Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/04/17 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular CITY OF OFFICIAL MINUTES ST. LOUIS CITY COUNCIL MEETING PARK ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA April 17, 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, Loran Paprocki and Susan Sanger Councilmember Paul Omodt was absent. Staff present: Associate Planner(Mr. Fulton), City Clerk (Ms. Stroth), City Manager (Mr. Harmemng), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Community Development Director(Mr. Locke), Housing Program Coordinator(Ms. Larsen), Public Works Superintendent of Utilities (Mr. Anderson), Public Works Director(Mr. Rardin), Planning/Zoning Supervisor(Ms. McMonigal), and Recording Secretary(Ms. Stegora-Peterson). 2. Presentations 2a. Sharon Anderson's Recognition Resolution No. 06-073 Mayor Jacobs presented Resolution No. 06-073 in recognition of Ms. Anderson's service to the City of St. Louis Park. Ms. Anderson commented on her time working with the City. Mr. Harmemng also thanked Ms. Anderson. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Study Session Minutes of March 13, 2006 The minutes were approved as presented. 3b. Study Session Minutes of March 27, 2006 Councilmember Sanger indicated on page two, paragraph at the top, "Birchwood" should be inserted after, "...people would not be able to get out of the". On page five after paragraph three, the following should be inserted, "She stated it was an issue of Federalism and local law enforcement should not be put in the position of doing the enforcement for the Federal Immigration Department and this would be an unfunded mandate." The minutes were approved as corrected. 3c. City Council Minutes of April 3, 2006 Councilmember Basill indicated on page six, paragraph two should read, "Councilmember Basill indicated we received many calls about this issue, but we shouldn't minimize the cost, or expenditure to the tax payer ..." The minutes were approved as corrected. Council Meeting Minutes -2- April 17, 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. Approve second reading of Ordinance No. 2313-06 to establish the Sungate One Housing Improvement Area, approve summary and authorize publication; approve Resolution No. 06-072 to impose fees; and authorize execution of Contract for Private Development and any other related documents, by the Mayor and City Manager, between the City and the Sungate One Condominium Association. 4b. Bid Tabulation: Designate Hardrives, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of$910,880.70 for the 2006 Local Street Improvement Project—City Project No. 2005-1000 4c. Approve Amendment No. 1 to contract 48-05 providing additional Professional Services related to the Design and Construction Administration of Water System Back-up Power Supply for Water Treatment Plants 1 & 4, Improvement Project No. 2005-1500. 4d. Approve Change Order No. 1 for Improvement Project No. 2005-1500, Installation of Water System Back-up Power Supply. 4e. Item was removed. 4f. Accept Planning Commission Minutes of March 8, 2006 for filing. 4g. Accept Planning Minutes of March 15, 2006 for filing 4h. Accept Park And Recreation Minutes of February 15, 2006 for filing. 4i. Accept Vendor Claims for filing. (supplement) Mr. Harmening indicated staff received a request from the applicant to remove item 8d from the agenda because a third variance was needed. He suggested the public hearing for item 6d be done with 8c because they were related. It was moved by Councilmember Carver, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to approve the Agenda as amended and items listed on the Consent Calendar The motion passed 6-0. 5. Boards and Commissions -None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing to consider granting an On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License with Sunday sales for Collins Restaurant Group, Inc. dba Brix located at 4656 Excelsior Blvd. in 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 Sanger to approve an on-sale intoxicating liquor license with Sunday sales to Collins Restaurant Group, dba Brix subject to the satisfactory background investigation of the prospective store manager Council Meeting Minutes -3- April 17, 2006 The motion passed 6-0. 6b. Public Hearing to consider granting an Off-Sale liquor license to Valley Wine & Spiritz, 8942 Highway 7—Knollwood Village in St. Louis Park Ms. Stroth presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public heanng was closed. Councilmember Paprocki indicated he had concerns with the number of licenses and location of liquor stores At a study session last year about this issue no action had been taken. It concerned him that there had been a 40% increase in the number of licenses in less than a year. It was motioned by Councilmember Paprocki, seconded by Councilmember Basill to continue this item to the next Council meeting. Councilmember Basill indicated the Council got analysis on the number of liquor stores. Some communities limit the number of liquor licenses they have. They hadn't researched it completely to know how many license were appropriate. If this is deferred, is there any timeline they are obligated to act? Mr. Scott replied they needed to act within a reasonable time frame. Councilmember Basill requested the report previously done be