HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013/09/16 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Regular IfsSt. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES
MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
SEPTEMBER 16, 2013
1. Call to Order
Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, Sue
Santa, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Julia Ross.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Deputy City Manager/Director of Human
Resources (Ms. Deno), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Director of Community Development (Mr.
Locke), Director of Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Planning/Zomng Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal),
Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Sullivan), Assistant Zoning Administrator (Mr.
Morrison), Environmental Coordinator(Mr. Vaughan), and Recording Secretary(Ms. Hughes).
la. Pledge of Allegiance
lb. Roll Call
2. Presentations
2a. 2013 Evergreen Awards
Mayor Jacobs presented the 2013 Evergreen Awards to Susan Czapiewski and Kevin
Sundquist (4910 W. 27th Street) and to Wendy and Patrick Skinner (3336 Huntington
Avenue South) and congratulated this year's award winners.
3. Approval of Minutes
3a. Study Session Meeting Minutes August 12, 2013
Councilmember Mavity requested that the sixth paragraph on page 7 be revised to read
"Councilmember Mavity stated the Beltline discussion needs to include dealing with the
Nordic Ware truck issue and making sure the City has a clear vision for the traffic issues
for Beltline regardless of what happens with light rail."
Councilmember Santa requested that the final paragraph on page 1 be revised to read
"Councilmember Santa suggested that the City schedule an open house at Lenox to
address any questions or concerns regarding the recycling program by seniors."
Councilmember Spano requested that a paragraph be inserted between the seventh and
eighth paragraphs on page 4 that states, "Councilmember Spano felt that the City's
primary responsibility was to ensure that TIF notes were paid off and that it was not the
City's responsibility to engineer a specific mix of restaurants in the development."
The minutes were approved as amended.
City Council Meeting -2- September 16, 2013
3b. Study Session Meeting Minutes August 26, 2013
The minutes were approved as presented.
3c. City Council Meeting September 3,2013
The minutes were approved as presented.
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
appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion.
4a. Reappoint the following commissioners as a city representative to their respective
commissions with terms as follows:
Name Commission Term Expiration
Richard Webb Housing Authority 6/30/2018
Tyler Dixon Planning Commission— Youth Member 8/31/2014
4b. Approve for filing Telecommunication Commission Meeting Minutes May 22, 2013
4c. Approve for filing Fire Civil Service Commission Meeting Minutes June 7, 2013
4d. Approve for filing Vendor Claims
4e. Approve for filing Housing Authority Minutes August 14, 2013
Councilmember Spano requested that Consent Calendar item #4a be removed and placed
on the Regular Agenda.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to
approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar as amended to move
Consent Calendar item 4a to the Regular Agenda as item 8c; and to waive reading of all
resolutions and ordinances.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Ross absent).
5. Boards and Commissions -None
6. Public Hearings
6a. First Reading of Council Salaries Ordinance and Economic Development
Authority Compensation Resolution. Resolution No. 13-135.
Ms. Deno presented the staff report. She stated that any increase in salaries for the
Mayor and City Council would be effective on January 1, 2014. She noted the last time
Council took action with respect to salaries was in 2010 when Council decreased the
City Council Meeting -3- September 16, 2013
Mayor, City Council, and EDA salaries by 5% due to budget concerns. She presented the
information showing 2014 proposed change for Mayor, Councilmembers, and EDA
salaries is a 2% increase.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Jacobs
closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Sanger pointed out that the proposed 2% increase is consistent with the
2014 salary increase for City employees and she felt the increase was fair.
It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Mavity, to
approve First Reading of Ordinance Setting Salaries for the Mayor and Councilmembers
and to set Second Reading for September 23, 2013, and to adopt Resolution No. 13-135
amending the Compensation of the Commissioners of the Economic Development
Authority.
Councilmember Spano asked if the salary comparison information for other metro area
suburbs includes combined salary information for the Mayor, Council, and EDA, or
whether the data includes only Mayor and Council salary information.
Ms. Deno replied that some of the information includes salaries for the Mayor, Council,
and EDA, and some of the information does not include EDA salaries, adding she could
provide further information before the Second Reading if desired. She noted that the
salary information for St. Louis Park lists Mayor and Council salaries separately as well
as Mayor and Council salaries with EDA.
