Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/06/20 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular CITY OF OFFICIAL MINUTES ST. LOUIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PARK ST. LOUIS PARK,MINNESOTA June 20, 2005 - 7:30 p.m. 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm Council members present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa and Sally Velick Staff present: Associate Planner(Mr Fulton), City Manager(Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), City Clerk (Ms. Reichert), Community Development Director(Mr. Locke), Economic Development Coordinator(Mr. Hunt), Plannnng/Zonnng Supervisor(Ms. McMonngal), Planning Coordinator(Ms. Enckson) and Recording Secretary(Ms. Stegora-Peterson). 2. Presentations 2a. Fred Dolton Recognition Mayor Jacobs read Resolution No. 05-084 hononng Fred Dolton for over 33 years of service to the City of St. Louis Park. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of June 6, 2005 Councilmember Sanger indicated in the last paragraph of page three, it should state, "Cedar Lake Road in Lake Forest", and "eliminating parking..." should read "limiting parking" Councilmember Santa indicated on page three, third paragraph from the bottom, the correct spelling was "Steven Steuck" The minutes were approved as corrected. 3b. City Council Special Meeting Minutes of May 23, 2005 Councilmember Sanger stated the last paragraph of page one, "potential" should be inserted before "legislation". The minutes were approved as corrected 3c. Study Session Minutes of May 23, 2005 Councilmember Sanger indicated in the fourth paragraph of page two, "that area" should be the "Cedar Knoll area". The minutes were approved as corrected. Council Meeting Minutes -2- June 20, 2005 3d. Study Session Minutes of June 6, 2005 Councilmember Finkelstein indicated it should reflect he was present. The minutes were approved as corrected. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routme 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. Approve Resolution No. 05-087 adopting the updated Public Purpose Expenditure Policy and rescind prior Resolution Nos. 00-055 and 03-013. 4b. Bid Tabulation: Designate Valley Paving Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of$843,724.12 for the 2005 Municipal State Aid Street Rehabilitation Project—City Project No. 2004-1100 4c. Approve Resolution No. 05-084 recognizing contributions and expressing appreciation to Fred Dolton. 4d. Approve the Housing Authonty Minutes of May 11, 2005 4e. Accept vendor claims for filing(supplement) It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar The motion passed 7-0 5. Boards and Commissions 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing to consider an application for a Club On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License for the Frank Lundberg American Legion Post 282 located at 5605 W 36th St in St. Louis Park Ms. Reichert presented the staff report. Councilmember Omodt asked if the VFW would remain there or were they going to coop the club or disband. Tom Schottenbauer, 4170 Webster Ave, responded that the VFW announced they would cease operations and go out of the business completely. They were going to spread their membership to other posts. Some at the Amencan Legion decided to take over operations, re-negotiate the lease and apply for a liquor license. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt to approve the application for a Club Liquor License. 1 ' , p , Council'Meeting Minutes -3- June 20, 2005 Councilmember Finkelstein noted when the conversion of the building was approved, if was predicated upon a 15-year lease. Were they able to establish a long-term lease. Mr. Schottenbauer replied they had established a first lease and several extensions. He thought there were twelve years left in the original agreement and believed the extensions brought them to that. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if this played a role in the issue of the billboard. Mr. Scott replied it did not. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if they would change the use, such as use of the additional room. Mr. Schottenbauer replied no, they were not leasing that room. The motion passed 7-0. 6b. Public Hearing to consider Vacation of a portion of 16th Street West near Lamplighter Pond Mr. Fulton presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Velick, seconded by Councilmember Sanger to approve first reading of an ordinance vacating right-of-way along a portion of 16`h Street West and set second reading for July 5, 2005. The motion passed 7-0. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public—None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Request of Sam's Club for a Comprehensive Plan Map amendment from Industrial to Commercial and a Zoning Map amendment from IG—General Industrial to C2—General Commercial for property located at 7115 W. Lake Street. Case Nos. 05-17-CP and 05-16-Z. Resolution No. 05-085 Mr. Fulton presented the staff report Dave Sullergren, Raymond Harris Architects discussed the site plan and indicated that they were before the Council because they had run into higher costs to remediate soil and to retrofit the building. Given the investment, they decided to build a new building that would be more efficient. There were concerns about parking and the location of the gas station brought up last year. In the revised plan, the building would screen the parking and the gas station would be relocated. They would work with staff on addressing other questions for the CUP (traffic, screening,building materials, etc.). This building was smaller than the one presented last year. Councilmember Santa believed this worked much better and believed if they continued to work on it they would have a much better product than was talked about previously. