Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/11/21 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular CITY OF OFFICIAL MINUTES ST. LOUIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PARK ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA November 21, 2005 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Council members present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basil!, Jim Brimeyer, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger and Sue Santa Staff present. Assistant Zoning Administrator(Mr. Morrison), Associate Planner(Mr. Fulton), City Manager(Mr Harmening), City Attorney(Mr. Jamnik), City Engineer(Mr. Brink), Community Development Director(Mr. Locke), Director of Parks &Rec. (Ms. Walsh), Director of Technology and Support Services (Mr. Pires), Economic Development Coordinator(Mr. Hunt), Finance Director(Ms. McGann), Public Works Director(Mr. Rardin), Planning/Zoning Supervisor(Ms. McMonigal), and Recording Secretary(Ms. Stegora-Peterson). 2. Presentations a Presentation from the City of Brooklyn Park Brooklyn Park City Councilmember Janette Meyer presented a resolution commending St. Louis Park for assistance provided after severe storms this summer. Ms. Walsh indicated equipment and an operator were sent to help remove tree limbs. b. Recognition of Lynn Schwartz Mayor Jacobs recognized Ms. Schwartz for 15 years of service to the City of St. Louis Park. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of November 7, 2005 The minutes were approved as presented. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion Consent items are acted upon by one motion If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience,that item may be moved to an appropnate section of the regular agenda for discussion. 4a. Accept Jaycees donation of$500.00 and authorize the City to make a contribution to the Police Reserves for$500.00 4b. Preparation for possible purchase of tax forfeited property, 2741 Salem Ave South from Hennepin County 4c. Accept BOZA Minutes of June 23, 2005 for filing 4d. Accept Planning Commission Minutes of October 19, 2005 for filing 4e. Accept Housing Authority Minutes of October 19, 2005 for filing It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar The motion passed 7-0 Council Meeting Minutes -2- November 21, 2005 5. :oards and Commissions- None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing to Consider 2006 Utility Rates Ms. McGann presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. Mayor Jacobs asked what the overall impact was on an average sized house? Ms. McGann replied approximately$10.63 per quarter. Councilmember Bnmeyer asked the amount of the revenue bond issued for storm water? Ms. McGann replied the 20-year term on the initial GO revenue bond done in 2001 was $3,265,000. All repayments for outstanding debt were figured in. Councilmember Finkelstein indicated the report identified upcoming projects that do not have a funding source. Is that why the estimated costs of the storm water fund were increasing over time? Ms. McGann responded many storm water projects needed to be done and with reserves available within the storm water utility, it's not feasible to do those projects. In addition, St. Louis Park was awarded a$750,000 grant from the State which requires a 100%match, which was calculated into the rate increase. Councilmember Sanger asked if the rates that were being increased were a pass-through of the actual costs to provide services to the residents? Ms. McGann replied yes. The cost of providing the infrastructure and the usage of each one of the utilities has to be paid by individual users and cannot be supplemented by property taxes. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Omodt to approve First Reading of an ordinance setting 2006 rates charged for Water, Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, and Storm Water Utility and set Second Reading for December 5, 2005. The motion passed 7-0. 6b. Sam's Club - Vacation of a Utility Easement Mr. Fulton presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. Councilmember Santa asked if the water mains would be moved to the new location? Mr. Fulton replied yes, Sam's Club would incur that cost. Councilmember Santa asked if that would inconvenience the neighboring residents or businesses? Mr. Fulton replied the inconvenience would be minor. The new water main will be in place before they shut off the old water main. Councilmember Santa asked when that happens, can they ensure those affected would receive notice? Mr. Fulton replied he believed they could do that. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Sanger to approve First Reading of an ordinance vacating a utility easement across Sam's Club property at 7115 W Lake St. and 3745 Louisiana Ave S and set Second Reading for December 5, 2005. The motion passed 7-0. Council Meeting Minutes -3- November 21, 2005 6c. Hoigaard's Village- Public Hearing for the Vacation of an Alley Case No. 05-63-VAC Union Land, LLC. SW Quadrant of Highway 100 and Highway 7 Mr. Fulton presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. Councilmember Basill asked why this was before the PUD on the agenda? Ms. McMonigal replied that the Ordinance requires this public heanng be held at the City Council level, while the other public heanngs were held at the Planning Commission level. Action could be held off until they went through the PUD and it could be approved at that time. Mayor Jacobs tabled the item to be voted on with item 8c. 6d. Time Warner Cable TV Franchise Renewal Mr. Pires presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Basill to continue the public hearing to December 5, 2005. The motion passed 7-0. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public—None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances,Motions 8a. Proposed Transfer of Cable Television System Mr. Pires presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Finkelstein, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to continue transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance and cable system from Time Warner Cable, Inc to Comcast Cable Communications, LLC to December 5, 2006 Council meeting The motion passed 7-0. 