association, stated that the neighborhood association objected to the approval of the TIF District and the adoption of the Park Commons East project He presented some documents to be added into the public record as Exhibit B. With no one else wishing to speak, Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. Councilmember Nelson asked staff to comment on the spreadsheet provided by the neighborhood asociatiori. s .. -F S . c• t Council Meeting Minutes -3- Januaiy 16,2001 Mr. Harmening, Director of Community Development stated that the parcels met the statutory tests required by the,City,toacreate a TIFDtstrict just as the City's third party assessment found as well. Councilmember Nelson asked when the City Council would vote on issuing general obligation TIF bonds Mr Buffington questioned the use of general obligation tax increment bonds and that he would review his questions with Mr. Kleve after the meeting. Mr. Kleve, Economic Development Coordinator stated that the TIF bonds would not be issued until all of the public improvements are complete around the end of next year. He stated that they could not be issued until there was at least 120% coverage of the bond payments. Mark Ruff, Ehlers and Associates, stated that the tax increment plan states that rig proposed the development may be financed by a variety of revenue sources including proceeds of existing general obligation tax increment bonds (cured by increment from other tax increment districts) It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to close the TIF and Business Subsidy hearing and to adopt Resolution No. 01-004 modifying the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the TIF Plan for the Excelsior Boulevard TIF District and establishing the Park Commons Tax Increment Financing W District and adopting its TIF Plan The motion passed 5-0. Z Z 6. Requests and Communications from the Public - None 7. Requests and Communications from the Public 0 Cn 7a. First Reading of the Ordinance Amending Water & Sewer Utility Rates for 2001 Jean McGann, Finance Director presented a brief staff report and recommended approval. It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to waive first reading and set second reading for February 5, 2001. The motion passed 5-0. 7b. Second Reading of Amendment to Zoning Map to Change the Zoning from C-2 General Commercial, R-C High Density Residential, and R-3 Two-Family Residential to M-X Mixed-Use, R-C High-Density Residential and R-3 Two Family Residential for Comprehensive Plan Consistency fot Park Commons East Case No. 00-60-Z Area east of Quentin Avenue, west of Monterey Drive, and north of Excelsior Boulevard to the southern portion of Wolfe Park. Ordinance No. 2186-01 Torn Harmening, Director of Community Development presented a staff report and recommended approval. Council Meeting Minutes -4- January 16,2001 It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve Second Reading of Zoning Map Amendment, adopt Ordinance No. 2186-01, approve summary, and authorize its publication. The motion passed 5-0 7c. TOLD Development Agreement. Resolution No. 01-005 Councilmember Nelson stated that the City has made a commitment to study traffic impacts of this development and be aware of potential mitigation costs. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to adopt lam; Resolution No. 01-005 approving a Contract for Private Redevelopment between the St. til Louis Park Economic Development Authority, the City of St. Louis Park, and Meridian Properties Read Estate Development LLC with the changes discussed at the EDA meeting. The motion passed 5-0 7d. Request by Edina Development Company for a Major amendment to a Conditional Use Permit for site plan, tree replacement and landscaping changes and a variance for w reduced bufferyard for Excelsior Townhomes Case Nos. 00-45-CUP and 00-46-VAR. 7100-7102 Excelsior Boulevard Sacha Peterson, Associate Planner presented a staff report. Staff and the Planning Commission believed the seven criteria had been met for the requested variance and recommended approval of the variance. Staff and the Planning Commission also recommended approval of the Major CUP Amendment, subject to the conditions in the resolution. Ms. Peterson noted the following change to condition 16b• to add "In addition, all roadways shall be maintained free of snow and snow storage from curb to curb with snow being transported of! site if necessary and the City will aggressively enforce snow clearing requirements and parking limitations". Councilmember Latz asked if there were any provisions in the ordinance for penalties for parties that fail to comply with the requirement of coming forward to the Council prior to making their own modifications to a site plan without getting a variance. Ms Peterson stated that she was not aware of any provision. Councilmember Latz asked if there were any provision that prevents the City from amending the ordinance to provide penalties or from adding penalties at the present time to an existing case. Tom Kleve, City Attorney stated the a provision can be made to the zoning ordinance which would make a violation ol a condition ol a CUP the same as a violation ol the zoning ordinance, a misdemeanor or petty misdemeanor. He stated he couldn't envision how we could apply that retroactively to this situation after the violation has occurred. Counc:lmember Latz stated that it couldn't be done from a criminal standpoint, but asked about an administrative penalty. ✓ F Council Meeting Minutes -5- January 16,2001 Mr. Kleve stated that he didn't see,any reason why the City couldn't have an administrative penalty. He stated the argument,for-being applied retroactively would be that it would be a continuing violation. He stated if the Council took some action tonight that would basically make the situation in compliance by granting a variance or granting a major amendment to a CUP and then they would be in compliance and it would no longer be a continuing violation. Councilmember Latz stated that the City was being put in a very awkward position. He did not want the city to be put into the same position again and wanted to send a substantial message to any future developers. He wanted developers to know that in addition to convincing the Council to grant a variance retroactively, that may be substantial financial