HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/03/14 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session ,/fSt. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES
MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MARCH 14,2011
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs (arrived at 7:06 p.m.), Anne Mavity (arrived at
6:34 p.m.), Paul Omodt, Julia Ross, Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa.
Councilmembers absent: Phil Finkelstein.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Community Development (Mr.
Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Economic Development Coordinator
(Mr. Hunt), City Engineer (Mr. Brink), Organizational Development Coordinator (Ms.
Gothberg), Communications Coordinator(Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary(Ms. Hughes).
Guests: Bill Morris and Peter Leatherman(Decision Resources) and April Crockett(Mn/DOT).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning—March 28,2011
Mr. Harmening presented the proposed study session agenda for March 28th.
2. Residential Survey Update
Ms. Gothberg presented the staff report and proposed city-wide residential survey. She then
introduced Mr. Bill Morns and Mr. Peter Leatherman of Decision Resources.
Councilmember Mavity requested that the definition of"move-up housing" be clarified or more
specific because some residents may not have a clear understanding of the term as used in the
survey.
Mayor Pro Tern Sanger asked how the City can be sure it will obtain an accurate, randomized
sample of the community given the fact that many people have given up their land-lines and use
only cell phones.
Mr. Morris advised that the survey will generate a random sample and the cell phone only group
represents only about 3-4% of residents in the metro area. He noted that one group not taken
into account may be the person who has moved into the area and is using a cell phone with a
different area code.
Mayor Pro Tern Sanger expressed concern that the survey might miss this distinct demographic
group, representing new arrivals, and asked if this will change the kind of results obtained.
Mr. Morris stated that the survey will track the age of respondents and added that only 10-15%
of respondents will fall into the cell phone only demographic.
Councilmember Ross suggested that the questions related to city services include a question
regarding sidewalks.
Councilmember Mavity suggested that the questions related to city services include a question
regarding garbage and recycling.
Study Session Minutes -2- March 14, 2011
It was the consensus of the City Council to include a question related to city services regarding
plowing and overall maintenance of sidewalks.
Councilmember Ross suggested that question numbers 51, 52, or 53 ask respondents if they were
treated with respect and dignity by City staff.
Mayor Pro Tem Sanger suggested that the question regarding a respondent's last contact with the
City be clarified to indicate whether that contact was with City staff and/or the Mayor or
Councilmembers.
It was the consensus of the City Council to add an additional question that asks if a respondent
has contacted the Mayor or City Council in the past year.
Councilmember Mavity stated that if a resident answers "no" to question number 76 regarding
the appearance of housing, that response is not necessarily a negative response and may simply
mean that the appearance of the neighborhood has been maintained.
Mr. Moms suggested that if the response to this question is no, a follow-up question be asked to
inquire whether they feel the appearance in their neighborhood has declined or been maintained.
He added that question numbers 83 and 85 are intended to probe for specifics regarding the
overall appearance of residential neighborhoods.
Mayor Pro Tern Sanger suggested that question number 88 include not only the reference to
work and include school or other places.
Councilmember Mavity stated that question number 92 should reference the Met Council and the
City as well as Hennepin County, and should be used in the present tense rather than stating
"may pursue." She added that question numbers 92 and 93 may not be needed.
Councilmember Ross asked if question number 107 related to additional amenities should
specify indoor or outdoor amenities.
Ms. Gothberg indicated that the question regarding civic amenities should reference an indoor
facility.
Councilmember Mavity noted that trails and sidewalks ranked high on the community recreation
survey results and suggested that these items be included in the list of amenities.
Mr. Leatherman suggested including a reference to "expansion of trails and sidewalks."
Councilmember Santa suggested that the reference to an artificial turf sports field be changed to
an artificial turf athletic field.
Mayor Pro Tern Sanger requested that question number 108 be amended to include a reference to
user fees.
Councilmember Mavity suggested that question number 109 be clarified to include a reference to
civic groups, school groups, and/or neighborhood groups.
It was the consensus of the City Council to eliminate question number 111.
Study Session Minutes -3- March 14, 2011
Councilmember Ross suggested that question number 112 include a reference to the manner in
which residents receive information about emergencies, e.g., snow emergencies or parking
restrictions.