8b. Wireless Internet Study - Resolution No. 05-161 Mr. Pires presented the staff report. Glen Peterson, 3320 Yukon, supported the project. Anything that would extend that access to information resources would be good. It was like a utility and becoming increasingly important for people. A concern was the price points and residential service was too high. Residential customers were being asked to subsidize business customers who used the service more hours. Businesses are generally asked to pay twice what residents were being asked to pay. Council Meeting Minutes -4- November 21, 2005 Carol Coffey, 4140 Xenwood, asked Council to do a health impact study. Science showed a variety of health harms. Dr. Carlo was willing to come to consult. Ms. Coffey had previously asked to bring in local healthcare practitioners and Oram Miller, a certified building biology mitigator. Studies showed a number of health effects of wireless. All citizens of St. Louis Park would be affected. She was concerned about routers in homes and discussed impacts of total body load and the burden on the body. "Electro smog" caused bodies to get sick. Wireless was not a huge field,but could be the "straw that broke the camel's back". The FCC and the MN Dept of Health were sources that did not have standards for WiFi and were not credible. She was concerned they were supporting a skewed process. They were charging each household $217 to do this and would also need to spend more to service it. The Council should tell people they could make a request not to be in the pilot project. Businesses had not come in to provide this because it was not profitable and could be obsolete in a few years. The Heartland Institute had come out with information that the few cities that had done this had found it to be risky and had cost taxpayers millions to subsidize. It was misleading to say this was a partnership, which implied an equal risk. St. Louis Park citizens would have all of the liability and risk and would pay contactors to provide the service and to replace equipment in the future. She was concerned that businesses were waiting for the Council to enter this venture and then would come in and make money providing the service. She asked the Council to reconsider. John Madsen, 4066 Brunswick Av. S, didn't believe government should be in the business of providing this service and money could be better spent concentrating this somewhere such as schools. He didn't see this as a revenue stream. Technology changed quickly and they may be getting into something not worth the money they spent. He asked Council to discontinue exploration of wireless. Dr. Bridget Bagley, stated health concerns regarding the impacts of wireless. She referred to the study by Dr Carlo. She photographed people's brains before and after using a cell phone. After children have used phones, they are scrambled and cannot form clear thoughts. It didn't help adults much either. Many doctors in Germany were speaking out for new regulations on exposures to high frequency electromagnetic radiation. Many disorders were being attributed to this. She treated tumors,which were occurring more and more. There hadn't been much testing on it. She referred a web site, cellphonereporter.com. Any time something is plugged in, waves are entering people's cells and altering their chemicals. Oram Miller, stated he had submitted letters, which were available on his web site, createhealthyhomes.com. They were aware expanding wireless was occurring. Health issues were a concern. Information was not made available in this country. He had information from Europe that he addressed regarding health concerns and impacts of radiation and wireless routers. He expressed concerns about MN Dept of Health, the FCC and the WHO, government agencies that could not be trusted because of industry influence. There is"electro smog"throughout the industrialized world and exposure was unnatural for human bio physiology. Physicians were seeing an increase in diseases. He referenced other articles and surveys regarding cell antennas and wireless exposure and the health impacts. The FCC and MN Dept of Health web sites say there is no documented evidence of harm, yet recently the British Health Protection Agency had acknowledged side effects of electromagnetic fields of mobile phones and computer screens as a physical impairment. It takes 20-30 years for the effects of low power radiation to reveal itself. A wireless router may be undesirable exposure. This is lower than cell towers,but the routers have a significant power output within a few feet,which would multiply the "electro smog" through the walls. Council Meeting Minutes -5- November 21, 2005 Mayor Jacobs asked staff to outline the health concerns and agencies consulted to answer questions that were raised. Mr. Pires replied after the July town hall they did additional follow up. Tom Asp, Virchow Krause, stated they looked at a variety of sources including the FCC, Minnesota Department of Health, American Veterinarian Medical Assn. and The American Medical Association. The University of Wisconsin has an extensive site. Many studies had done an exhaustive research, pro or con, and provided good summary information from sources both domestically and internationally. Mayor Jacobs asked if they discussed the notion of"electro smog". One of the question raised was if the addition of WiFi would make a significant difference in health impacts? Mr. Asp replied it was a matter of waves being radiated on a given device such as the bridges (routers) in the houses, which are a 200-milliwatt device, substantially lower than handheld devices from cell phone studies. The power declines the further you get away from the antennae and dissipates rapidly. Mayor Jacobs asked the impact in an apartment building? Mr. Asp replied not all of them would operate at the same time in any given location. If you are right next to it, you may see the 200 milliwatts,but if you are in the next room, it could be down to about 10 milliwatts. Enka Klus, 3216 Edgewood Av. S, as a pharmacist she had come to believe that 80% of prescriptions given were unnecessary. She felt technology had created the need for drugs. She worked with two very different demographics and noticed as nutrition and education went down, the health of people got worse. She was concerned this would add to the cost of society. She suggested they know which homes had this technology so they could