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to adopt Resolution No. 05-085 amending the Comprehensive Plan to change the land use designation from Industrial to Commercial at 7115 W. Lake Street. r Council Meeting Minutes -4- June 20, 2005 Councilmember Sanger supported this approach because it gave them the potential of a better-looking building and solving the problem of two different zoning districts for the same parcel. She hoped they would also take into account the appearance of the building from Louisiana Avenue as well. Councilmember Finkelstein agreed changing the onentation of the building made sense. It was a unique opportunity to encourage use of art on the back and side of the building so people were not staring at a bnck wall. It appeared there would be less than 100 parking spots while construction was going on, how many spots did they currently have. Mr. Fulton replied there would be over 300 available at the site, which was under the required number of parking spaces. Councilmember Finkelstein asked what they typically used for daily operation. Mr. Sullergren replied around 300. They were aware of the issue and had engaged a broker and had five alternate sites for interim parking,primarily for employees. Councilmember Finkelstein stated a condition of the conditional use permit was that in accordance with increased traffic on Highway 7, including Wooddale, Sam's Club agreed to pay for part of the cost of a pedestrian bridge. He wanted to be sure that would be part of the new CUP and rezoning. Mr. Sullergren stated that was in the development agreement and they had no intent to change that. It would be part of the new agreement. The motion passed 7-0. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to adopt first reading of an Ordinance amending the Official Zoning Map changing the zoning designation from IG— General Industrial to C2— General Commercial at 7115 W Lake Street and to set second reading for July 5, 2005. The motion passed 7-0. 8b. Request for a public hearing to consider the establishment of a special service district along the western portion of Excelsior Boulevard from Highway 100 to Louisiana Avenue and to consider the imposition of a service charge within the district. Mr. Hunt presented the staff report. He noted that there would be two public hearings, July 18th and August 1st. It was moved by Councilmember Basil!, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to set public hearings for July 18, 2005 and August 1, 2005 to consider the establishment of Special Service District #4 and consider the imposition of a service charge within the district The motion passed 7-0. 8c. Request of Emad Abed for a Comprehensive Plan land use amendment and a Zoning map amendment for property located at 7202 and 7252 Excelsior Boulevard. Case Nos. 04-71-CP and 04-72-Z. Resolution No. 05-086 Ms. Enckson presented the staff report. Council.Meeting Minutes -5- June 20, 2005 Dean Dovalis, DJR Architecture made introductions. He described the redesign of the public art portion and wall, which created a gateway and screened the parking area. There will be public parking for people to access the creek. All entrances of the building will be two feet above the flood plain. Storage would be incorporated into the Appliance Smart property, by lowering it a couple of feet. Wetland mitigation would be accomplished North of the building by re-grading, removing buckthorn and making the area a type two wetland (wet during rainy periods). Councilmember Basill asked for clarification regarding the marketability of the bigger units and dropping the density. Mr. O'Neill responded that he didn't see any difficulty marketing bigger units. There could be a couple of different market positions for this building. If the upper floors have skyline views and views of the wetlands, they could get premium prices and interested buyers. Being a"high-rise"in the suburbs would give it a unique position in the market that could be attractive. Heated underground parking would also be desirable. Councilmember Basill asked for the difference between office versus residential and what it meant for traffic on Excelsior Blvd. Mr. Benshoof replied for the proposed development (125 condos/50,000 sq. ft of office) trip generation projections for the AM peak hours would be 47 trips and the alternative would be 133. The PM peak hour projections would be 55 trips for the proposed development and the alternative would generate 140 tnps. Councilmember Basill thought the numbers could be skewed because they could run into parking issues, but the existing use would have more traffic than the proposed use. As they had talked with neighbors a couple of issues came forward. The developer went to meetings and listened to the concerns and made significant changes to the proposal, which he appreciated. The original proposal had many more units, didn't involve public art, didn't involve a public easement or public parking to use the wetland. Dedicating the wetland