It was the consensus of the City Council to add an additional question after question number 113
that asks residents how they want to receive information as it relates to emergencies.
Councilmember Santa suggested that question number 121 include a reference to the Lenox
Center.
It was the consensus of the City Council to amend question number 122 to state "what is your
primary source of information about the Saint Louis Park Public Schools, if any?"
Councilmember Mavity expressed concern regarding question number 133 and asked how this
information will be used in the survey.
It was the consensus of the City Council to amend question number 133 to state "for
demographic purposes, I need to ask your gender."
Mayor Jacobs arrived at 7:06 p.m. and presided over the remainder of the meeting.
3. Proposed St. Louis Park Open to Business Program
Mr. Hunt presented the staff report and advised that the Metropolitan Consortium of Community
Developers (MCCD) provides various services to small businesses, including technical
assistance to those running or owning a small business as well as providing assistance to
entrepreneurs starting a business. He then introduced Mr. Rob Smolund, Enterprise Facilitator,
and Mr. Jim Roth, Executive Director for MCCD.
Mr. Roth stated that MCCD is an association of 43 nonprofit community developers working
across the Twin Cities metro area working to improve housing and economic opportunity. He
indicated that MCCD recently established the Open to Business program which provides small
business assistance services under contract with cities in Hennepin County. He added that
MCCD has assembled a strong staff with complementary expertise around technical, regulatory,
and financing issues, and is also active in local issues affecting affordable housing.
Mr. Smolund stated that he works on a one-on-one basis with people wanting to open or expand
a business and to provide an objective third party view on their business. He indicated the Open
to Business program is intended to be branded as a city's program and would provide a valuable
resource for small businesses. He added that MCCD provides and/or facilitates approximately
fifty loans per year.
Councilmember Mavity requested further information regarding performance measures. She
also requested further information regarding goals and targeted dollar amounts for loans that
could be expected in the City.
Mr. Roth stated that the Open to Business program represents a much more proactive effort to
reach businesses in the City. He indicated that MCCD is heavily involved in working with
businesses along the Central Corridor.
Study Session Minutes -4- March 14, 2011
Mr. Locke indicated that the Economic Development staff feels the Open to Business program
represents a worthwhile investment and would provide great long-term value for the City by
helping its businesses, especially small businesses, get the resources they need and will serve to
improve the City's tax base. He noted that any contract with MCCD would be for a one year
term.
Councilmember Omodt stated that any program entered into by the City should not
unintentionally discriminate against franchise businesses.
Councilmember Ross stated that the Open to Business program makes sense, particularly around
leveraging small business loans for minority and women owned businesses.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to proceed with a contract with the
MCCD to bring its Open to Business program to St. Louis Park.
4. Southwest Light Rail Transit and Freight Rail Studies Update
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
Ms. McMonigal provided an update regarding the Southwest Light Rail Transit (SWLRT)
project and discussed the integration of the SWLRT Community Works and SWLRT
Management Committee. She also discussed the SWLRT and Community Works funding
sources as well as the project schedule, stating that the DEIS is in the process of being completed
and preliminary engineering will begin in May or June with funding provided by the Federal
government. She indicated that the Hennepin County Community Works Steering Committee is
currently working on setting its vision and goals and staff is creating a work plan that includes
parking and access, which have been identified as high priority.
Councilmember Santa asked if the project has gone through all the required budgetary processes
and if the money has been allocated for the project.
Ms. McMonigal replied that not all of the funding has been allocated and the FTA has not yet
agreed to the next step in the project, which is giving approval to begin Preliminary Engineering
(PE). She added that the project is high on the FTA list in terms of its performance for cost and
ridership.
Mr. Harmening pointed out that funding for these types of projects is approved on an incremental
basis.
Mr. Bill James, Management Committee Member, stated that there are currently 23 new FTA
start projects of$1 billion or more and the SWLRT and Central Corridor represent two of those
23 projects. He advised that the FTA reviewed the preliminary risk assessment of timelines,
funding, and scope for SWLRT in February; since that time, the FTA had further questions
regarding whether the project has accounted for increases in the cost of steel, concrete, etc. and
that information is being reviewed now by the FTA. He stated it is expected that the FTA will
sign off in April and release the project in May to enter the preliminary engineering phase.
