Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/03/20 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular itCITY OF OFFICIAL MINUTES iST. LOUIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PARK ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA March 20, 2006 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Council members present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, C. Paul Carver, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt, Loran Paprocki and Susan Sanger Staff present: Assistant Zoning Administrator(Mr. Momson), City Clerk (Ms. Stroth), City Engineer (Mr. Brink), City Manager(Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Engineenng Project Manager (Mr. Olson), Human Resources Director(Ms Gohman), Fire Chief(Mr. Stemmer), Public Works Director(Mr. Rardin) and Recording Secretary(Ms. Stegora-Peterson). 2. Presentations - None 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of February 6, 2006 Councilmember Basill indicated on page seven in the second paragraph, at the end of the second sentence, "because of the unwillingness of the property owners, he would not be in favor of parking vanances in the future" should be inserted. Councilmember Paprocki noted in item 8b, "asked" should be replaced with "stated that" Councilmember Finkelstein indicated the following should be inserted on page seven, before the paragraph starting with Ms. McMonigal, "Councilmember Finkelstein pointed out that this builder took account of lower density and lower height in terms of meeting neighborhood needs and they encouraged other builders to take a look at that issue too." Councilmember Basill indicated his name was incorrectly spelled in item 8a. The minutes were approved as corrected. 3b. City Council Minutes of February 21, 2006 The minutes were approved as presented. 3c. Study Session Minutes of March 6, 2006 The minutes were approved as presented. City Council Minutes -2- March 20, 2006 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. Adopt Ordinance No. 2312-06 regarding Zoning Ordinance Amendments related to residential setbacks, Sections 36-73, 36-115a, 36-162, 36-163, 36-164, 36-165, 36-73, and 36-361 relating to residential setbacks, detached garages, accessory buildings, and to allow studios in the Industrial Park (IP) zoning district; approve second reading, summary and authorize publication. 4b. Adopt Resolution No. 06-064 authorizing the execution of the Amended City of St. Louis Park Cafeteria Plan Master Plan Document. 4c. Adopt Resolution No. 06-065 to approve St. Louis Park Lions Club, application for the placement of temporary signs in the public right-of-way. 4d. Adopt Resolution No. 06-066 for Final Payment to Lametti & Sons Inc. for work on Lamplighter Pond Problem Area No. 4. City Proj. 2000-1800A Contract No 99-04. 4e. Adopt Resolution No. 06-067 calling for a public heanng by the City Council on the proposed creation of the Highway 7 Corporate Center Tax Increment Financing District (a Redevelopment District) and a Hazardous Substance Subdistrict within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (relates to former National Lead/Golden Auto site). 4f. Accept Planning Commission Minutes of February 15, 2006 for filing. 4g. Accept Housing Authority Minutes of February 8, 2006 for filing 4h. Accept Human Rights Minutes of January 17, 2006 for filing. 4i. Accept Park And Recreation Minutes of January 18, 2006 for filing. 4j. Accept Vendor Claims for filing. (supplement) It was moved by Councilmember Omodt, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, 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 Intoxicating On-sale and Sunday Sale Liquor License for Byerly's, Inc, DBA Byerly's-St. Louis Park. Ms. Stroth presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt to approve an intoxicating on-sale and Sunday sale liquor license for Byerly's, Inc, DBA Byerly's St Louis Park, 3777 Park Center Boulevard Councilmember Finkelstein indicated the staff report said Sunday sale liquor license, was that just for catering? Ms. Stroth replied the Sunday sale liquor license was for Byerly's restaurant and that the catering license was issued by the State The motion passed 7-0 City Council Minutes -3- March 20, 2006 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public—None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Fire Union Contract: January 1, 2006- December 31, 2007 Resolution No. 06-059 Ms. Gohman presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs congratulated the labor union and the management team for the settlement It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No 06-059 approving a Labor Agreement between the City and International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF)Local#993, establishing terms and conditions of employment for two years,from 1/1/06- 12/31/07. The motion passed 7-0. 8b. Conditional Use Permit for excavation and fill of more than 400 cubic yards for the construction of a single family home. Location: 2821 Nevada Avenue South, Applicant: Sergey Vladyka, Case No.: 05-74-CUP Resolution No. 06-060 Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs asked if the maintenance agreement would run with the land and be on the deed? Mr. Momson replied yes. Councilmember Sanger asked with issues with potential drainage and flooding, by approving this CUP was the City assuming any liability in the event there are subsequent flooding problems to the house downstream? Mr. Morrison replied they didn't believe so. That was why they worked with the applicant to design a system that not only maintained the status quo,but also actually improved upon it. Councilmember Omodt noted there was a presentation recently on new storm water guidelines, does this fit with those? Mr. Momson replied it did. The water would be pumped up and discharged within the yard, not directly onto the street. From there it would flow like any naturally occumng rainfall into the system. Mr Harmening clarified the difference was that this water would be pumped into the storm sewer system, not the sanitary sewer