Councilmember Santa stated she was opposed to the increase, adding the increase is
approximately$200 per year, which is less than $5 per week, and the pay itself is more of
a stipend and does not reflect any connection to actual work done.
Councilmember Spano stated he would be voting against the increase, adding he felt that
Council needed to remain sensitive to the proposed increase in the 2014 property tax levy
and overall budget. He added he would be interested in exploring the idea of having the
Charter Commission or some other committee provide advice to Council on this issue.
The motion passed 4-2 (Councilmembers Santa and Spano opposed; Councilmember
Ross absent)
6b. Appeal of Board of Zoning Appeals Decision — Variances at 4701 Excelsior
Boulevard. Resolution No. 13-136
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report and explained that Elion Acquisitions (Elion) is
proposing to construct a 7,000 square foot retail building at 4701 Excelsior Boulevard
and has requested a 1.0' variance to the 25' drive aisle width and a 10' variance to the
required 15' side yard abutting the street. He noted the purpose of the side yard variance
is to address an unintentional irregularity in the Zoning Ordinance that states the shorter
of the two lot lines adjacent to the streets is the front lot line and in this case, Natchez
Avenue is the front lot line and Excelsior Boulevard is the side yard. He stated the
property is impacted by circumstances beyond the owner's control and the variance
request is consistent with other similar uses. He explained that the initial plan was
City Council Meeting -4- September 16, 2013
discussed at a neighborhood meeting and concerns were raised including parking lot
noise, screening along the south property line, impact to trees, only one access to the
parking lot, traffic volume increase, parking in the neighborhood, and lighting; as a
result, the applicant submitted a revised plan to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA)
that reduced the building to 7,000 square feet with 29 parking stalls, replaced the 42"
fence with an 8' masonry wall, and showed two driveway access points including a right-
in only off Excelsior Boulevard. He advised the plan was revised following the BOZA
meeting to include 28 parking spaces, the addition of a landscape island along the south
property line, the masonry wall has been increased to 9', and the applicant has agreed to
plant trees on the other side of the property. He added that in order to address pedestrian
movement along Natchez, the applicant has also agreed to extend the sidewalk across the
driveway apron to better define pedestrian movements. He stated that the applicant will
use downcast LED lighting attached to the screening wall and building and there will be
no light spillover. He presented several drawings of the proposed building and explained
that the variance to the side yard would provide sufficient space to allow the applicant to
construct the masonry wall and the variance to the setback along Excelsior Boulevard
would allow for the parking lot to be located behind the building. He indicated that
according to the national average, a gas station with eight pumps would generate about
1,300 trips per weekday as opposed to 290 trips per day generated by a 7,000 square foot
retail building. He stated the variance request is consistent with new development on
Excelsior Boulevard and presented several pictures of existing buildings on the south side
of Excelsior Boulevard, adding that thirteen of these buildings are oriented toward the
street and the subject property is the only one with the front oriented on the side street.
He indicated the variance request is also consistent with the Park Commons Concept
Plan's livable community goals.
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing.
Ms. Hillary Stewart, 4712 Vallacher Avenue, stated she lives directly behind the BP gas
station and requested that Council table action on this variance request. She stated she
was concerned about her property value going down and also was concerned about the
quality of life for her and the residents of Minikanda Vista. She stated she understood the
importance of this parcel and was not against development, but requested that Council
take a step back to let the residents of Minikanda Vista have further conversations with
the architect. She felt the whole process was rushed and they did not have enough time to
go over some additional drawings based on the concerns of residents. She reiterated her
request to consider tabling this for a few more weeks so they can have more constructive
conversations and to address concerns about the amount of traffic in this area.
Mr. Jon Schaefer, 3913 Lynn Avenue, stated the redevelopment presented concerns for
all of the Minikanda Vista residents. He stated he went to the 3800 and 3900 block of
Lynn Avenue to get signatures for the petition that states they want their voices heard
regarding redevelopment of the south side of Excelsior Boulevard and every person
signed the petition. He stated they are not anti business but they want to get it right and
want their voices heard, adding he supported the request to table this matter.