and not using that for future development, elimination of a billboard and allowing public parking were pluses. Concerns that had come up from the neighborhoods were regarding traffic and the number of units. They had dropped the density and the amount of traffic by changing the use. This would have a lot less impact than the alternative use. This borders housing, a wetland and a golf course, which left industrial on one side. The changes had made the plan much better than the alternative and he appreciated the lower density and larger units. Councilmember Sanger stated there was misleading information on the chart shown by Mr. Benshoof. He compared a six-story residential building to a potential office building of what height. Mr. Benshoof responded that the development statistics would be 125 units and 50,000 square feet of office. Councilmember Sanger thought that they were informed last week that if there were offices on this property, they would require one floor of parking for every floor of office. They wouldn't have a building there that would be the theoretical maximum the zoning code would allow. The comparisons they were making about the traffic that would be generated from a residential unit versus the traffic that would be generated from an office unit were not accurate and were misleading. If they were going to make comparisons, they ought to make comparisons with what would realistically be built if it were an office building, rather than what could theoretically be built if they didn't have to take parking into account. a Council Meeting Minutes -6- June 20, 2005 Mr. Dovalis stated a six-story building would have three stories of office and three stones of parking(90,000 sq. ft.), and asked what that would generate. Mr. Benshoff replied the peak trip generations would be 140 trips in the AM and 134 PM trips. Mr. Dovalis indicated the traffic information was based on a proposal from the developer if he didn't get the zoning for this project. He could do something allowing the same amount of housing units mixed with office. Mr. Benshoof was given an example of office only with no housing. Housing generated fewer trips than office. Councilmember Sanger believed it would depend on what they would put instead of the proposed housing in order to make a fair and accurate comparison. Councilmember Velick asked how impact flooding of the underground parking was addressed. Mr. Voit responded that the property would be two feet above the flood plain. To mitigate flooding they would install a series of under drain lines with a 20-foot spacing underneath the entire footprint and around the penmeter of the building. There would also be geo textile around the area to prevent fine material from clogging the lines. Councilmember Omodt indicated the Methodist Hospital expansion was just approved, which was closer to an active body of moving water and asked how this project compared. Ms. Erickson replied that the buildings were near the flood plain. They required that 15 feet beyond the building be two feet above the flood plain. That was also required for Methodist. Councilmember Omodt spoke in favor of changing this designation. This was private money and he believed this was the proper use of a gateway to the city. It was removing a billboard. He complemented the team on the use of public art. The developer had done everything they had asked him in terms of wetland mitigation, flood plains, having a boardwalk and allowing public access. This would also help property values for the residences. It also made this a walkable city and people who worked at the hospital might want to live here. It was moved by Councilmember Omodt, seconded by Councilmember Basill, to approve Resolution No. 05-086 amending the Comprehensive Plan Land Use from Office to RC contingent upon review of the Metropolitan Council, approve summary publication and authorize publication. Councilmember Sanger agreed that the developers had made changes in response to requests that had been made. She was glad to see the billboard coming down and to see the public art. She was still not in favor of the plan. On a land use basis, this property was bordered on two sides by industrial areas, which was what the upper stories would see. Residents complain about noise, even though they were aware of the industrial uses when they purchased. Secondly, she was concerned about wetland and flooding issues. She appreciated the Engineer's approach, but that was probably what the engineers said years ago when they built the rest of St. Louis Park, where they spent millions of dollars correcting flooding problems. It made no sense to build a residential property right against a wetland and floodplain. The parking could still flood. The Council would get complaints and would be petitioned to spend millions of dollars to fix the flooding problems. They should learn from past experience. She thought this was an appropriate spot for an office campus. People in offices did not complain and didn't demand the same kinds of changes to their surroundings like those in residential. Council Meeting Minutes -7- June 20, 2005 Councilmember Finkelstein stated he would be voting in favor of the project. He was initially opposed because of concerns about traffic,hydrology issues and market issues although he continued to remain concerned about what they called "cond-itis". That was something the entire City Council was concerned