report any effects. She hoped the pnvate sector would be funding some of the study. Because of what she had learned from Mr. Miller, she had taken out the WiFi in her home, as well as the cordless phone and was trying to minimize cell phone use. She was concerned a city like this that was about the family would put their families at risk by incorporating this technology. She hoped they proceeded with caution. Phillip Hoagland, 2716 Vernon Av. S, wanted to clarify misinformation that had come up. The bridge device was only necessary when someone wanted to connect a network inside of their house to the outside world. If they only had a laptop, they didn't need a bridge device. Bridge devices have an automatic fall back. While they are rated at 200 milliwatts, they know whether they need that to talk to the device. They only use 10 milliwatts if that's all they require. You can connect an external antenna to the bridge devices. If you don't want the device emitting RF inside your home, you can route a cable from the antennae input to an external antenna and put it on your roof. There are options and they don't have to use a bridge device if they are using a laptop. Ms. Coffey asked Mr. Asp to provide hard copies of information they had found on the various web sites. Councilmember Finkelstein stated this dealt with the issue of what they felt the appropriate role of government was. They have seen the necessity of WiFi and shown it to be something equivalent to providing water and sewer. It was the basis by which cities would be compared in the future. He didn't believe any of the information they had received showed that WiFi reached an unacceptable level regarding health concerns. The radiation it gives is less than many other things such as garage doors and cell phones. The WHO, the Council Meeting Minutes -6- November 21, 2005 MN Dept of Health, the American Medical Association and others had found WiFi to be acceptable. He didn't think the health concerns were a basis for denying it. By pretending it didn't exist would not stop it, it would make their city stronger and allow them to provide more options to citizens and public institutions. It was appropriate to invest and better serve the public. Councilmember Sanger thought they hadn't focused on the benefits of going forward with WiFi; to offer high-speed Internet access to the residents. Many parts of St. Louis Park only have one provider offering that service and they effectively have a monopoly and were charging to match. This will offer people a more affordable choice. One of the speakers believed the price estimated of$25/month for a home was expensive,but the comparison should not be to dial up service, but to other high-speed Internet services. This will be useful for businesses that don't have choices. There were several comments about alleged health concerns of providing this service. From what they had seen from mainstream medical services, this did not seem to be an issue for most people. She understood sensitivities to electrical fields, but it appears they can protect themselves by choosing not to sign up for this service. They were going down the nght path with the pilot project. She heard from many residents interested in going forward. There was some risk because they didn't know how many people would sign up. They had taken other risks that had paid off and she supported the project. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution No.05-161 authorizing staff to proceed with a pilot project for wireless high- speed Internet service at a cost not to exceed$280,000 with the intention of subsequently establishing a citywide wireless high-speed Internet service unless the results of the pilot study suggest that it is unadvisable to proceed further. Councilmember Basill stated he opposed spending money on the study to begin with and would not support this. Wireless can provide a low cost convenient alternative, however, they were talking about spending $300,000 to $4.5 million of taxpayers money. If it was not successful, that money was at risk and taxpayers needed to know that. The survey did not ask if people would support it if they were spending that money. They didn't know what the price points would be. Google offered the entire City of San Francisco free wireless in exchange for advertisement. They were going to put taxpayer money at nsk and he didn't feel good about doing that when the private market was coming in with different alternatives. Councilmember Finkelstein asked Mr. Pires to comment on the City of San Francisco's experience with Google and why they hadn't been looking to partner with the City of Minneapolis. Mr. Pires stated Google had made overtures to provide free wireless to San Francisco. The City of San Francisco had subsequently decided to issue a request for proposal and look at other options in addition to Google. With regard to Minneapolis, they had talked about access to their network in the suburbs, but they were talking about having radios at the borders, which could potentially spill into other communities. They had not expressed any interest in partnering with other communities. The other issue with Minneapolis was the model they were looking at was akin to a franchise cable TV model, where the company would build, own and operate the system and have total control over pncing. One of the goals in St. Louis Park had been to make services like this competitively priced and affordable to people who couldn't currently afford it. Council Meeting Minutes -7- November 21, 2005 Councilmember Brimeyer asked if there were grades or tiered levels of pricing for different kinds of users such as businesses willing to pay more if they have a network? Mr. Pires replied they talked about experimenting with different tiers, which may be slower or faster than the standard one. There potentially could be more than two tiers of service and perhaps lower than the $25 tier. This was something they would learn through expenence with the pilot. Councilmember Santa stated there had been comments about risking taxpayer money, yet earlier they heard discussion about enterpnse funds, that must be supported by the users. What did that mean for a pilot project and for a rollout? Mr. Pires indicated the intent would be a utility model, rates would be charged to recover both the capital