brought to study session and this come back to the next Council meeting. A two-week delay was not unreasonable. Councilmember Carver was uncomfortable delaying this application. The applicant didn't get notice they might take this action and was looking forward to opening a new business. He was in favor of acting on this application and then doing the study. They could then give notice to those with pending applications. Councilmember Finkelstein agreed with Councilmember Carver He was also concerned about this, but to put the burden on a small business owner seemed heavy handed. He would like to study this further, but not put this person on hold. Councilmember Sanger also agreed and didn't think it was appropriate to delay action on this item. Future study shouldn't have any bearing on an application already pending. Councilmember Paprocki stated once a license is approved, it was there and he would rather wait two weeks and make a good decision. Mayor Jacobs indicated he would like to have a discussion about the number of licenses, but was not comfortable doing it in the context of this applicant. He met the requirements and was expecting his application would be acted on. Councilmember Sanger wasn't certain two weeks was an appropnate amount of time to do a good study. If they were going to look at liquor licenses, the question was broader than where are they now and what other cities do. The question she would ask was if there was a problem? That would be an issue of looking at police stats and if there is a problem associated with some liquor stores, which may take longer than two weeks. Council Meeting Minutes -4- April 17, 2006 Councilmember Basill felt if they should let new applicants know they were going through this process, and get through the discussion before the next applicant. Councilmember Finkelstein requested as part of the study to see how many licenses surrounding communities allowed, the price applicants pay for licenses, how it is monitored and how long the limit has been in place. The motion failed 4-2 with Councilmember's Carver, Finkelstein, Jacobs and Sanger opposed. It was moved by Councilmember Carver, seconded by Councilmember Sanger to approve an off-sale intoxicating liquor license for Valley Wine &Spiritz Councilmember Basill requested a friendly amendment that Council takes this to study session within a reasonable time frame to study the number of licenses within surrounding cities and any provisions they should include going forward. Councilmember Carver felt that made it sound like the approval was contingent on that and would not be considered a friendly amendment. Mr. Scott stated that should be a separate motion. The motion passed 5-1 with Councilmember Paprocki opposed It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein that Council discuss at study session, within a reasonable time frame, the number of licenses within surrounding cities and any provisions they should include going forward. The motion passed 6-0. 6c. Public Hearing on the Wellhead Protection Program Mr. Rardin, Mr. Anderson and Mr. Kurtz, SCH Consulting firm, presented the plan for the Wellhead Protection Program. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. No other action required by the City Council. 6e. 3300 Decatur Lane—Request for Vacation of a Utility Easement, Case No. 06-26-VAC Mr. Fulton presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. Maja Salmon, 3300 Decatur Ln, stated they were looking to put an addition on their home and approval of the vacation was the first step. Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. Council Meeting Minutes -5- Apnl 17, 2006 It was moved by Councilmember Paprocki, seconded by Councilmember Sanger to adopt first reading of an Ordinance approving the Vacation of a Utility Easement and set second reading for May 1, 2006 The motion passed 6-0. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public—None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Renaming Stephens Drive to Westside Drive. Applicant: Westside Luther Companies, Case No.: 06-23-ST Mr. Fulton presented the staff report. Councilmember Sanger requested in the event Novartis expressed an objection to this prior to the second reading, it be part of the regular agenda, rather than the consent agenda. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Carver, to approve first reading of the proposed ordinance to rename Stephens Drive to Westside Drive and set second reading for May 1, 2006 The motion passed 6-0. 8b. 4525 Morningside Road—Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Preliminary and Final Plat of Browndale Park Second Addition, Case No: 06-02-CP and 06-03-S Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report. Chris Garwick-Foley, 5100 Morningside Rd, stated opposition, felt people had been misled and that this property was part of the park. Mike Foley, 5100 Morningside Rd, opposed this because he felt residents had been misled. Requested this be looked at further. John Lawson, 4320 Browndale Av, displayed a photo showing this as a gateway to the park. Opposed because this would be removing green space. Noted at the Visioning meeting, the item people were most concerned about was green space. He believed there was no longer a demand for housing. Susan Canter, 4249 Utica Av S, indicated she was surprised at the