about and had been talking about at study sessions. It was not their job to worry about market issues. It was also not his job to play hydrologist. In regards to the traffic, he was convinced this would have a traffic calming aspect. The developer had been very accommodating coming up with a plan meeting the City's needs and his needs. Through the use of a PUD and a plat, they would be able to remove a blackboard on one of the gateways and would be able to protect one of the great natural wonders of St. Louis Park. This would allow them to protect it now and into the future and also make it available to the community. In addition to protecting the wetland and giving the creek an opportunity to meander, the public can also have an opportunity through the boardwalk and trail (which had been promised), they would also have public art in a gateway area. This project was a superior design and the current zoning would allow them to do a mixed-use project that would be far less desirable for the community and would do far less to aide in the development of Excelsior Ave. west of Highway 100. It was the nght thing to do Councilmember Basill agreed with Councilmember Finkelstein. They had been studying Excelsior Blvd. to the west and were looking to improve that corridor. The traffic was alarming. This was an opportunity for a quality project and to reduce traffic from what would be there on another project that could be built. He thought they should move forward Councilmember Omodt stated City employees could control noise to some extent at the MSC building. There were other sites under potential development in the City that either bordered something zoned or used as industrial including the Hoigaard's site. People look at the internal amenities of the site. The developer was using Lundgren Brothers for some of the interior work. They are one of the leading builders in the state. People shouldn't be surprised there is industrial. He would guess that the buildings were being built to mitigate noise. Regarding people coming back and complaining to the City Council, that was part of their role as problem solvers. This was a beautiful way to solve a problem in the City and they should seize the opportunity. Councilmember Santa agreed with much of what Councilmember Sanger said and that it was more traumatic when it was personal property being flooded. They had spent millions of dollars in the City getting as many properties as possible up to the 100-year flood level, plus 25. She did not want to think about a future Council being put into the position they had been in dealing with residents who had been flooded. Having said that, they needed to look at this in terms of land use, they could look at the other issues later. It was a beautiful project. In terms of traffic, this was on a major bus line and they needed to encourage people to use public transportation as an alternative. From a land use perspective, she supported the resolution. She could not see encouraging additional empty office space in the community. It made sense to put in a residential use that would be a benefit and make a good use of this site. Mayor Jacobs agreed that he had been able to make arguments on both sides of this issue and shared Councilmember Sanger's concerns. He presumed that City staff and the hydrologists would build this building to the required specifications. They had spent a lot of money on floodwater mitigation and he was concerned about that. Residents had more at stake than people working or renting an office. He was also concerned about the nearby industrial. But what eventually persuaded him to support this project was asking the question, "Is it risky to do this." Yes it was. It was risky to put residential property next to what has been an S Council Meeting Minutes -8- June 20, 2005 industrial use for many years. But this City was all about risk and this was a calculated one. They were making a decision based on the best information they have at the time. The office market is very soft and he believed it would remain so for awhile. Under these circumstances, given the traffic issues that had come up and the building, it was worth the risk. There were some areas on Excelsior Blvd. on the cusp, and they were risking making an investment If they nsk investing with the hopes that it would make the surrounding areas better, for him it was worth the risk. For those reasons he would be supporting this. The motion passed 6-1, with Councilmember Sanger opposed. It was moved by Councilmember Omodt, seconded by Councilmember Basill, to approve first reading of Ordinance amending zoning map to change the designation from 0- Office to RC-Residential Commercial and set second reading for July 5, 2005. The motion passed 6-1, with Councilmember Sanger opposed. 9. Communications Mayor Jacobs thanked those involved with organizing Parktacular, which went very well. Councilmember Omodt commended the Rec. Center staff for their work on the high school graduation party. The power had gone out, and the staff pulled together and did a great job. Mr. Harmening indicated that the Community Foundation Board and the St. Louis Park School Foundation had been working together to see if the two foundations could partner to the benefit of the larger community. They drafted a joint brochure and submitted it for Council comments. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p m. , - --9O &v(ity Clerk Maj/4