investment and the operational costs. To start that, they need to borrow money and then recover those costs through the utility fees. Mr. Harmening stated the source of funds to build this system was the Economic Development fund. They would borrow the initial $280,000 from that fund and set up a formal loan that would be repaid with subscriber fees and do the same for the $4.4 million that would be needed to build the entire system. A speaker stated earlier that each resident would be asked to pay $217 toward the construction and operation of a system. They were not charging residents through property tax dollars. The people who will be paying for the construction and operation would be those who desire to use the Internet service. Councilmember Basill indicated the difference was people need water and sewer and do not need Internet. The nsk goes to taxpayers because if they take this loan and are unable to get the subscribership to pay it back, it would fall on the entire community to pay back the loan. If the private market comes in and does this better, with a better and less expensive product, the taxpayers would be held responsible for the loan. Councilmember Omodt stated he opposed the pilot project. Initially he was in favor, but he had a fear that technology would pass them up too fast before they could implement this. He also had a fear if the marketing study was off that they could be wrong. He hoped he was wrong They met with Qwest who said they would come in with new systems in parts of St. Louis Park. He feared technology would move too fast and they would be stuck with an infrastructure that doesn't make a lot of sense and that they couldn't upgrade fast enough. Councilmember Sanger disagreed with Councilmember Basill about not needing Internet service. It may be true that not everyone needs it 100% today, but going forward it will be something as essential as any other public utility. It is necessary for business, education and to keep the community competitive. If they were going to wait for the private sector to come in and make a good product and choices available for the community, they would be waiting a long time. A wireless provider did come to town to look into providing services to the community, investigated, did due diligence and left. The speaker who said they couldn't make a big enough profit was probably accurate. The City was not there to profit, they were on a break-even basis and would get it done long before any pnvate enterprise made themselves available. Councilmember Finkelstein added if private enterprise came forward after they started a pilot project, then they had something to talk about. They were dealing with leapfrogging technologies that needed a jumpstart. They were competing against other countries and for their children to be prepared, they needed to make technologies available, even with full knowledge that at some point they may become out moded. Council Meeting Minutes -8- November 21, 2005 Councilmember Basill clarified it was a different choice, some people can chose not to have Internet. Certainly they need Internet, there was no question. Technology is moving very fast. They had to realize that as a City and be cognizant of that risk. Mayor Jacobs stated his initial reaction was that they shouldn't do this because he was concerned about the money they were going to spend. He was a little more comfortable now that it was coming out of an enterprise fund. He understood if it failed, they would have to repay the loan. The idea of it being characterized as a utility fund gave him less trepidation. He initially didn't believe it was the role of government, then he read, The World is Flat, by Tom Freedman. The further he got into the book, the more he recognized that they were not competing against St. Louis, Missouri, they were competing on a global economy. He was supporting this now because it was a pilot project, they were not spending $4.4 million at this point. They were spending $280,000,which was a lot of money. They had talked about an exit strategy and potential partnerships with private business. He also talked with a representative from Qwest, but agreed if this serves as a jump start to the pnvate market to fill the gaps in areas of St. Louis Park that don't have this, maybe it's a win and they can get out of it and recoup much of the cost of doing it. Technology is changing, but when you look at the municipal applications, he could justify it and on the basis that it might potentially jumpstart the private market. He still had trepidation about whether this was the legitimate role of government, but he didn't see the private market coming to the forefront and saw the need to have this done. He was interested to see whether or not the municipal applications could justify themselves and the cost before they move forward and spend $4 million. This was something he thought they could recoup if they had to. Councilmember Basill commented once a decision was made and there is a commitment, they would champion it and hopefully make it successful. Councilmember Omodt agreed and thanked staff for their work. The motion passed 5-2, with Councilmember's Basill and Omodt opposed. 8c. Hoigaard Village Amendment to the Official Zoning Map, Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD), Preliminary Plat, Variance from the Subdivision Ordinance, Case No. 05-61-S, 05-62-PUD, 05-63-VAC Union Land II,LLC., SW Quadrant of Highway 100 and Highway 7 Resolution No.'s 05-162 and 05-163 Mr. Fulton presented the staff report. Councilmember Basill asked for clarification on the variance. Mr. Fulton responded it was a variance from the subdivision code and subject to different standards, that required a ten- foot easement around each of the boundaries. They were providing substantial easements for the pond and park areas and in areas where there are public utilities. Councilmember Basill asked for clarification about a connection to the trail system on the final PUD. They would be putting more traffic on this corridor and needed connections all the way across Highway 7, not just to the trail. Mr. Fulton replied staff was looking at the trail, specifically on Wooddale Avenue and engineenng was determining costs of improving the intersection. Council Meeting Minutes -9- November 21, 2005 Councilmember Finkelstein believed it was