Mr. Alan Floyd, 3400 Glenhurst, stated he offered to speak regarding his experience
living near a development with parking in the rear and indicated he lives close to the
Ellipse. He stated they have experienced numerous problems including noise from
snowplowing in the middle of the night, noise from parking lot maintenance at 1:00 a.m.
City Council Meeting -5- September 16, 2013
on more than one occasion, and light intrusion because promised plantings were not
installed, adding there has been a recent move to address the planting issue. He felt it
was important to maintain neighborhoods in St. Louis Park and supported his neighbors
in their request for additional time to consider this project and to get it right.
Ms. Lyn Wik, 3965 Quentin Avenue S., thanked Council for listening and stated that
Excelsior Boulevard is a seven-lane road in many places, which means it will not be
pleasant to walk along. She stated this is about establishing guidelines for the future and
felt if guidelines had been developed in 2001 when they asked for them, maybe the
concerns with this project would not be an issue. She asked that Council vote to table
this variance request and give the architects and residents more time to develop a creative
alternative that is pleasing to everyone.
Ms. Erica Gibbons, 4724 Vallacher Avenue, stated she shares a property line with the
commercial business and has been involved in these discussions. She stated she was
aware of the City's vision to push buildings to the front but was not sure that this makes
sense for the south side of Excelsior Boulevard. She stated the north side has a
walkability factor and there is room for trees that adds an extra buffer but this will not be
part of the current proposal. She stated their neighborhood has expressed numerous
concerns and felt these issues could be worked out with the architect through proper
planning. She questioned why they have not seen a proposal placing the building at the
back of the lot and felt this was a viable option that would alleviate most concerns and
would not require a variance. She felt this new development would set the tone for how
the rest of the south side would be developed and asked Council to table its decision to
allow the residents to work with the architect and explore an alternative design acceptable
to all parties and to make sure this is done right.
Mr. Patrick Skinner, 3336 Huntington Avenue, stated he did not support this proposal
given the angst he was hearing from neighbors about the impact and he felt that that angst
would carry over to the next project. He felt there was a way to make this project happen
without the minimized setback and he asked the developer and the City to further
consider this. He stated his bigger concern related to the fact that this project has the
potential to set a precedent for future projects and it was important to make sure that
zoning is developed across the City in a thoughtful manner that creates comprehensive
predictability where variances are granted only in extreme hardship or extreme
impracticability. He stated if this variance request is granted, the City will have the same
fight on the same topics with the same people on every future project and urged Council
to take a step back and to develop design guidelines for the whole corridor that sets
expectations for future projects. He added he was hopeful that Council would pause and
give serious consideration to developing guidelines for all of Excelsior Boulevard.
Ms. Maura Howard, 4815 Vallacher Avenue, stated they are excited to see new
development and they appreciate Council's willingness to listen, but the residents of
Minikanda Vista were brought in late to this process and she felt that with more time they
could come up with the best possible scenario for all projects along the south side of
Excelsior Boulevard. She stated she located a 2001 memo that talks about the need for
mechanisms whereby residents have control over development over small sectors and she
asked that Council table this decision to provide more time to get this right for the health
and vibrancy of their community.
City Council Meeting -6- September 16, 2013
Mr. Paul Jennings, 3925 Joppa Avenue S., stated his belief that this would not be the last
appeal heard by the City regarding the south side of Excelsior Boulevard. He indicated
the developer did not identify how many trees would be chopped down for the parking lot
and this will result in loss of privacy for those on Vallacher Avenue. He stated they went
through a design guideline process for Wooddale Flats, the Ellipse, and Methodist, and
did not understand why the City has not developed design guidelines for this area.
Mr. Steve Buffington, 3800 Huntington Avenue S., spoke in favor of tabling the variance
request. He stated he would like the City to follow-up on the request of the neighbors to
have a say in what happens along the south side of Excelsior Boulevard, adding the City
does have a precedent for developing design guidelines. He stated the south side of
Excelsior Boulevard is different than the north side because the lots are shallower and
back up to a residential area and there is a potential for excessive light and traffic. He
expressed concern about the traffic generated by this proposal and how that traffic will
compete with the residents on Natchez.