administrative penalties that the Council could choose to impose. He suggested bringing this policy issue of amending the ordinance to provide for the discretion on the part of the Council to a future study session for discussion. He stated that what the city is left with is a situation where either the developer is forced to go back and tear down whole buildings because they built it too close to a lot line without getting a variance. In this case big trees were removed which lett no ability for staff to independently confirm that those trees had to be removed. He felt the City was put in a no win situation and the only way to resolve these kind of issues is with penalties. Ms. Peterson stated that as far as the variance is concerned staff believes that all seven criteria are met, regardless of whether the site has already been developed or not because there is a physical hardship with the shape of the lot and the wet lands. As far as the CUP, staff recognized that there was already a development there and looking at the existing road width would meet the minimum requirement of 28 feet from the Fire Department and Public Works Councilmember Nelson stated that he was also concerned about coming in retroactively and ' seeking a variance. He believed this needed to be discussed as a general policy issue a future study session. He reviewed some highlights from a Council Packet of July 20, 1998 r� outlining staff recommendations for the development. He noted the importance of aggressively monitoring the snow removal and the no parking zones in order to ensure 20 feet of usable roadway. He suggested that the turn around be extended and the cost be absorbed by the developer. He asked if the sidewalks are indeed five feet in width. Ms. Peterson stated that she didn't have a grading plan, therefore didn't know if extending the turnaround was possible. If it was feasible, the agreement between the City and the developer would need to be amended to inciease the area where the develop is leasing land from the City in order to provide the turnaround and this would be at the developer's expense She believed the sidewalks were less than five feet. She stated that is would be possible to have an arrangement wheic the City would clear the snow if necessary and assess it back to the property owner. Jack Kranovich, Edina Development Corporation believed that the Council had a misconceived idea that the developer had gone in and totally altered the site without the City's knowledge. He provided some photos to be added into the public record of the trees on the property which were impossible to save because of their roots that went under neighboring garages He stated that he talked with the Inspections Department about the Counc11 Mec.,ng Minutes -C- January 16,2001 retaining wall and obtained an approved permit. He stated that he talked to the Fire Marshall who approved the plan. He stated that the snow is being adequately removed at the present time. Councilmember Nelson stated he would like to determine a mechanism to ensure compliance for adequate snow removal in the future. ' Mr. Kranovich said that it would be beneficial to come up with a fine for improper snow removal instead of tearing out the retaining wall and extending the turnaround. The Project Manager explained that the trees and their roots were pushing into the neighboring garages and the garages needed to be protected with the retaining wall. He stated that the sidewalks were five feet. • Councilmember Nelson asked if the developer was amenable to work out some type of liquidated damages if the streets don't get plowed. Mr. Kranovich, Edina Development Corporation stated that he would be amendable to this. Councilmember Sanger asked if permission was granted by the Inspections Department for all of the deviations from the plan without informing Community Development. Ms. Peterson stated that the developer came in with a design change for the retaining wall which does not require any changes to the planning approval. The Inspections Department was not made aware of the fact that changes to the retaining wall necessitated other changes and so planning staff was not informed She stated that it should have been clear to the developer that tree removal should have been notified because there was a specific tree removal plan that was approved Councilmember Sanger stated that she did not believe that the criteria for the vanance has been satisfied because self imposed problems that cause the hardship do not constitute hardship under our ordinance and indicated that economic hardship was not valid criteria for a variance. She believed all the problems were caused by either the developer's failure to do adequate planning on the site or from failure to pick up the phone and call the people who needed to be called. She was opposed to granting the variance. She believed that perhaps too many units were on this lot and more diligent planning would have prevented this pioblem. She was not in favor of voting on approval and saw this as a developer seeking forgiveness rather than seeking permission in the first place. Mr. Kranovich, Edina Development Corporation reiterated that anything that was done was discussed with the Inspections Department. Mayor Jacobs stated that he was uncomfortable with the way this was done and the 20 feet road width. He asked what discretion the City had to approve or disapprove a major amendment of this nature He asked staff how tied the two motion were together. Torn Scott, City Attorney stated that the Council has this within its complete discretion whether it wants to amend any of the conditions to the CUP. Council Meeting Minutes -7- January 16,2001 Ms. Peterson indicated that if the variance was approved there still would be several areas in which the actual site doesInot conform:to the,CUP. Councilmember Nelson suggested that the City build into the condition some way to ensure compliance of maintaining a 20 feet roadway. Recovery of costs to the City could run with the land. Tom Scott, City Attorney stated that this could be accomplished through an agreement with the developer and current owner that the City would have the right to assess any costs incurred that would be built into the Development Contract or CUP or make it a condition of the CUP that runs with the land Councilmember Sanger asked if