Ms. McMonigal reviewed next steps, including continued committee work, Beltline station area
planning phase II, and DEIS comments. She advised that two grants were received from the Met
Council for work related to Beltline, one for surface water planning and the other for design
Study Session Minutes -5- March 14, 2011
guidelines. She indicated when the DEIS is finalized, a meeting with Council will be scheduled
during April, May, or June.
Mayor Jacobs stated that he felt it was important to include a forum to obtain public comment
and provide residents with an opportunity to review the DEIS documents.
Mr. Locke provided an update on the freight rail studies, stating that the EAW from the MNS
study is still underway and the expectation is that this study will be issued in May. He noted that
the EAW will obtain sign-off from Mn/DOT as the responsible governmental unit (RGU), the
EAW will be published, and a thirty day comment period will follow. He added that a public
meeting would fall within that thirty day timeframe during which comments will be accepted and
become part of the public record. He explained that it is the RGU's responsibility to make a
judgment after the thirty day comment period as to the adequacy of the EAW and whether
further environmental analysis is necessary or if changes should be made to the EAW based on
comments.
Mr. Harmening stated it is important to keep in mind that the EAW process does not choose a
route, but rather is intended to identify potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures,
and determine whether further environmental review is required. He noted that those decisions
are made by the RGU and the City may submit official comments.
Councilmember Omodt expressed frustration that the City, the City Council, and the community
have not been heard and felt it was critical to have a public process in place whereby residents
are involved and can comment on the issue.
Councilmember Sanger agreed and stated the City needs to have its own process and hold a
public meeting in which Mr. McKenzie's findings regarding the viability of the Kenilworth
corridor for both light rail and freight rail are presented along with the freight rail alternatives
comparison. She indicated that once public input is received, the information should be tied into
the EAW process that the County is running before the County finishes its process. She
expressed concern that the County is going to rush through the process before the City gets its
portion done.
Mr. Locke presented a proposed process for community involvement on the freight rail
comparison, including a study session on May 9th to discuss the draft comparison analysis by
SEH, community meetings the week of May 16`h to provide an opportunity for residents to ask
question and make comments, a study session on May 23"1 to receive a freight rail update, a
public hearing on June 6th regarding freight rail routing comments, a study session on June 13th
to include a policy discussion on freight rail, and a Council meeting on June 20`h to adopt a
resolution updating Council's freight rail policy.
Councilmember Sanger stated that she felt the schedule needs to be moved up by approximately
three weeks because the City needs to have its position statement and information ready to give
to the County long before the County finishes the EAW.
It was the consensus of the City Council to have this process completed earlier if possible, in
order that comments may be submitted during the EAW comment period.
The Council discussed the items identified as measures for providing a comparison of freight rail
in the Kenilworth corridor with freight rail on the MNS line.
Study Session Minutes -6- March 14, 2011
Councilmember Santa requested that water quality, water ponding, and soil impacts be included.
Mr. Locke stated that this list is intended to focus on those things that are most critical from the
City's perspective. He indicated that the EAW will address wetland and water quality for MNS
but these items will not be addressed as it relates to the Kenilworth corridor because there is no
EAW in process for Kenilworth.
The Council discussed the desired process for obtaining public input.
Councilmember Sanger proposed that the Council hold one or more listening sessions for
residents attended by all Councilmembers and staff, and that minutes be prepared so that the
information can be compiled and disseminated. She stated that the City already has a starting list
of mitigation issues and the City should be able to compile its own list of necessary mitigation
measures and use it as part of the public meeting process to see if anything has been missed. She
added that Safety in the Park could provide assistance in compiling a robust list of mitigation
measures.
Mr. Harmening summarized the desired outcomes that Council is looking for, including making
sure the City has a comprehensive comment document on the EAW, developing an updated
formal position on the routing options, and involving the public in those two processes by
holding two public meetings, and Council desires to have all of this done by the end of May
based on the premise that the EAW process will run from May 1 to May 31.
