HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013/05/28 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session IfiSt. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES
MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 28, 2013
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Steve Hallfin, Anne Mavity, Julia Ross, Sue Santa,
and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Susan Sanger.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Engineering (Mr. Rardin), City
Engineer (Mr. Brink), Director of Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning/Zoning
Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Senior Planner (Mr. Walther), Communications Coordinator (Mr.
Zwilling), and Recording Secretary(Ms. Hughes).
Guests: Mark Fuhrmann, Jim Alexander, and Sophia Ginis (Metropolitan Council Southwest
Project Office).
1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning—June 10, 2013
Mr. Hannening presented the staff report and proposed study session agenda for June 10, 2013,
and advised that the agenda item related to concept plans for a multiple family residential
redevelopment at the West End has been removed from the agenda for the time being.
2. Southwest Light Rail Transit Update
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and introduced Mr. Mark Fuhrmann and Mr. Jim Alexander
from the Metropolitan Council Southwest Project Office (SPO).
Mr. Fuhrmann thanked Council for the opportunity to present an update regarding SWLRT and
corresponding freight rail routing questions. He presented the SWLRT development timeline
noting that the project development and design process will take place through 2013 with
municipal consent occurring the latter part of 2013. He advised that 30% of the design process
would be finished in the first quarter of 2014 followed by final engineering. He indicated that
Met Council recently hired CH2M Hill as the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS)
consultant and stated they had done the FEIS for the Denver LRT project, too. He extended
thanks on behalf of the SPO for all of the time and energy invested by City staff and for their
assistance in identifying concerns to be addressed through the design process. He explained that
Freight Rail Technical Issue #21 related to freight rail co-location or relocation was required by
the FTA as a condition to enter Preliminary Engineering and is part of the Met Council's due
diligence and responsibility as project sponsor.
Mr. Alexander stated the SPO has been working with City and County staff, Three Rivers Park
District, the Minneapolis Park Board, as well as CP, TC&W, and BNSF railroads on Technical
Issue #21 and presented a chart depicting existing train volumes on the TC&W/Bass Lake and
Kenilworth Corridor, CP/MN&S, and BNSF/Wayzata Subdivision. He pointed out the train
volumes have been updated with current values provided by the railroads. He advised that the
SPO has been reviewing plats from the County and doing some surveying showing available
right-of-way in the Kenilworth Corridor with Section A right-of-way at 139', Section B right-of-
way at its narrowest by the West Lake Street bridge at 49', and Section C right-of-way at 42',
adding that BNSF has indicated a willingness to sell some land in this area that would provide a
Study Session Minutes -2- May 28, 2013
total of 98' of right-of-way in this area. He stated that Section D also has a right-of-way of 98'
at its tightest point north of 21st Street. He explained that the SPO has developed six different
design options for freight rail co-location and then presented several diagrams depicting all
modes accommodated at-grade. He pointed out the 25' clearance from center line of the freight
rail tracks to the edge of the rights of way (ROW) is based on a standard of the American
Railway Engineering & Maintenance Association (AREMA) that suggests at least 25' from the
track centerline to the nearest obstruction. He indicated they presented this to the railroad and
are awaiting input from CP and TC&W about an acceptable dimension. He stated that a crash
wall is typically required with a separation of anything less than 25'. He explained that Section
A has 139' of available right-of-way and would require 149.6' of right-of-way if light rail,
freight rail and the trail were included in this area because it also needed to accommodate the
West Lake Station platform. He explained that Section B north of the Lake Street bridge would
have an encroachment of 45' into the adjacent property to expand the right-of-way to the 94'
required to accommodate the freight rail, light rail and regional trail at grade. He explained that
Section C has 42' of available right-of-way coupled with the BNSF property of 56' for a total of
98' of available right-of-way. He explained that Section D north of 21st Street would encroach
onto a residence north of 21st Street and added the spacing in this area would need to
accommodate the Burnham Bridge south of this area. He advised that other design options for
co-location considered by the SPO include designs for a shallow tunnel and deep twin bored
tunnels for light rail, elevated light rail, relocation of the trail, and elevation of the trail. He
discussed options for the trail relocation route and trail elevation options. He also discussed
options for elevated light rail and presented diagrams depicting 9' of clearance between freight
rail and the piers holding the elevated trail. He discussed the option of having light rail in a
shallow tunnel and stated this option presents challenges from a constructability standpoint and
would require special maneuvers to relocate freight rail during construction. He then discussed
an option of having light rail in deep twin bored tunnels and stated the SPO believes this is
workable even with freight rail operating in the area during construction by realignment of the
Cedar Lake trail through this area. He then reviewed a modified MN&S connection and
explained that TC&W had a lot of comments in the DEIS process indicating they took issue with
the horizontal and vertical curves in the DEIS plan for re-locating freight rail to the MN&S. The
SPO has come up with a design that flattens out those curves but the railroad has stated this is
still not acceptable because of the reverse curves; as a result, the SPO created the Brunswick
West and Brunswick Central options. He stated these designs were shared with the railroad and
the railroad indicated they feel they can work with this design concept. He indicated the
alignment under all the relocation scenarios assumes the switching wye would be replaced by a
southerly connection. He presented the property impacts for the Brunswick West alignment.