Ms. Claudia Johnston-Madison, 3931 Joppa Avenue S., thanked Council for listening to
the residents and requested that Council table this matter for the same reasons cited
earlier. She stated that residents have asked in the past what was going to happen to the
south side of Excelsior Boulevard and the City has previously indicated that it had not yet
been decided what would happen with the south side. She urged Council to table this
matter and to give the residents a month to work with the developer and architect. She
then presented a petition to the City Council for inclusion in the record.
Mr. Dean Dovolis, DJR Architecture, Inc., 333 Washington Avenue N., Minneapolis,
stated there has been a lot of thoughtful discussion between the neighbors and City staff
and it falls on the architect to sort out all of the opinions, concepts, etc., from the
community, the developer, and the City and to come up with the best plan, including the
City's desire to transform Excelsior Boulevard from a strip commercial street into more
of a commercial center with a pedestrian environment. He indicated that they could put
the building in the back but from the City's standpoint, this would set a precedent that
would waste all of the City's past efforts for this area. He indicated there have been three
neighborhood meetings with a lot of discussion about the direction for Excelsior
Boulevard and they have revised their plans by scaling back the square footage on the
building, reducing the height of the building, moving the location for the trash, building a
9' masonry wall, lowering the lighting, and adding trees. He stated it comes down to a
future vision for this street and he felt that placement of the building in the front
continues the City's vision for this area. He indicated his preference that Council not
table this item and to vote one way or the other on the variance, adding he would
continue to work with the neighborhood.
Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Mavity thanked all the residents who have been involved in this process
and thanked City staff for their assistance in the overall process. She felt this project
represented an impetus to initiate a design guidelines process for the south side of
Excelsior Boulevard and requested confirmation that the City will undertake this effort.
Mr. Hanmening confirmed that the Excelsior Boulevard design guideline process would
begin in early 2014.
City Council Meeting -7- September 16, 2013
Councilmember Mavity stated the developer has worked with residents on their questions
about landscaping, trees, lighting, etc., but questioned whether the only answer to getting
this right would be to have the building oriented toward the back instead of the front. She
did not feel it made sense to delay action on this matter, adding this matter is before
Council because of a peculiarity in the City's Ordinance and she asked if this variance
would be needed if that peculiarity did not exist in the City's Ordinance.
Mr. Mornson replied that if the property were properly oriented to Excelsior Blvd, then
the property would have a 5-foot setback from Excelsior Blvd.
Councilmember Mavity formally requested that staff bring back to Council a fix for this
irregularity in the Zoning Ordinance.
Councilmember Sanger agreed with the need to develop design guidelines for the south
side of Excelsior Boulevard. She indicated the Park Commons Concept Plan addressed
some of the issues and requested that the City revise its definitions of front and side yard.
She stated the developer has indicated a willingness to construct a 9' wall that is more
than required and asked if there was any way to tweak the design to provide more buffers
or perhaps save more of the trees.
Mr. Dovolis stated the plan has been tweaked as much as possible to make it viable retail,
adding he was willing to continue to meet with the residents.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if it was possible to move the three utility junction boxes
to another location to make access for a different driveway location.
Mr. Morrison replied the utility boxes could be moved but at considerable expense for a
project this size. He added even if the utility boxes were moved, the developer still has to
contend with the 50' setback from the intersection.
Councilmember Spano stated there was a lot of give and take in dealing with Methodist
Hospital's expansion of their property and he felt that a lot of the same issues were being
raised as part of this project related to landscaping, lighting, and fencing. He felt the
architect was doing all he could to develop this property on the front side, which is the
direction the City is heading as it relates to the south side of Excelsior Boulevard.
Councilmember Santa requested confirmation that the issue before Council was to either
uphold or deny the decision made by BOZA and that the other issues, while equally
important, could be dealt with outside of this decision.
Mr. Scott replied that this was correct and stated Council is deciding the two variance
requests which BOZA decided and which have been appealed to the City Council. He
added that Council also has the authority to impose conditions to the variance, e.g., a
condition on a particular site plan being presented this evening.