system. It was moved by Councilmember Paprocki, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No 06-060 approving a conditional use permit, subject to conditions found in the resolution Councilmember Paprocki commented this was a very complex piece of land and he commended the Vladyka's for their work with the City. The motion passed 7-0. City Council Minutes -4- March 20, 2006 Sc. City Engineer's Report: Lake Street Reconstruction Project- City Project No. 2006-0100 Resolution No.'s 06-061 and 06-062 Mr. Olson presented the staff report. Councilmember Sanger asked with construction of the sidewalk on the north side of West Lake Street, can staff confirm they are not going to be taking anyone's property and this would be constructed on the city's nght-of-way? Mr. Olson replied that was correct, the sidewalk would run along the new curb and gutter and be within the right-of-way. Councilmember Sanger stated she heard quite a few people did not agree with replacing the traffic light at Zarthan Avenue with a four-way stop sign, particularly people concerned about kids going to the school. Could they leave the traffic lights in place, even though they were turned off, to make sure it worked as a four-way stop sign before removing the traffic lights? Mr. Olson replied it would be possible. Councilmember Sanger requested staff put some thought into that. In the event the four- way stop sign approach didn't work, they could go back to the traffic lights. Councilmember Finkelstein stated the Council revisited this issue less than two years ago and this was a location they discussed. The Council specifically agreed it was appropnate to keep the stoplight there. The school is getting larger, there is a church there and this area is also going to be getting a lot of traffic from the Highway 100 construction. Mayor Jacobs noted this was going to be closed to traffic along Lake Street while it was under construction. During construction of Hwy 100, the designated detour route would be down Dakota and not Lake Street because it would only be open to local traffic. He didn't think there would be cut-through traffic. Mr. Harmening stated staff could look at the feasibility of keeping the traffic signals in place, although he was unsure they could guarantee it. People need to stop whether they have a stop sign or a red light on a signal. What may be compromised was easier movement by the traveling public who has to stop regardless. Presently they can move nght through the intersection with a green light, which he believed was part of speed concerns on that road. Mayor Jacobs agreed they should look at the idea of keeping the signal. He had been getting feedback on the intersection of Wooddale and Dakota, and the idea of having a stoplight there. There are times, especially in the morning, that intersection backs up, almost to Highway 7, which is a concern. He suggested they give some thought to that as well. Mr. Olson replied that could be looked at. Staff would examine traffic volumes and take into consideration future road improvements in that area as well. Darla Hoffer, Zinnia's Gifts, 6610 W. Lake St, asked where her customers would be able to park when the repaving project is done? Mr. Olson replied dunng the construction on that segment, the milling operation would last a day or two. When that was complete, people would be able to park on the street. When they come back to fill in the pavement, there would be minimum disruption of on street parking in that area. City Council Minutes -5- March 20, 2006 Mike Spack, 3259 Yosemite Av. S, indicated he worked as Traffic Engineer for the City of Maple Grove where they had bad stop sign compliance compared with signals. Round abouts were something that might be a good solution as well. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No. 06-061 accepting this report, establishing and ordering Improvement Project No. 2006-0100, approving plans and specifications, and authorizing advertisement for bids; and, adopt Resolution No. 06-062 authorizing the installation of parking restrictions at certain locations along Lake Street as part of the Lake Street Reconstruction Project, City Project No 2006-0100, and as required by the Minnesota Department of Transportation's (Mn/DOT s) State Aid Standards. Councilmember Sanger stated they had been talking about this project for many years and she was glad to be doing this. The motion passed 7-0 8d. Municipal Consent Request for Mn/DOT Trunk Highway 100 Temporary Lane Addition Project: State Project 2734-43 Resolution No. 06-063 Mr. Rardin presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs asked if anything had changed in the design of the project from what was shown at the public hearing in January? Mr Rardin replied no. Ann Blumberg, 2824 Utica, stated she had concerns about potholes on Utica and people speeding off of Hwy 100. Can they get the potholes taken care of? Mr. Rardin replied they should be able to take care of the potholes, although they would not get to an overlay of the street this year. Mayor Jacobs asked if they could work with MnDOT on signage to indicate this was not a through road? Mr. Rardin replied during construction, they would have ramp closures. Staff was concerned with uncertainty of where traffic would go. MnDOT would provide for detours on the County and State system. They would need to take special measure in the neighborhoods in this area and respond dunng the project. Because MnDOT had accelerated the full build to the advanced design stage, they had the full expectation of bunging that back to Council in September or October for layout approval. When that happened, they would know what the right of way alignment would be, specifically through this area, at which point they could look at Utica for 2007 to see what kind of improvements they could make. Ms Blumberg indicated they would be coming in six feet toward Utica on the West side into the median. She asked if they would protect the trees there or if they would be removed? Harvey Scheffert, MnDOT Project Manager, replied they would be putting snow