This option would link up the Walker Street on the north side of Highway 7 with a new north
frontage road. The Brunswick West option would cross Hwy 7 with a bridge structure over both
south and north Hwy 7 frontage roads and proceed up through the high school football field
resulting in creation of a new right-of-way of approximately 99' wide shown in Section A. He
discussed property impacts for the Brunswick Central alignment and stated this scenario would
lower Highway 7 approximately 4.5', and as this alignment progresses east there would be
encroachment on land used by the Spanish Immersion School. He stated that Section A in the
Brunswick Central alignment suggests an 86' right-of-way is required and would relocate
Library Lane, Section B of this alignment shows freight rail located 12' above the ground surface
with 66' of right-of-way created for freight rail, Section C of this alignment depicts freight rail
20' above the existing grade with 66' of right-of-way to accommodate freight rail, and Section D
of this alignment depicts freight rail 19' above the existing grade with a 52' proposed right-of-
way. He indicated Section E of this alignment would be 13' above the existing top of the rail
and would be 22' above ground. He discussed the MN&S proposed to be realigned north of
Study Session Minutes -3- May 28, 2013
Minnetonka Boulevard and stated this suggested design is similar to the DEIS design. It would
require that four properties be acquired to account for the 28th St. road way being raised and for
an at-grade crossing of the MN&S tracks. He showed the proposed freight rail tracks in both the
Brunswick West and Central options and stated there would be an approximate 10,000' siding
running along the BNSF subdivision for both options. He stated the Brunswick alignment would
have to raise the grade 6' in Section F in order to accommodate freight rail and added the
railroads have accepted the Brunswick West and Central alignments as laid out. He indicated the
Brunswick alignment in Section G would raise the grade approximately 5' to accommodate new
track and Section H of this alignment would need to move to the east and would be 15' above the
overall existing grade.
Mr. Fuhrmann reviewed next steps and advised that public open houses are scheduled on
Thursday, June 13th, at 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. at Benilde St. Margaret. He indicated that the
SPO will continue to work on refined design options and cost impacts over the next month and
will plan another round of presentations in July as well as formal advisory committee meetings
in late July and early August culminating in a recommendation to Met Council in late August of
a recommended decision on freight rail.
Councilmember Santa requested further information regarding the updated figures for existing
train volumes and asked if another refinement of these figures could be expected.
Mr. Fuhrmann replied this information reflects what the railroads are currently experiencing and
stated that train volumes ebb and flow with the economy, adding it could be more or less in the
future but neither the Met Council nor the City has any control over this.
Councilmember Ross noted that BNSF has 91 average weekly trains with 80-125 cars per train
and expressed concern regarding the number of trains and the potential for adding more trains.
She urged the SPO to include full mitigation in its cost comparisons for homes and businesses as
well as the School District that would be impacted by a reroute. She requested further
information regarding the deep bored tunnels and asked if this type of tunnel would be safe for
operating a train on top of the tunnel. She also requested further information regarding the
elevated trails and expressed concern about emergency vehicles being able to reach someone
who was injured on an elevated trail.
Mr. Fuhrmann replied that a deep bored tunnel would be safe for operating a train on top of the
tunnel and stated there would be approximately 50' between the freight and light rail trains. He
advised that the Sabo pedestrian and regional bike trail was designed to accommodate
emergency medical vehicles and an elevated trail would likely have this type of bridge.
Councilmember Mavity asked if the SPO has determined the number of properties that will be
taken in each scenario.
Mr. Fuhrmann replied there are 62 or 63 properties that would be acquired. He stated the SPO
has identified 42 property acquisitions for the Brunswick West option and 30 property
acquisitions for the Brunswick Central option. He noted that these are the identified acquisitions
based on the level of design today and‘these figures can fluctuate as the design is refined.
Councilmember Mavity noted the design does not include widening of the entire MN&S corridor
north of Minnetonka Boulevard, as previously noted in the City's DEIS comments, adding that if
Study Session Minutes -4- May 28, 2013
freight was relocated, the entire right-of-way would need to be widened and would require
additional property acquisitions.