Councilmember Mavity stated she did not want to put conditions on anything that could
constrain future conversations between the neighbors and the developer that might
improve the site plan; at the same time, she wanted to make sure that any landscaping
that was discussed and promised was included in the final design.
City Council Meeting -8- September 16, 2013
Mr. Scott suggested that Council condition its approval of the variance upon the site plan
as presented in the staff report.
It was moved by Councilmember Mavity, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt
Resolution No. 13-136 Upholding the Board of Zoning Appeals'Decision and Approving
a Variance to Allow a 5.0 Foot Side Yard Abutting the Street and a 24 Foot Parking Lot
Drive Aisle Width for Property Located at 4701 Excelsior Boulevard with the conditions
that the property be developed in accordance with the site plan and lighting plan
presented to the Council and with the conditions that the masonry wall along the south
property line be nine feet tall, the sidewalk along Natchez extend across the driveway and
that the developer work with the neighbors to plant additional trees on their property.
Councilmember Mavity requested that Council's action also include direction to staff to
address the Zoning Code irregularity as soon as possible as well as directing staff to make
sure the design guideline process moves forward in a timely fashion.
Councilmember Santa agreed with Councilmember Mavity's amendment to the motion.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Ross absent).
6c. Public Hearing First Reading of Ordinance Amending Xcel Franchise
Ordinance
6d. Public Hearing First Reading of Ordinance Extending CenterPoint Energy
(CPE) Franchise Ordinance
Mr. Harmening presented the staff reports for agenda items 6c and 6d to extend the Xcel
and CPE franchise ordinances through December 31, 2015. He advised there were no
other changes to the ordinances, except that Xcel has agreed to include a provision to
allow the City to charge permit fees for work done by Xcel, adding that CPE currently
allows the City to charge permit fees for this work.
i
Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers were present. Mayor Jacobs
closed the public hearing.
Councilmember Mavity stated that Council recently discussed several issues with Xcel
about possible hot spots in the City that are experiencing more frequent power outages
than the norm and asked if Xcel has provided any follow-up to the City.
Mr. Harmening replied staff has contacted Xcel and Xcel has stated they will review and
discuss these issues, adding there are other cities interested in addressing the same issues.
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to approve
First Reading of Ordinance Amending St Louis Park City Code Section 9-610 Relating
to Permit Fees and Section 9-603 Extending the Term of the Northern States Power
Company Franchise and to set Second Reading for September 23, 2013.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Ross absent).
City Council Meeting -9- September 16, 2013
It was moved by Councilmember Hallfin, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to approve
First Reading of Ordinance Amending St. Louis Park City Ordinance No. 2236-03
Extending the Term of the CenterPoint Energy Minnegasco Franchise and to set Second
Reading for September 23, 2013.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Ross absent)
7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public—None
8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions and Discussion Items
8a. Major Amendment to Knollwood Mall Planned Unit Development (PUD).
Resolution No. 13-138.
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report and explained that Rouse Properties (Rouse)
proposes to demolish 92,500 square feet of the existing mall, construct 25,000 square feet
of new junior box retail spaces, renovate 71,400 square feet of existing mall area,
construct an 11,500 square foot retail building, renovate existing parking areas and
construct additional parking, as well as storm water improvements to the site. He
presented a diagram of the construction area and outlined the proposed changes to the
site, including parking and docking areas, and stated that parking on the site will be better
defined by landscape islands that will more clearly define the drive aisles on the site. He
stated the proposal also includes pedestrian connections to 36th Street and the addition of
a sidewalk segment along 36th Street. He stated the applicant has submitted a plan to
address storm water on the site that includes a dry pond to address and handle runoff
from the eight acres included in the proposal and the second phase includes replacement
of the dry pond and installation of in-ground tanks at some point in the future. He stated
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) has presented an opportunity to address
storm water in this area and is willing to contnbute financially to a regional pond to treat
an additional 125-150 acres to the north and east, noting this plan will take some time to
develop but the applicant has expressed a willingness to work with MCWD on this plan.