the best way to accomplish this would be to set up an escrow account. Mr. Scott, City Attorney stated that this option could be looked at also. Mayor Jacobs was not concerned about the variance, but was concerned about road width. Councilmember Latz asked why the developer couldn't have lowered the site with the edge of the development. a Gary Rude of Edina Development Corporation stated that the root systems were too LLJ extensive. Councilmember Latz asked why it was not evident that the tree roots would be extending beyond the range on the property when the original plan was designed. Mi Rude stated that the project would have not been possible without the removal of the ;11 trees. He indicated that he talked with Helen Bigos who owned the garages and the roots were pushing her garages in and agreed with the removal of the trees. Councilmember Latz did not agree with the garage issue as a factor of the tree removal. He believed the developer created his own hardship by paying too much for the property and having to load the density on the site. He believed the developer denied the City the opportunity to basically force the developer to redesign the project. Councilmember Sanger asked the developer what the emergency was that prevented him from calling the Community Development Department before taking action. Mr Rude stated that Scott Moore from Inspections had been out at the site and they had made the cut along the side and the trees had to come down. We possibly could have made a phone call. Councilmember Young stated that he was convinced by the photos that the trees had to come down because of the potential future liability by the landowner. He noted that this road width was not uncommon in the City, i.e. Victoria Ponds. Councilmember Latz asked what the tree replacement requirements were. Council Meeting Minutes -8- January 16,2001 Mr. Harmening stated that the trees that were removed were cottonwood trees and a cash contribution and plantings on the site would meet the City's tree replacement ordinance Ms Peterson stated the tree replacement requirements in this case are proposed to be met by a combination of on site replacement and cash in lieu of on site which would be approximately $9,600. Councilmember Sanger suggested that this was not the City's problem, but let the developer go back and do some planning and thinking and how he might intend to remedy his own mistakes. Councilmember Nelson supported the variance issue and stated he was going to make a recommendation with respect to the roadway. Councilmember Latz asked the City Attorney if it was possible to levy any kind of administrative penalty on the developer for failure to follow the required process in this case. Mr Scott, City Attorney stated that he didn't see any way to impose any sort of administrative penalty since it was not in any existing ordinance on this developer. He indicated that the City could make a provision in the zoning ordinance that makes violation of a CUP a misdemeanor. The Council discussed the various options that would remedy the situation. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Young, to approve Resolution No. 01-006 approving a variance for reduced bufferyard along east lot line. The motion passed 4-1. Councilmember Sanger opposed. Mr. Meyer, City Manager stated that it would also be helpful to review the issue of the enforcement of the parking to ensure public safety. Mr. Harmening stated that if this issue was to be continued it would need to be with the understanding that the developer was willing to wnte a letter agreeing to extend the period of time to work through this on a cooperate basis. Mr Kravanovich agreed to extend the required time period for 60 days. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Young, to defer considering the major amendment to the CUP to the next Council Study Session and we come back with an agi cement between the City and the developer as to how we are going to implement an enfoi cement mechanism with some form of damages. If the condition continued unabated for a reasonable time the City would recover any cost incurred. He suggested that staff also iook at the police departments inci eased enforcement costs. The motion passed 5-0 It was moved by Councilmember Latz , seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to refer this matter to the City Attorney for consideration of misdemeanor charges for violation of the zoning ordinance Council Meeting Minutes -9- January 16,2001 Councilmember Nelson believed the act of refemng the issue to the City Attorney speaks to the mindset of the City Council. A violation has occurred and he felt by directing to the City Attorney it was direction,to pursue the issue.-;The motion passed 5-0. 7e. Request by Westside Office Park to rezone property from R-4, Multiple Family to C-2, General Commercial and to vacate a portion of W. 14th Street 6009 Wayzata Boulevard Case Nos. 01-01-A and 01-02-VAC Sacha.Peterson, Planner presented a staff report and recommended approval. It was moved by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to approve first reading of Zoning Ordinance Map amendment changing the designation on property located at 6009 Wayzata Boulevard R-4, Multiple Family Residential to C-2, General Commercial and set second reading for February 5, 2001. The motion passed 5-0. It was moved by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to approve first reading of an ordinance vacating a portion of W. 14th Street, subject to the condition described in the ordinance, and set second reading for February 5, 2001. The motion passed 5-0 Mr Meyer, City Manager noted that this would be Sacha Peterson's last meeting. 7f. Election of Mayor Pro-tem. Resolution No. 01-007 It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Young, to adopt Resolution No. 01-007 appointing Councilmember Latz as Mayor Pro-tern. The motion passed 4-1. Councilmember Latz abstained. 8. Board and Committees 8a. Appoint members to the Human Right Commission It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to appoint Knsti Rudelius-Palmer, Cassandra Boddy, Maya Winoker, and Jake Feldman to the Human Rights Commission The motion passed 5-0. 9. Communications From the City Manager—None From the Mayor—None 10. Adjournment Mayor Jacobs adjourned the'.meeting at 9 50 p1m Ci Clerk M.,or