appropriate to separate the distinction of the sidewalk issue from Wooddale. Mr. Fulton replied that may be something staff can address when looking at the streetscape plan for West 36th Street and how that is carred forward on Wooddale. Councilmember Omodt asked for further clarification about MNDot requesting the pond be moved. Mr. Fulton replied the pond might move 5-10 feet for Highway 100 reconstruction. Councilmember Sanger didn't recall previous discussions regarding building elevations and exterior materials and was uncomfortable being asked to address that aspect of the plan. Can that be removed until they had an opportunity to look further at the elevations and materials? Mr. Fulton responded the cementious siding had been used in the past and it had been determined to be a class one matenal. Staff felt it was appropriate to make Council aware that this was something they wanted to address. Councilmember Sanger believed they were being asked to vote on this and was concerned without seeing what it would look like. Ms. McMonigal stated staff could bring that back with the final PUD and plat. Councilmember Bnmeyer asked for clarification that the pond would not be constructed and then moved. Mr. Fulton responded staff was working with MnDot before the final PUD came forward. Councilmember Omodt asked if that would affect Developed Outdoor Recreation Area (DORA)? Mr. Fulton replied it was not anticipated it would drop below 12%, but it may not be quite 17%. Marie Cote, SRF Consulting, discussed the traffic studies. Councilmember Santa indicated this area was different because there was also train traffic. Were trains taken into consideration when talking about the level of service? Ms. Cote replied no, they worked with City staff and because there wasn't any defined time that trains crossed, they did not include them. Having a train crossing during the peak hour would have a significant impact. Councilmember Finkelstein asked what happened if they didn't assume there would be trip reductions from Hoigaard's, he noted it had a significant reduction in the plans? Ms. Cote replied what Table 3 represented was because of the current uses, was the comparison was made with the proposed use, subtracting out the existing use. Councilmember Finkelstein asked according to that, it would have less than half of the traffic as a result of shrinking the Hoigaard's store, if it moves there? Ms. Cote responded correct. Councilmember Sanger indicated since they don't know whether it would be Hoigaard's and could be some other form of retail, wouldn't it have a dramatic impact on the level of traffic generated? Ms. Cote replied due to the size of the store that was assumed, it would have very little difference. Typically for commercial uses, they use the shopping center rate, which is the higher rate. They tend to use the worst-case scenario. Councilmember Sanger stated it sounded like they were telling them that traffic will be so bad most of the day within a couple of years, that it was hard for this to make it much worse. Council Meeting Minutes -10- November 21, 2005 Was that correct? Ms. Cote replied yes. The only solutions to the operations in this area were solutions that were much larger than what this study would cover such as Highway 100 and grade separations. Unless they were willing to have no development, the operations would continue to worsen until major improvements were made. Noah Bly, Urban Works Architecture, discussed the site plan, urban design and architecture. Councilmember Omodt indicated last time they said the height was 54' on the Hoigaard building and now it was 60', could they address that? Mr. Dunbar responded he had been informed that they would be using a different architectural system,which gave it greater height and soundproofing. Councilmember Basill asked Mr. Dunbar to address the setback in the front. Mr. Dunbar replied it was 22' from the curb to the building, and indicated there were two points where it was 15' at the corners and the remainder was 22'. Mr. Dunbar stated this was something they could work with on the final plan. Councilmember Sanger commented she was distinguishing this vote on potential land use from the vote yet to be taken. The applicant had asked for TIF financing and she wanted to be clear her vote today was on land use, they should not assume she would also support the TIF application. Councilmember Finkelstein stated in looking at this project, it either made sense or it didn't whether or not Hoigaard's was included. He hoped they would be there,but if they weren't, either the project made sense or not. He initially had a concern about this project, after a lot of thought he believed it made sense because it was so close to the LRT stop, having a variety of housing, and the storm retention pond that served a 50 acre site made a lot of sense and would help the entire area. Councilmember Basill commented about feedback from the neighborhood and Council was well aware of the problem at Wooddale and Highway 7 and concerns for pedestrian safety. With this project, setback to the street was very important. He was not sure about the cementious product. This is the first project on that strip and it needed a superior design. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt First Reading of an ordinance amending the Official Zoning Map and set Second Reading for December 5, 2005 The motion passed 7-0 It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No. 05-162 of approval for the Preliminary Planned Unit Development, subject to conditions in the resolution. The motion passed 7-0. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No.05-163 of approval for the Preliminary Plat and Variance from the Subdivision Ordinance, subject to conditions in the resolution. Council Meeting Minutes -11- November 21, 2005 The motion passed 7-0. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt to approve First Reading of an ordinance approving the Vacation of an Alley and set Second Reading for December 5, 2005. The motion passed 7-0 8d. Request of JMW Development LLC for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Industrial to Commercial; and a Zoning Map Amendment from IP—Industrial Park to C-1 —Neighborhood Commercial, 5330 Cedar Lake Road,JMW Development, LLC, Case No.: 05-34-CP and 05-35-Z. Resolution No. 05-160 Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report. Paul Maenner, JMW Development, discussed the company background and the proposed project including traffic impacts and parking. Councilmember Omodt asked if the rain garden was part of the storm water runoff system? Mr. Maenner replied yes. Councilmember Omodt asked what restaurants? Mr. Maenner responded it wasn't finalized, but a restaurant type would be something akin to Chipolte. They have coffee vendors interested. The goal would be to create a high quality asset. Councilmember Sanger stated one concern was having food establishments and other retail that would appeal to office workers across the street. There would be more pedestrians going across the street and they needed to be aware that it was essentially freeway ramps. It concerned her to have pedestrians going across the ramp and cars being permitted to make left turns across those ramps to get in and out of the parcel. She asked staff to look at establishing a median and making it right in, right out dnveways. Councilmember Brimeyer asked the parking requirement for a restaurant? Ms. McMonigal responded the typical retail parking was one stall per 180 square feet of retail space. Councilmember Finkelstein stated this was close to Highway 100 and they were talking about a potential $500 million development north of this. When you bring potential safety concerns with people running across the street, he thought they would be asking for a lot of trouble. Councilmember Sanger commented she struggled with this and saw potential issues, but it wasn't serving them very well to be industrial. This plan will be an improvement both aesthetically and economically. She wasn't sure they could count on a vibrant industrial use on this site. This was an awkward site for anything. The retail use was better than anything else she could think of for the site. For ten years she had been heanng how the site to the North was going to be redeveloped. It wasn't fair to hold up plans for this site based on the fact that some day there may be a new office tower built north of here. Council Meeting Minutes -12- November 21, 2005 It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No. 05-160 approving the Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use designation from Industrial to Commercial and approve summary for publication. The motion passed 6-1, with Councilmember Finkelstein opposed. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to approve First Reading of the attached ordinance approving the zoning map amendment to change the zoning designation from IP—Industrial Park to C-1 —Neighborhood Commercial and set Second Reading for December 5, 2005. The motion passed 6-1, with Councilmember Finkelstein opposed. Councilmember Brimeyer noted when this comes forward, he would not be excited about the concept of a drive-through restaurant. Ms. McMonigal responded a drive-through required a conditional use permit. Councilmember Sanger indicated the traffic flow within the site might affect how she felt about a drive-through restaurant as well. 8e. Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential; and a Zoning Map Amendment from R2 Single Family Residential to R4—Multi Family Residential, Case No.: 05-58-CP and 05-59-Z Mitchell I. Kieffer 5714 Lake Street West Resolution No. 05-164 Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. Fred Mutchler, 5701 W Lake St., stated he presented a petition to the Planning Commission. The issues hadn't changed. St. Louis Park's vision is for families and single-family homes. There is office space throughout St. Louis Park, many on Lake Street. Statements had been made by the applicant regarding not changing the extenor and using it as a small office space. There isn't any way to enforce that in the future if the proposal were to be allowed. It could be put up for sale tomorrow and they would have the benefit of the zoning change. The neighborhood felt it should stay as a single-family home. They welcomed the applicant to live there. Sue Budd, 3071 Zarthan, indicated she lived in a town home behind this property and this would impact many residents and their living conditions. Mitchell Kieffer, applicant, noted he had bought a home in St. Louis Park. The City Planning Commission voted to deny this request, but the final decision rested with this body. His family built the apartment building next door to this property in 1968 and had taken great pride in this community. They had made substantial investment in the building and enhanced the neighborhood. Their building is zoned R4, the town homes are also zoned R4. This property is about 70% surrounded by R4 zoning. The staff recommendation was originally for approval of this request. He did not feel they were given a fair hearing by the Planning Commission, who scheduled the hearing on Rosh Hashanah and he was not able to attend. Considerable work needed to be done to this property and they had put a lot of money into correcting the deficiencies. They wouldn't have done that if their plans were to erect a multi-housing project. It looks like it has been lived in and his children play there. Council Meeting Minutes -13- November 21, 2005 Members of the Planning Commission expressed concern regarding the long-term plan for this property. They were planning to keep their office at the property for the foreseeable future and did not know what the long-term future held. Because of interest expressed by members of the Commission, they had given considerable thought to this question. Their vacancy rate at 5700 has been around 20% over the past two years. He did not know what the future held for the need for apartments. He had no intention to come before the Planning commission asking for a conditional use permit for apartments or condominiums. If circumstances arise and were favorable for multi housing, they could have an interest. He co-owns a company that distributes products to large retail chains. They do not distribute products from their property, the garage is not used for a warehouse, and they rarely have visitors. He and his partner have families that occasionally stop by. It looks like any other families home. The property fronts a thoroughfare, with major bus lines. The 5700 block of West Lake Street is not a quiet side street entirely composed of