fences around the trees to protect them during construction. They were trying to protect all trees along the corridor not being impacted by construction. City Council Minutes -6- March 20, 2006 Kim Anderson, Golden Valley resident, asked what effort MnDOT would make to coordinate the reconstruction so there were no delays and then would have 24-hr/day construction? Mr. Scheffert replied they had laid out short-term closures for specific ramps. They would begin on the SE quadrant of Hwy 7 along with the NW and the ramp exit behind the Holiday Station, which would be about one month. Stage two, would be the NW quadrant of Hwy 7. People would be able to utilize Minnetonka. Contractors are aware of the time frames required for each stage. Completion of the project is scheduled for mid October. Mayor Jacobs noted the plans were available from city staff. Mr. Scheffert added they would not have construction 24 hrs/day, although the last two stages may include 24-hr construction over a weekend to expedite the work. Braden Beam, 2856 Utica Av. S, asked if the access from Utica would be closed? Mr Rardin replied it would be temporarily closed at a certain point during construction. Mr. Beam asked if they would be removing the dead end at Utica? Mr. Rardin replied that was not a part of the intenm project,but was a possibility with the full build project. Mr. Beam added a concern about the speed of vehicles traveling on Utica and believed part of the reason was trees covered that signage Mayor Jacobs asked staff to look into that. JC Beckstrand, 4386 Wooddale, member of the Edina Study Advisory Committee, Transportation Planning Committee, stated his support of the project and urged the Council to move forward because the present situation was not acceptable. Representative Steve Simon supported the intenm project and urged the Council, residents, etc, to keep up the pressure so that this does not become the permanent fix. Mayor Jacobs agreed and stated his concern with the growing level of traffic and safety issues with the badges Representative Simon commented on the ballot initiative this fall that would dedicate the Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST). Presently that money goes into the general fund, which would dedicate money for roads and transportation. There are a number of reasons this would be important. Locally, it would mean there would be more of a chance Hwy 100 would be built earlier. Councilmember Carver added a letter from the Commissioner of Transportation stated, "One possible new source of funding would be the constitutional dedication of motor vehicle sales tax revenue to transportation which is on the ballot for November of 2006. If this referendum succeeds, revenue would be only gradually dedicated to transportation, limiting the increase in the near term." The letter essentially said that projects like the full build had been delayed so far for want of money. This was an opportunity for residents to do something about Hwy 100. Lee Engler, Twin West Chamber of Commerce Chair, indicated this could not become a permanent solution, but they felt it was something needing to be done now. The continued delay had adversely affected many people and businesses. The Twin West Chamber and its member businesses remain committed to see the completion of the final project and would continue to work with the City of St Louis Park and the State Legislature to secure long term funding necessary to develop the transportation infrastructure in the West Metro Market. City Council Minutes -7- March 20, 2006 Mike Spack, 3259 Yosemite Av. S, felt if they approved this interim project, it would make the region happier, but they would not be getting the fix needed. He believed this would be the permanent fix and urged the Council to deny this project and wait until the funding was available to do it right. It was moved by Councilmember Carver, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to adopt Resolution No. 06-063 approving the final design layout of the TH100 temporary improvement project, adding to the fourth bullet of the final Whereas statement, "subject to neighborhood input. " Mayor Jacobs agreed and noted that MnDOT typically solicits neighborhood input, although the noise walls were not planned to be part of the interim project. Councilmember Carver commented he was in favor of the motion. They had a responsibility to continue being"squeaky" and he urged residents of St. Louis Park, Edina and Golden Valley to do the same. This action was setting an example for MnDOT about what government should be about, making it better for where they live and it would not be better if they waited two years. Sitting back and doing nothing would not cause something different to happen. He expected to be vigilant over the next several years and regular interims of monitoring. He expected they would remain among the advanced design projects and among the very strongest candidates, which was how the full build project was characterized at the public heanng. What had to happen for this to go forward in 2009 was money. They will have the opportunity to vote on the constitutional amendment, whether or not money gets spent on projects like this The goal of the interim project was to reduce congestion, increase safety and increase overall environment. Cars are stopped there now and creating noise and pollution. They want to get rid of that. Once those goals are no longer being met, it is time that MnDOT will be back here to finish the project, this is just the first step. Councilmember Sanger believed this proposal represented a no win situation because traffic on 100 was very congested and would continue to get worse It was not ideal for this community. She had concerns about safety, the impact of this on vanous neighborhood issues and the most important concern, the issue of this being labeled as an interim project, but was it really something they would be stuck with indefinitely? They still didn't know when it would be built and even if the constitutional amendment passed, there was no guarantee money would be dedicated