The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2011/05/16 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session II/ St. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK,MINNESOTA MAY 16, 2011 The meeting convened at 8:29 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Phil Finkelstein, Anne Mavity, Paul Omodt, Julia Ross, Susan Sanger, and Sue Santa. Councilmembers absent: None. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmemng), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Communications Coordinator(Mr. Zwilling), and Recording Secretary(Ms. Hughes). Guest: Dave McKenzie (SEH, Inc.) 1. Possible Updates to City of St. Louis Park Freight Rail Policy Mr. Harmening presented the staff report and advised that the City is on schedule to adopt an updated freight rail policy on May 31st as directed by Council. Mr. McKenzie advised that the MN&S Freight Rail Study Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) was officially published today resulting in the commencement of the 30-day comment period. He reviewed the current and proposed MNS freight rail alignments as well as the track plan drawings contained in the EAW. He discussed the County's proposed closure of 29th at the railroad crossing in order to soften the grade coming up to the Minnetonka Boulevard bridge, noting that 28th Street would stay open with a new crossing and new signals. He also discussed the right-of-way and environmental issues associated with the proposed reroute. He added that the Technical Memorandum #4 is still in draft form as comments and questions continue to be addressed. Mr. Locke presented an updated draft of Table 9 depicting freight rail options in St. Louis Park only. He stated that one of the mitigation measures heard throughout the process and dunng the listening sessions was that if freight rail is rerouted to MNS, it should have a wider right-of-way, more typical of a rail corridor, and the most efficient way to obtain that right-of-way is to acquire approximately 40-45 homes. He indicated if this land is acquired, it could make the buffer zones around the tracks much wider and would provide room for a trail which could serve to create a north-south connection in the community. Councilmember Sanger asked what the width would be from the centerline of the tracks on each side to the boundaries of the closest homes. Mr. McKenzie replied that the closest distance to the property line would be 50' on the west and depending on what is done with the additional right-of-way, the distance on the east could be upwards of 150'. He then discussed the Kenilworth corridor as currently proposed, as well as the Cedar Lakeshore townhomes, commonly referred to as the "pinch point", which would need to be acquired to provide additional ROW if freight rail and LRT were to co-locate in the Kenilworth corridor. The regional trail would also need to relocate. Special Study Session Minutes -2- May 16, 2011 Mr. Locke discussed the EAW process and stated that Mr. McKenzie and staff will begin its review of the complete document with a goal of preparing a comprehensive review for Council consideration at its first meeting in June. He added that the EAW is available as a link on the City's website and hard copies will be provided to Council. Councilmember Finkelstein requested information regarding the distinction between betterment and mitigation as used by the County. Mr. Locke stated that there is some language specifically included the EAW and the County has one category of mitigation that includes those items which are required by State or Federal regulations and a second category of items the County has willingly said it will commit to do. He noted there are no rules that limit the County from adding more items to mitigation. He explained that the language in the EAW law is not precise in terms of saying what exactly must be done because the circumstances differ in any given project. He added that the City has referred to all items as mitigation and not used the term"betterments." Councilmember Ross urged the City to focus on the environmental impact of trains potentially going through an area of floodplain or wetland. Councilmember Mavity stated that she previously inquired about the potential removal of all coal trains and questioned whether funds might be available from the State legislature toward the removal of all coal trains from the City and whether the railroads would be compelled to use those funds toward exiting the City entirely. She also asked if there is a natural capacity ceiling that will limit traffic on MNS. Mr. McKenzie stated that an alternative route for coal through Appleton would represent a shorter run and result in significant savings for the railroad. He indicated that in terms of capacity, the primary concern is not necessarily in St. Louis Park but near Target Center and going across the river. Councilmember Omodt felt that a significant question to be considered is how much discomfort the Council is willing to live with on this difficult issue. He stated that the County has not been a good partner and the process has been flawed. He urged the Council to review its resolution regarding the preferred route and seriously consider how much discomfort it can live with. Mayor Jacobs stated that it would be wonderful to find a way to have all the decision-makers together at the same time in order to discuss this. He indicated that the City previously offered to facilitate this type of meeting and the County did not respond to the offer. Mr. McKenzie agreed and indicated that now that the EAW has been published, there may be an opportunity to meet with Mn/DOT, the Met Council, the County, the FTA and the railroads all at the same time. Councilmember Santa expressed concern regarding the availability of an apples to apples comparison. She also expressed concern regarding mitigation versus betterment. She stated that there may also have to be some mitigation for the railroad for the MNS route because the grade is steeper, therefore costing the railroad more dollars, and she asked how that will be factored in. She indicated that she has not yet seen enough information to say that Kenilworth is not a viable option. Special Study Session Minutes -3- May 16, 2011 Mr. Locke presented another draft of the mitigation list prepared by Mr. McKenzie that includes items contained in the EAW as well as the items mentioned dunng the listening sessions. He also presented an updated Table 5 comparing the existing conditions in the Kenilworth and MNS routes for both St. Louis Park and Minneapolis. Council discussed right-of-way and acquisition of properties, as well as outdoor living space vis- a-vis DORA requirements. Councilmember Mavity stated there are certain aspects of rerouting that have been documented to show there will be a benefit to certain members of the community, e.g., safety issues related to traffic at Wooddale and Beltline. She added that this is not intended to diminish the concerns raised with respect to MNS, but some neighborhoods are already taking the impact of freight and will take the impact of light rail. She stated that it will be important to make sure the City has some kind of a win-win scenario and that any potential reroute works well and is an asset to the overall community. Mr. Harmening discussed the staff report suggestion that from a policy perspective, Council consider the fundamental question of whether all the conditions under which rerouting to MNS would be acceptable are still applicable: and whether those conditions have been met, based on all the studies, analysis, and process to date. He stated that from a physical engineering perspective, there appears to be another viable route. He added that after a quick review of the EAW, the mitigation measures identified do not meet the conditions contained in Council's resolution. Councilmember Finkelstein stated he was troubled that it does not appear there has been a full and robust discussion as to appropriate mitigation measures. Councilmember Mavity stated it will be important to make clear that the City supports light rail and to draft a resolution that includes more detail related to mitigation. Councilmember Sanger suggested that Council adopt a resolution that opposes relocation of freight rail into St. Louis Park based on the earlier resolution and because the conditions have not been met with regard to another viable option. She stated that she would rather separate the list of mitigation measures in response to the EAW, including noise walls, whistle quiet zones, traffic issues, safety issues, acquisition of homes, and issues related to the wye. Mr. Harmening stated that staff will prepare a draft resolution for Council consideration at its study session on May 23`d; following that discussion, further detail regarding the EAW will be provided. He advised that Mn/DOT will be holding an open house regarding the EAW on Wednesday, June 8th, from 4:00-7:00 p.m. at the Rec Center. The meeting adjourned at 10:07 p.m. -rtes_ /I Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff . .s, ayor