Visioning meeting about the results that green space was a pnonty. Opposed because she believed they could get housing without using green space. Patsy Monson, 4240 Browndale Av, asked what made this lot different than other lots at Browndale Park. Ms. McMonigal replied none of the park was designated as park in the platting process. The parcels were not different. Ms. Monson stated all of the parcels that make up Browndale Park and any park are the same. She felt old information was used to make this decision and they should table it to get more current information. Council Meeting Minutes -6- Apnl 17, 2006 Katrina Lawson, Plymouth, opposed to using this parcel and removal of green space. Stephen Girard, 4240 Browndale Av, opposed to the sale of lots. Mari Salveson, 4309 Browndale Av,believed there was misinformation and an outdated study and requested this be tabled until they had more current information and suggested using information from the Vision process. Lyn Osgood, 4337 Browndale Av, indicated this was a former swamp and residents were asked for their land when they filled it in for the park and people readily gave it. It would be a legacy to the Council to retain green space She suggested the Council look at more affordable housing for seniors, which would free up homes. Mayor Jacobs noted the Aquila Commons coop was done for that reason. Amy Ellis, 4253 Browndale Av, opposed because she believed the City misrepresented this to oppress the opposition and requested this be tabled. Robert Knudson, 4375 Browndale Av, felt it was important for the future to retain this parcel as green space. Denise Konen, 4228 Salem Av S, agreed with the importance of the green space and the parks in the City and felt they needed to think about the future. David Enckson, 4044 Utica Av S, stated finding out the Comp Plan designation is the exact same for this parcel as it was every other parcel of park land concerned him. There had been many improvements to the park in the last ten years and the park is used more than it was. He stated green space in St. Louis Park is precious. Mary Austin, 4382 Dart Av, indicated open green space was at a minimum and requested it not be reduced further. Peter Lenzen, 4300 Browndale Av, didn't understand why this piece of land wasn't a part of the park and stressed the importance of green space. They needed to use the Children First philosophy in all decisions. He was also concerned about safety of children if a house were built on this parcel. Betty Karl, 4089 Toledo Av S, indicated people enjoyed the view of the park through this parcel. She did a petition and most were happy to sign to keep parks and green space. Tom Anderson, 4088 Utica Av S, stated he saw this as an integral gateway to the park and expressed concern about green space. Sonny Schouveller, 3222 Rhode Island Av, expressed support for the residents of Browndale and noted he moved to St. Louis Park because of the parks and green space. Canna Schouveller, 3222 Rhode Island Av, stated a concern about green space being taken away. Council Meeting Minutes -7- April 17, 2006 Glenn Sorenson, 4340 Browndale Av, stated he was opposed to selling this parcel which was frequently used, but was trying to come up with a compromise and indicated there were other underutilized parcels in the park. Sandra Chatfield, 4252 Toledo Av S, supported the previous speakers. They were concerned citizens, not a group of rich people or developers and it seemed like those were only people getting heard. She questioned why they didn't use other land that had been developed for single-family move-up housing. Mayor Jacobs noted Councilmember Basill helped get five new homes approved at the former Brookside School site. Councilmember Basill added he tried to get single family homes into the Village in the Park project across from Center Park, but they weren't able to get support because it was financially difficult. At Brookside school, the Council supported reducing density and putting in five single-family homes. Mike Niehans agreed with the previous speakers Terry Meland, 5118 W 28th St, indicated he had come to oppose the number of liquor licenses, but added his support for residents of Browndale and retention of green space. Kevin Schrefils, 4349 Browndale Av, stated there are over 40 kids in the neighborhood and expressed a concern about their safety at the corner Dan Breyak, 4306 Browndale Av, clarified the lots that were referenced by Mr. Sorenson that were underutilized, although they didn't want any of the park taken. Over 600 people signed the petition(outside of Browndale). He believed there had been misrepresentation by the City and this would set a precedent by selling a portion of parkland. Guidelines need to be established to protect parks. He requested this item be tabled. He read a statement from his wife opposed to the land sale. Robin Solberg, 4249 Browndale Av, stated a concern about eroding green space, which would have a downward effect on property values and those served by the green space. Councilmember Basill stated that the City staff is great and no one intentionally misled residents. They have one of the best City managers and he took issue with comments that people had been misled. They were fortunate to have a Mayor who would allow the public to comment as this is not a formal public hearing, which would not happen in other communities. He believed the Council and staff had high ethical standards. He also disagreed with the neighbors who suggested selling other lots,but agreed with residents that there is a new park building, considenng the visioning process results and the idea of parkland zoning. The Council needed to discuss those issues and take more time on the decision. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to postpone discussion on this item indefinitely. Councilmember Carver agreed with Councilmember Basill's comments about staff and the ability for people to speak when there wasn't a hearing. Citizens also worked on this issue on the Excess Land Task Force. Because there was a vote in December, the question was whether or not the Comp Plan, which currently has this guided as Park, should be changed. He appreciated that the visioning that identified need for move-up housing went back many years, but also that the decision the Council ultimately arrived at in December happened Council Meeting Minutes -8- April 17, 2006 throughout last year. He didn't think the process lacked from keeping current, it was a strong process to reach the place they were. He asked what other Councilmembers envisioned would be done if this were postponed? Councilmember Basil! replied he wanted to understand what was done with the visioning process. They also needed to look at the parkland zoning further. This Council was very pro-children, single-family, and parks and there were competing interests for this parcel. He didn't think it would hurt to take more time. Councilmember Sanger stated she was not in favor of selling this lot in the first place. At the vision meeting she was with the group discussing protecting green space. It made sense to defer this because of the vision process that is going to address this question. She would rather defer and go through the vision process to address the vision statement. She asked that they look at various options how to protect park space from future encroachment. They went into the process of the excess land for the purpose of move-up housing and she believed they did need more move-up housing,but it didn't mean they needed to sell every parcel for move-up housing. Councilmember Paprocki believed this was turning into a re-vote of a previous decision by this body. A task force went through the effort, neighborhood meetings were held, hours of presentations were done, and Council voted and made a decision. This was a Comp Plan amendment, and it was not his place to second guess what had been done before. He believed they should vote. Councilmember Finkelstein stated he didn't agree with all of the land sales. Staff had talked about this, there was a housing task force, and excess land task force and a previous City Council vote on this issue. He lived across from a vacant lot and his children played there, but they didn't own the lot and neither did the neighborhood. The Council may need to correct a mistake that had been made by not designating land as parkland, but it had not been the intention of the Council to set up subdivisions of parkland and they would fix that problem. He saw this parcel as a lot and it didn't make sense to table this item. Councilmember Basill believed this needed further discussion and was not willing to support this now. Councilmember Finkelstein stated tabling it indefinitely didn't serve the process well that got them here. He also felt the whole Council should vote on this. Mayor Jacobs indicated the motion was to postpone indefinitely. What action would it take to get this back on the agenda? Mr. Scott replied normally what would accompany the motion would be a direction to staff with the desired process outlined. Mayor Jacobs stated he was OK taking another look at this, but also felt they needed to give some respect to the process that has been undertaken and the people that did it. He would like to look at the idea of creating a new zoning designation. Councilmember Basill asked if there was a specified time period other Councilmember's would accept? They owed it to the residents to make a decision and to have a time frame to look at the parkland zoning. Council Meeting Minutes -9- April 17, 2006 Mayor Jacobs added a decision of this magnitude should be made with the entire Council as well. Councilmember Carver stated the indefinite nature troubled him. They had tied several things together including the parkland zoning designation with the question about the Comp Plan and the question of this lot being answered by a previous Council. The other concern was what the vision meant. There were different interpretations of what something means. He didn't see an absolute right or wrong, but believed they needed to take action. Councilmember Paprocki believed the decision had been made about the land sale. This was a Comp Plan amendment. Were they going to duplicate efforts by putting this off for more study? He thought they should vote. Councilmember Sanger noted a number of factors didn't get considered as part of the critena the task force considered, one of which was the aesthetic value of open space. A second was environmental protection factors and a third, issues dealing with groundwater and potential flooding. They weren't asked to consider the factors that had relevance for other people in the community, upon