He explained that the current proposal is for a two-phase fallback plan that handles the
storm water on site; if at some point the regional offsite plan works and the parties agree,
that plan would then come back as a major amendment to the PUD. He further explained
that if the offsite pond does not work, there is still a possibility to treat regionally the
storm water onsite by expanding the in ground tanks to treat the additional 150 acres. He
discussed the parking and traffic flow issues and also discussed the landscaping and
streetscaping options, including pocket parks with seating areas and public art. He
advised that the 11,500 square foot building on the south side will house the Panera
restaurant and will include a drive-thru, adding this will not impact traffic on the site and
no modifications are required under the PUD for this drive-thru. He also discussed the
public plazas and pedestrian walkways, pedestrian scale lighting that will help define the
drive lanes and pedestnan walkways and advised that the required minimum parking of
2,059 spaces has been met with 2,175 spaces being proposed. He reviewed the
architectural materials that include glass, stone, brick, and stucco, adding there is a
possibility that some of the elevations along the front may change as tenants are
announced but staff will ensure that all City Code requirements are met prior to issuance
of building permits. He then introduced Mr. Kevin Connell, Vice President of
Development and Construction for Rouse Properties.
City Council Meeting -10- September 16, 2013
Councilmember Santa asked if the plaza outside of the area designated for Applebee's is
for the general public or whether it will be for outside dining at Applebee's. She also
asked about what the view will be for residents to the north looking at the mall.
Mr. Morrison replied that Applebee's has indicated it is not interested in outdoor seating
at this time. He noted that all of the plaza area is private property. He explained there
are a number of trees along 36th Street and there is a possibility that some of those trees
will be lost when the sidewalk is installed. He added there would still be some lights on
the back of the building.
Councilmember Santa requested information about the storm water improvements and
stated she wanted to make sure that the storm water is dealt with appropriately. She
requested clarification that Rouse is not being asked to fund storm water retention for the
100+ acres around their site and is required to fund only their storm water improvements.
Mr. Morrison advised the proposal is for installation of a regional pond whether onsite or
offsite that brings in 125 acres in addition to Knollwood's 37 acres and confirmed that
Rouse would only be required to pay for storm water improvements to their 37 acres.
Mr. Kevin Connell, Rouse Properties, advised that Rouse has a portfolio of 32 regional
shopping centers and has approximately 22 million square feet of retail space under
management. He stated Knollwood meets their criteria as a priority redevelopment and
they are targeting anchor or junior anchor type retailers with a goal to execute phase 1 of
the redevelopment on this eight-acre portion, to remerchandise the shopping center with
preferred retailers, to add new retail and food service opportunities, and to invigorate the
overall mall. He stated they are investing significant capital that will boost construction
spending in the area, as well as increase both short term and long term employment, and
they have gained significant momentum with retail prospects interested in a redeveloped
property, but they must act timely to retain existing tenants as well as capture new
tenants, adding they hope to initiate work in 2013 and to be in a position to start core
demolition by March 2014. He stated they are not opposed to the addition of the north
sidewalk and they have discussed moving the sidewalk to reduce the number of trees to
be removed and they will continue to work with City staff on that issue. He stated the
storm water management plan includes an on-site dry pond to accommodate the eight-
acre redevelopment project and Rouse feels this meets the technical requirements of the
PUD for storm water treatment as well as the new requirements for ten year storm events,
adding it was their preference to defer construction of that until some other options are
vetted out including the off-site solution. He stated they disagree with the City's
interpretation of the 2004 PUD amendment that requires Rouse to execute a full-site
solution in two phases by October 2017, stating it was their contention that they are
redeveloping an eight-acre tract thus satisfying the on-site drainage solution for that eight
acres. He added Rouse will address the storm water issues with other projects on the site
but cannot be obligated to a $4 million obligation at this time because it would result in
an infeasible project; in addition, they are executing a project that has a thin margin and
as a publicly traded trust, they are not allowed by policy to report those costs until they
have an approved project, so at this point they are not able to convey that specific
information until the Board has approved it. He noted they have offered to put up escrow
of two times the anticipated cost of the pond to allow them to move forward as they vet
out other solutions, but a$4 million obligation dramatically compromises the project.