to the construction of the full build project. She was concerned if they approved this, they were approving a longer-term project. Neighbors need the option to consider what kind of noise barriers they wanted, if any. Since this project was first announced, the residents and owners of about 20 owners had been in limbo. They were told their houses would be taken, and they did not know if they should put money into their houses and were having difficult selling their houses. This project did not make any effort to help those homeowners or help the neighborhood around them. There was also the issue of Utica Avenue and no permanent fix to the problems with their road and the drainage. Safety was an issue. Lanes will be narrowed to eleven feet. MnDOT told them there were no eleven-foot lanes on freeways in the Metro area and many people had concerns about sideswipe accidents. People are fearful and would rather go through the neighborhoods. These issues needed to be considered and if they voted in favor of this project they hadn't tried hard enough to solve the problems. Her preference would be to keep the pressure on MnDOT even more by voting to deny this and reopening negotiations with MnDOT to try to come up with a better design. It could delay the interim project for a year, but she felt they needed to look at the project in the City Council Minutes -8- March 20, 2006 long run and the impact on the community. She feared the intenm project was the long run and this would be what they would have to live with, so she would be voting against this. Councilmember Finkelstein stated the importance of this issue to the neighborhoods, the city and the entire region. What they were looking at wasn't the preferred plan. They would prefer a permanent and total highway reconstruction. However, they had an opportunity to offer some relief for people spending time on the Highway 100 "parking lot" and to do some of the prep work necessary for the full design and future permanent project. They were forced to make a decision between doing nothing and trying something. He felt the responsible decision was to try to do something, which was the"least bad" alternative. This wasn't perfect and didn't take care of all of the concerns, but at least it gave them a start for the full build project. It was too important for them to play a game of"chicken" and he felt they needed to approve this, go forward and keep the pressure on. Councilmember Paprocki agreed with Councilmember's Finkelstein and Carver. In the report they estimate a 20% reduction in accidents. When someone is at a stand still on a highway and gets rear-ended at 50 mph, this was different than a sideswipe. They could wait another year, but if there was a fatality, it was their fault for doing that. Councilmember Basill agreed with the Councilmembers in support. There are neighborhood issues with cut-through traffic. If they do nothing, those issues would be elevated. It would be unconscionable for them to do that. There were other neighborhood concerns, but when they try to balance them, they were affecting everyone's quality of life With the 35W/Crosstown project coming, there would be more traffic and they should not let traffic from Hwy 100 flow any more into the neighborhoods. He believed it was a very small chance this would be the final project Engineers indicated that the bridges crossing Hwy 100 only had so much useful life left. No governmental entity would rebuild the bridges exactly as they were. The permanent fix would come and the argument that this will become the permanent fix didn't hold water. They needed to do this and if they didn't, he believed they would be asking for more problems. • Councilmember Basill made a friendly amendment to clarify the resolution in the fourth bullet point of the final Whereas clause, "The installation of these noise walls shall not occur until adjacent neighborhoods are consulted, are allowed to provide input, and the City Council approves the noise wall project " Councilmember's Carver and Finkelstein accepted the friendly amendment Councilmember Omodt indicated his support He was concerned about air pollution and noise pollution in the area. They also hadn't thought through the issue of residents whose homes were in "limbo" and he hoped they could give some guidance to those residents. He hoped residents understood how much it took to get where they were today It took a lot of groups and people coming together, including push from staff at MnDOT. They couldn't give up on being"squeaky" and everyone needed to keep it up. Mayor Jacobs stated Councilmember Sanger raised a good point about the issue of if they could trust MnDOT about the full build project happening. If he thought that waiting on this project guaranteed them the full build in 2009, he might go along with it, but it doesn't. If they delayed this, there was still no guarantee the full build project would get started in 2009 or 2010. Should they do something today that would help alleviate the gridlock that currently existed on Hwy 100 and the cut-through traffic that existed City Council Minutes -9- March 20, 2006 currently or do they not? He thought the most responsible course of action was to go forward and alleviate some of the congestion. This would not fix all of the problems. The bndges are narrow, but beyond the bndges the lanes would widen. There being no guarantee of money for this in 2009, was all the more reason to do this now as opposed to waiting. They needed to continue keeping up the pressure and make sure this did not become the permanent project. Councilmember Sanger stated her comment had been misconstrued. She was not suggesting doing nothing at all. She was suggesting by voting to reject to give them greater leverage to reopen the discussion to develop a better project. She agreed doing nothing was not constructive. She just wanted to do something in a different way. The motion passed 6-1 with Councilmember Sanger opposed 9. Communications-None 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:06 p.m. a44-(V-9X1766e'b C.) )re_zoli City Clerk Maypr