single-family homes. It is a mixed-use thoroughfare. They do not believe their use of this property would detract from the immediate neighborhood. Councilmember Omodt apologized the heanng was held on Rosh Hashanah. This property was purchased and they started using it for something it wasn't zoned for and after the fact asked for a rezoning. That usually doesn't go over for other applicants who had done something like that. That wasn't to say they didn't have a good track record. From his perspective as a Councilmember when people buy property and use it for something and then ask for the zoning, it is backwards and makes it hard to see the other side. Mr. Kieffer noted they came from Minneapolis where they are allowed to do this. When they found out they immediately made the correct applications. They would not have done it had they known differently. Councilmember Sanger commented that the scheduling of the first Planning Commission meeting was done incorrectly and by the time it had come to their attention, it was too late to cancel the meeting for legal reasons. By giving them the tape of the meeting and extending it to the next meeting, they did the best they could to provide the opportunity for them to address their comments. That needed to be separated form the merits of the application for the rezoning of the property. The property continued to appear as if it's a single-family occupied dwelling. Her concern was that it was their intent for the next few years, but if this proposal were granted, they would have every right to change the use of the property to something far more intensive. It is at the edge between single-family residential and more intensive uses. They were trying to preserve single-family homes. She could not support the proposal. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to approve Resolution No. 05-164 to deny the Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use designation from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and to deny the zoning map amendment to change the zoning designation from R-2 Single Family Residential to R4—Multi Family Residential. Cynl Kieffer, 2500 Huntington, stated she noticed what was allowed under residential zoning and they could add onto this house and have a bed and breakfast or a group home. Neighbors should be aware could be something different than they were expecting and not be quite as quiet as the office is now, being used in a similar way as a house. A comment for future meetings is to note it is a holiday on the notice that is sent. Council Meeting Minutes -14- November 21, 2005 The motion passed 7-0. 8f. PUD SilverCrest Properties Ms. McMonigal indicated the Council would receive a letter from the applicant and briefly reviewed the project. Mike Gould, SilverCrest, stated the intent of the letter was to update the pertinent facts and the enhancements they agreed to do. The partners thought about what they could do to make a step forward and the proposals they brought back were to provide for the last 17% of units be sold to people over 55 if at that point at least half of the building had not been sold to people over 55. A concern was when they resell a unit. That was something they could not address. It would allow the initial fill of the building to be for people over 55 close to 50%. One of the other concerns was height and density. They discussed postponing this until the December 5th meeting at which time they could look at taking a story or two off of the building and reducing the number of units and determining at which point it no longer made sense to proceed with it. Councilmember Finkelstein asked for further clarification on the percentage of units for seniors. Mr. Gould replied if at least 50%of the units had not been sold to people over the age of 55, the last 17% of the units (25) they would mandate be sold to people over 55. The lender said that was fine and the partners agreed to that. Councilmember Santa indicated she would like to know the height of the building in feet (if the height changed), the number of units, and how that would impact parking or traffic. Mr. Harmening requested the applicant submit a letter extending the time period for City Council to act on this through December 5`h. Mr. Gould agreed. Councilmember Brimeyer was concerned about sending the applicant back for nothing. Councilmember Sanger stated if they were being asked to approve a deferral and Mr. Gould was initiating it, she was willing to give them the deferral. That was not to say she was going to be voting to approve whatever he came back with. Her concern with the age restnction was still not being addressed. Councilmember Finkelstein stated this was the first he had heard of the changes reducing the height and adding the senior requirement. He wanted to think about the implications. Councilmember Basill agreed, they hadn't even seen the proposal. He commended the applicant for working hard on this. He was working on the senior component, the traffic and the height issue. He didn't think the applicant minded taking two more weeks for the decision. If they do those things, there is a better shot in two weeks. Councilmember Omodt agreed with Councilmember Brimeyer and didn't want to send him back and do what they did the last two times. Mr. Gould had always been honorable. He thought it was funny that Hoigaard's was here with a"D"traffic rating and there was nothing they could do, but now they were worried about traffic this would generate. It made no sense to have traffic as an issue if they just approved Hoigaard's land use. Council Meeting Minutes -15- November 21, 2005 Councilmember Brimeyer asked if the applicant was willing to defer? Mr. Gould replied yes. Councilmember Basill disagreed with Councilmember Omodt because they were getting a better project. He had many meetings with Mr. Gould and at no time had he felt he was uncomfortable. He knew they were trying to do the right thing for him and the right thing for the city and if it took another two weeks, they should do it. It was moved by Councalmember Basall, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to continue the item to December 5, 2005. Councilmember Santa stated that she supported the project the way it was. She believed seniors from 55-70 wanted to live with people their age, but didn't want the label. It