City Council Meeting -11- September 16, 2013
Councilmember Sanger expressed concerns about the storm water and was disappointed
to hear that Rouse feels it does not have to come into compliance with the environmental
requirements of the PUD. She stated the 2004 PUD put Knollwood Mall on notice that it
would have to come into compliance with these requirements at the time of its next
project, but Rouse only wants to comply partially at this point and is arguing that it
cannot afford to put forth a standard letter of credit or other financial guarantee for the
whole project. She stated when Rouse took over this property, it had clear notice that this
property included a requirement to complete the storm water management for the entire
site. She felt the City was correct to require full compliance with the environmental
storm water conditions and to require Rouse to provide a letter of credit to make sure this
will be completed within the next four years. She pointed out that Rouse is a large,
financially successful company, and many smaller developers are required by the City to
provide a letter of credit.
Mr. Connell felt it was a matter of interpretation and reiterated Rouse's argument that
they are in compliance with the eight acres being redeveloped at this time. He stated they
have a design solution for the eight acres and Rouse does not have a project at this time
for the balance of the site and does not have a means to fund that significant incremental
cost. He stated this project is in financial distress if it has a $4 million obligation for
storm water improvements, reiterating they are not against the storm water improvements
for the eight-acre area being redeveloped. He indicated they previously worked with staff
on other uses for the site but they do not know the timing of those phases but Rouse
understands the storm water requirements and Rouse will execute that work at that time,
adding he did not know if Rouse will have projects to cover this within four years.
Mr. Jim Tiggelaar, LHB Civil Engineers, approached the City Council and stated it is
very typical to do redevelopment commensurate with storm water. He indicated in this
case, Rouse is only developing eight acres of the 37-acre site so it is typical to only do
storm water management for the eight acres. He added he felt the language of the 2004
PUD was subject to wide interpretation.
Councilmember Santa stated that full storm water management on this site has been
repeatedly deferred and without at least some sort of guarantee and end date, she feared
the storm water management would be deferred again.
Councilmember Mavity requested further information about the financial commitment
offered by MCWD.
Mr. Mike Hayman, MCWD, approached the City Council and stated MCWD has been
forthcoming in offering a partnership, adding there is a large regional area that can be
redirected on the site or off-site. He indicated that any financial commitment would have
to be worked out, including the possibility of fronting the private developer's costs or a
portion of costs for the regional treatment that was not required through the
redevelopment process and that would be moved from the site.
Mr. Scott clarified that the resolution with conditions as proposed provides for the first
stage of storm water improvements, which is the dry pond, and the second phase within
four years that requires Rouse to provide a plan for how to bring their site into
compliance with the PUD. He stated if Rouse wants to go on their own and come in with
a plan separate and apart from MCWD, that would be fine, and the City is in no way,
City Council Meeting -12- September 16, 2013
shape, or form requiring Rouse to enter into any sort of agreement with MCWD. He
stated it was his understanding that working with MCWD was the most efficient and cost
effective way for Rouse to do an on-site underground system,but Rouse is not required to
work with MCWD and Council approval is not conditioned on any agreement with
MCWD.
Councilmember Sanger asked if Rouse would need to come in with a plan and construct
the second phase of the storm water treatment by October 2017.
Mr. Scott replied that this was correct and stated Rouse would need to construct the
second phase by October 2017 and provide a letter of credit to the City to make sure the
second phase is constructed.
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to adopt
Resolution No. 13-138 amending and restating Resolution No. 04-054 adopted April 19,
2004, Granting an Amendment to an Existing Planned Unit Development for a Shopping
Center over 200,000 Square Feet with a Grocery Story Under Section 36-367 of the St.
Louis Park Ordinance Code Relating to Zoning for Property Zoned C-2 General
Commercial for Property Located at 8332 State Highway No. 7.
Mr. Connell requested clarification about what the letter of credit would need to entail.
He also expressed concern about the timeline for completing these improvements because
it could take 12-18 months to vet out the off-site solution.
Mr. Scott advised that the letter of credit would include the amount of the estimated cost
of completing the phase 2 storm water improvements to bring the 37-acre site into
compliance. He stated if Rouse can reach agreement with MCWD then the letter of
credit should include Rouse's share of the cost of these improvements.