Mr. Locke suggested that the week of May 16th community meetings could be used for
listening/comment sessions and presentation by SEH of its comparison findings and the June 6th
public hearing could be another listening/comment session. He agreed to adjust the meeting
schedule to fit everything in before the end of May.
Councilmember Sanger requested assistance from SEH with regard to the noise and vibration
technical information and to explain this issue so people understand how that impacts mitigation.
She also requested assistance regarding the County's definition and use of the terms
"betterment" and "mitigation." She explained that the County has previously talked about
mitigation it would not offer and labeled the noise and vibration question as "minor" and
everything else as "betterment"rather than mitigation. She requested information regarding who
gets to decide what constitutes "betterment" or "mitigation and the criteria being used by the
County. She stated that the measures for providing a freight rail comparison do not include a
comparison of track safety or the number of curves in the track and asked that the list include
safety implications. She suggested that the measures compare the distance between a property
and the center line of tracks, not just comparing the number of homes within a certain number of
feet. She requested further information regarding property acquired and who is deciding what
property is acquired. She also requested that the measures include right-of-way comparisons.
Councilmember Ross requested that comparison measure #3 include the type of institution. She
also requested that comparison measure#7 include pedestrian crossings at trails and bike trails.
Councilmember Mavity stated that a wide variety of safety issues need to be included, including
impact on car crossings and the number of cars crossing the tracks. She requested that the
comparison measures address the elimination of the wye because this represents a safety issue
and quality of life issue for the neighborhoods.
Study Session Minutes -7- March 14, 2011
Councilmember Santa requested that the comparison measures address the number of at-grade
crossings.
Councilmember Sanger requested that the comparison measures address track elevation.
Councilmember Mavity requested that the comparison measures address lost economic
development opportunities and property values that are impacted by the trains.
5. Trunk Highway 169 Noise Wall Options
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
Mr. Brink discussed several options for noise abatement along Highway 169 and introduced
April Crockett, Mn/DOT West Area Engineer. He explained that Mn/DOT has scheduled
construction in 2015 of a 20' noise wall along the east side of Highway 169 between W. 16th
Street and I-394 (Option A). He noted that the 20' noise wall could be extended to a location
just south of W. 16`l' Street, but would require closure of the W. 16th Street ramp. He indicated
that Mn/DOT has also proposed to construct a visual barrier consisting of a 12' wall in the area
located between Cedar Manor Lake and the wetland area north of W. 22nd Street (Option H). He
added that Mn/DOT is offering to construct this barrier in 2012 at no cost to the City, provided
the exit and entrance ramps to Highway 169 from W. 22nd Street, W. 22nd Lane, ad W. 23rd Street
are closed.
Councilmember Ross expressed concern regarding re-routing of traffic and the increased number
of cars on Cedar Lake Road if the W. 16th Street ramp is closed.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to pursue the public process for Option H.
6. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Work
Plan
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
Councilmember Mavity suggested that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission be
invited to meet with Council once the community survey is completed.
Councilmember Omodt requested that staff encourage the School District to fill the School
Distnct representative vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission and to
provide the School Board with suggestions for filling the vacancy.
Councilmember Sanger suggested that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission's 2011
Work Plan include sidewalks and trails.
7. Communications/Meeting Check-in (Verbal)
The Council expressed congratulations to Councilmember Finkelstein on the birth of his
granddaughter.
Study Session Minutes -8- March 14, 2011
Mr. Harmening advised that a gunshot victim was reported this afternoon in the vicinity of the
trail near Minnetonka Boulevard. He indicated that few details are available at this time but it
appears the victim was shot in Hopkins.
Councilmember Mavity noted the recent ad in the Sun Sailor encouraging tenants to join the
fight for constitutional rights.
The meeting adjourned at 10:22 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
8. 2011 Valuation Report
9. 2011-2012 Wellness Incentive Program
10. Federal Early Retiree Reinsurance Program(ERRP) Disbursement
11. Redevelopment Project and EDA Contrac s Report: 1st Quarter 2011
Nancy Stroth, eity Clerk Je a Ons ayor