is the largest growing segment of the population and it was a marketing issue more than anything else. The 14-stories had been settled. She hoped they could resolve this and agreed with Councilmember's Brimeyer and Omodt, this had gone back and forth and it wasn't right. Councilmember Sanger indicated she had heard from residents about this issue and everyone who had talked to her was a potential customer and all said they wanted it to be age restricted and urged her to stand firm because there were many other condo projects that were mixed age and liked the age restricted building. Mr. Gould believed they were both right, the 55-70 year old did not want a senior stigma building, where seniors over 70 would like that. Councilmember Sanger noted they were seniors still in their own homes that were younger than 70. Councilmember Finkelstein stated it was their role to try and make a project better. Councilmember Omodt responded no one was saying they were not trying to make something better. To hang this up on traffic didn't make sense. Councilmember Basill requested this item be moved up on the agenda at the next meeting. The motion passed 7-0. 8g. City Engineer's Report: Westdale Park Detention Pond, Project No. 2006-1300 Resolution No. 05-165 Mr. Brink presented the staff report. Councilmember Bnmeyer stated they were losing playground equipment by pursuing this project. There will be a new connection to the new equipment at the nature center. Mr. Bnnk indicated at Westdale Park the soils were soft and the maintenance had been an issue for the Park and Rec. Department over the years It was a natural fit to move the equipment somewhere else where it would be better maintained and used. Council Meeting Minutes -16- November 21, 2005 Chris Monicatti, 1421 Flag Av., stated he was not here to oppose this, but to give them an idea of what the park meant. They have a park in their back yard and bought a home on that lot because of that. The park had been in existence for decades. It was put in place by the residents who lived there years ago. It was considered difficult to maintain,but it never really was maintained or given a lot of care. He and his neighbors had appreciated having a park and understood there would be other playground equipment. He had seen people put housing units on swamps and he did not fully accept that the park was beyond repair or that it wasn't salvageable. He would like to have seen other plans to try to keep the park, but that was not the case. Mayor Jacobs asked if it was beyond repair and beyond salvaging? Rick Birno, Park and Recreation, replied his understanding from Park Superintendent Rick Beane, was that mowing was difficult. Play structures go through a safety audit every year and this structure shifts so much with the soft ground with the freezing and thawing, they can't pass it. Even if they put in a new structure, they didn't think they could pass it. The structure had to be removed, the basketball court could stay. They planned to pull out the structure and the basketball court and change it to green space. Stephanie Milstein, 1345 Flag Av S, stated that the park was disgusting. It is rusted and unrepairable. She only hears people smoking pot and partying in back of her house. She never sees kids. She wouldn't put a dog in that park. The basketball isn't bad, but the rest is terrible. This would be a service to the community. Mr. Monicatti disagreed that people were back there smoking pot. There were teenagers occasionally and if that were the case, they would have heard about it sooner. He wasn't saying there weren't merits to why they would want a pond and a skating rink,but if their goal was to have families with children move in and stay in the houses and have places to play, they have to make tough decisions to keep areas for kids to play. This is not a good street to allow kids to go down to the Westwood Nature preserve, nor would he allow them to walk unattended through that preserve. He understood many people enjoyed the park for 30 years and the residents chose to put that park in place. It would have been nice to have seen someone try to maintain it over the last eight years and to give them a place where their kids could play. Councilmember Sanger wanted to clarify that the main reason they were doing this wasn't because of the park and how easy it was to maintain, but because of the need to cleanse storm water and deal with pollution. Mr. Brink replied correct. This detention pond would take care of about half of all of the drainage going into Westwood Lake. The main intent of the pond was for water quality purposes. Councilmember Omodt asked if there was any middle ground where they could keep a small playground in this area or if they reconfigure the pond to leave land for a pocket park? Mr. Birno responded that the Parks Department feeling was that they could not maintain a structure there safely any longer because of the movement of the ground without considerable expense creating a base that makes sure that structure did not move from season to season. Regardless of the pond, their recommendation would be to remove the structure. Councilmember Basill believed it was unfortunate and could understand wanting to have a park, but the ground was unstable and there are safety concerns. Council Meeting Minutes -17- November 21, 2005 Mayor Jacobs agreed. They couldn't second-guess the Park Department. Safety standards were very different than they were years ago. He didn't see a feasible way to save the park. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution No. 05-165 accepting this report, establishing and ordering Improvement Project No. 2006-1300, approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids. Councilmember Omodt asked if the ground at the new site was any better? Mr. Birno replied yes, the new location was West of the parking lot and the ground is more stable and has proper drainage. Councilmember Omodt asked what equipment they were putting in? Mr. Birno replied the neighborhood selected Game Time. Diagrams were available. The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Mayor Jacobs reported the next Bookmark in the Park meeting is scheduled for December 1st, 3:00 at City Hall. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 11:54 p.m. et..,yLev-9 >dAta:Pe- vt.e.dd City Clerk ydr