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Ross absent).
8b. Preliminary/Final Plat — Auto Motion Carwash Addition (3901/3921
Excelsior Blvd.). Resolution No. 13-137.
Mr. Morrison presented the staff report and explained this application is a continuation
from a previous meeting for the Auto Motion Carwash Addition to combine two
properties at 3901/3921 Excelsior Boulevard. He stated that Council previously
approved a CUP to modify the existing gas station by adding a car wash with conditions
and pointed out that approval of the plat must be completed before the end of 2013 and a
building permit for the car wash issued before the end of 2013. He presented the site plan
and stated that Council directed staff in July to review compliance of the property and
staff inspected the property on five occasions and no violations were noted.
Mr. Peter Crema, 8912 Windsor Terrace, Brooklyn Park, appeared before the City
Council on behalf of the applicant, Alberto Properties, LLC, and stated his client recently
submitted a letter to City staff indicating his desire to be a good citizen and to invest in
the City by putting $1.4 million into his project and requesting that his project be
approved.
City Council Meeting -13- September 16, 2013
Councilmember Mavity stated the City has had several challenges in the past on certain
properties owned by the applicant even though there were no violations on this property.
She stated it was her understanding that the City has a complaint against the applicant for
a number of violations that include things related to his Auto Motion business and asked
if these violations have been resolved. She added at this point, it appears there are eight
separate violations, each of which carry a $1,000 fine or jail time. She also asked how
these potential fines might impact the applicant's ability to complete this project.
Mr. Crema stated there has been a complaint issued by the City related to parking that has
not yet been resolved and a second appearance is scheduled in October. He advised that
the proposal for this plat is going to ameliorate these types of fines for violations because
70% of the applicant's parking spaces are going to go away; in addition, there was a
tenant in the building who will no longer be a tenant.
Councilmember Mavity noted the applicant chopped down a mature tree on City land and
there was another violation on this property of improper signage in the City right-of-way.
Mr. Bertomeu stated he was not aware the signage was a violation and stated it would not
happen again.
Councilmember Mavity asked if Council was allowed to factor into its decision such
things as the applicant's "F"rating with the Better Business Bureau.
Mr. Scott advised that Council should not factor this into its decision on this matter.
Mr. Bertomeu stated he sells about 500 cars per year through his three dealerships, of
which 496 customers are happy and the ones who are complaining are going to the Better
Business Bureau. He stated that someone who worked for him chopped down the tree on
City land.
Councilmember Mavity urged Mr. Bertomeu to make sure to follow the City Code in the
future, even if there is a disagreement about the Code.
It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Spano, to adopt
Resolution No. 13-137 Giving Approval for Preliminary and Final Plat of Auto Motion
Carwash Addition.
Councilmember Sanger stated she would not support this, adding she did not support it
from the beginning because she felt that the car wash was too close to residential property
and the City should not permit spot zoning.
The motion passed 4-2 (Councilmembers Sanger and Mavity opposed; Councilmember
Ross absent).
8c. Reappointment of Commissioners (from Consent Calendar).
Councilmember Spano stated there are youth commissioner openings on the Human
Rights Commission, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, Police Advisory
Commission, and Telecommunications Advisory Commission and asked what the City is
City Council Meeting -14- September 16, 2013
doing in terms of outreach to public and private schools, youth groups, etc., to encourage
youth members to apply for these commissions.
Mr. Harmening stated that the City conducts its usual advertising as well as outreach with
the public schools to inform them of these opportunities to serve as a youth member on
the City's Boards and Commissions. He stated the City also works with Karen Atkinson
through Children First and agreed the City could be more robust in its outreach, including
outreach to the private schools.
It was moved by Councilmember Spano, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to
reappoint the following commissioners as a City representative to their respective
commissions with terms as follows:
Name Commission Term Expiration
Richard Webb Housing Authority 6/30/2018
Tyler Dixon Planning Commission— Youth Member 8/31/2014
The motion passed 6-0 (Councilmember Ross absent).
9. Communications
None.
10. Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 10:50 p.m.
C L_
Nancy Stroth, ity Clerk Jeff Jacob Mayo