which they were now making a further decision. They were not being asked to simply take a procedural step toward a decision that was made last fall, but being asked to make an independent step on the proper land use for this parcel. Mayor Jacobs suggested this be continued to a date certain, rather than indefinitely. He thought there should be a study session discussion. Councilmember Basil! indicated the two important things to him were that they owed it to this community to look at protecting parks. How long would it take staff to provide a report of what other cities were doing and how they protect parks? They don't have a separate zoning designation for parks and they want to look at that. Mr. Locke replied the amount of time for research of ordinances and zoning distnct designations for parks, would be about 4-6 weeks. Mr Locke stated that would not necessarily get to the point where they had adopted a new amendment to the zoning code. Councilmember Paprocki believed they were still putting off the decision they had to make. Defining what a park is doesn't define whether or not this will be in that definition of a park. They were making it sound as if they were going to decide what to do with this piece of land. The vote in December was that this would be sold for residential. Councilmember Basil!amended his motion that this item be brought back to a meeting by June, 2006 Councilmember Sanger accepted the amendment. If they were asking for information to be brought back on vanous alternatives to protect parkland, she understood that,but were they also asking for additional information on this particular parcel? Councilmember Basill replied yes, he wanted to look at the building and the visioning process. He didn't think it would hurt to look at that information and find a way to protect parks. Council Meeting Minutes -10- April 17, 2006 Councilmember Finkelstein asked what happened to the other lots in the process? Councilmember Basill believed they were talking about those that were shown in the Comp Plan as Park and what the zoning should be going forward. Mayor Jacobs indicated they could discuss this at a study session prior to June. Mr. Locke indicated they could chose to handle this issue separate from the issue of coming up with the new park zoning distnct or open space zoning district if they chose. Councilmember Carver stated he would support the motion as amended. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if this was just the Browndale parcel or all of the parcels. Councilmember Basill replied his suggestion was if another parcel came before Council with an amendment to the Comp Plan from park designation to residential, they wait until the study session has been held. He asked staff if there would be another coming with Park designation before June. Ms. Larsen replied there was one other parcel that had the Comp Plan Park designation and that wouldn't be before Council until the end of summer. Councilmember Sanger asked regardless of the designation, are there any other parcels staff intended to ask council for official action before June? Mr. Locke replied there was one next on the agenda. The motion passed 5-1 with Councilmember Paprocki opposed 6d. 4200 Natchez Avenue South—Request for Vacation of a portion of the unbuilt Natchez Avenue South, Case No.: 06-25-VAC Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public heanng. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. It was moved by Councilmember Carver, seconded by Councilmember Paprocki to adopt first reading of an Ordinance approving the Vacation of a portion of Natchez Avenue South and set second reading for May 1, 2006 Councilmember Basill wanted to clanfy if this lot was needed for drainage and could a home be built without any flooding problems? Ms. Larsen replied the 28 foot wide easement was for drainage and utility purposes. As recommended by the Engineers and determined it would be best to have a wider easement to accommodate drainage. The southern seven lots would remain vacant and allow for holding of water. Soil bonngs were conducted on this parcel and analyzed by the engineering firm and the homes would need to be built on pilings. The costs of the soil corrections will be significant, up to $40,000, which would be made know to perspective buyers. This is similar to the homes to the West. Councilmember Basill asked staff to assure the homes were built correctly. Councilmember Sanger asked the size of the home. Ms. Larsen replied the home could be 35' wide (fronting 42nd Av). If two stones high, it could easily be a move-up home. The motion passed 6-0 Council Meeting Minutes -11- April 17, 2006 8c. 4200 Natchez Avenue South —Preliminary and Final Plat of Wooddale Park First Addition, Case No.: 06-24-S Resolution No. 06-074 Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Finkelstein, seconded by Councilmember Carver, to adopt Resolution No. 06-074 approving Wooddale Park First Addition Preliminary and Final Plat. The motion passed 6-0 8d. Junior High Addition—Deleted from agenda 9. Communications Mayor Jacobs reported the Lenox spaghetti dinner will be held Friday at 4:30. The Home Remodeling Fair will be April 23rd from 12-4. Councilmember Paprocki encouraged residents to become involved in the remodeling fair. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. City Clerk Ma r