Mr. Locke stated the City's position has been that the right-of-way north of Minnetonka
Boulevard needs to be wider in order to provide a buffer between residents and the rail track
itself and indicated the SPO designs reflect minimum right-of-way needed to fit the freight tracks
with the 25' separation between the centerline of the train track and private property.
Councilmember Mavity stated the SPO will have cost estimates available for review by Council
in approximately six weeks and felt this was a short amount of time to have the kind of cost
information Council would need to evaluate this. She indicated the City has been clear in its
DEIS comments about widening the right-of-way and many other factors the City feels are
necessary in either option and urged the SPO to include consideration of all the minimum
requirements to make this work for the community in either scenario.
Mr. Fuhrmann stated the SPO benefits from the St. Louis Park and Minneapolis resolutions
identifying its required mitigations and indicated the SPO is not able to deliver a final mitigation
design but would identify the mitigation concepts previously identified by the City and present
some cost estimates to the City.
Councilmember Mavity asked what decision factors the SPO is using to decide on the best route.
Mr. Fuhrmann stated the SPO developed, and Met Council approved, thirteen guiding principles
with input and comment from all city and county stakeholders that are being used to evaluate
these major scoping decisions.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if TC&W and/or CP have indicated which Brunswick option they
prefer.
Mr. Alexander replied that TC&W and CP have indicated the co-locate design represents what
TC&W runs on today and that the Brunswick West and Brunswick Central are acceptable
designs to the railroads.
Councilmember Hallfin requested information about the amount of design changes that can be
anticipated as the project moves through the municipal consent process.
Mr. Fuhrmann explained that once municipal consent is granted there will be a number of
refinements made and if significant changes are made in the design, municipal consent must be
requested again to reflect that significant change in the final design.
Councilmember Spano felt it was important to address not only the quantity of properties being
taken but also to talk about the types of properties, e.g., one design shows impacts through the
football field which impacts hundreds of people throughout the community. He stated he wanted
to make sure Council is on record as stating that the number of properties being acquired is
important but so too are the types of properties impacted. He asked about the impacts on
properties taken through the Kenilworth corridor with either a shallow or deep bore tunnel.
Mr. Fuhrmann stated the number of properties identified for acquisition in a co-location option
does not change that much with a deep or shallow tunnel or at grade. He stated they will need to
Study Session Minutes -5- May 28, 2013
provide for continued operation of freight rail that will require taking some of the properties to
allow for the construction phase and to allow freight rail to continue during construction.
Councilmember Spano asked about temporary relocation of the trail and/or freight rail
temporarily during tunnel construction in the Kenilworth corridor and felt that those options
should be considered on the colocation option.
Mr. Fuhrmann replied that the idea of moving the bike trail or freight rail temporarily had not
been considered but would be examined.
Councilmember Spano stated that even though the Brunswick options have not been thoroughly
discussed, he was eager to explore that as an option.
Councilmember Santa stated the relocation options for Brunswick West and Brunswick Central
include a lot of tearing up of roads that impacts everyone in a particular neighborhood and this
represents another cost that needs to be factored into the cost estimates.
Mr. Fuhrmann stated the road improvements were not included in the property acquisition
numbers.
Councilmember Ross stated these costs cannot be ignored and should be included as mitigation.
Mr. Fuhrmann indicated this would be a mitigation action that will be a project cost
responsibility borne by the project and not by the City.
Councilmember Ross asked about the Bottineau line and the potential impact for BNSF and
stated she was concerned about trains idling or parking and any potential negative impact to the
trains in St. Louis Park.
Mr. Fuhrmann stated he is also working on the Bottineau line and indicated there would be
minimal impact of the Bottineau light rail running parallel with the BNSF trackage, adding the
Preliminary Engineering analysis shows there would be no impacts requiring a shifting of the
BNSF trains to other corridors.
Councilmember Mavity stated the Wooddale and 36th Street area is arguably one of the most
congested intersections in the City and expressed concern about this area especially when light
rail is added and felt the cost estimates and engineering should reflect what it will take to address
the traffic in these areas.
Mr. Hannening stated that Council will have a discussion on June 10`h about what the City's
process for evaluating freight rail options will be, and the discussion will include the City's
public process. He asked what SPO is looking for from the City in terms of input prior to
making its recommendation to the Met Council.
Mr. Fuhrmann stated the SPO greatly values the input and engagement from the City Council
and City staff. He indicated the questions and comments received will be helpful in providing
guidance to the SPO in further evaluating the design options. He requested that the City provide
the SPO with the list of questions generated at the June 10`h Council meeting and also requested
that the City provide the SPO with Council's preferences regarding the freight rail question.
1 y
Study Session Minutes -6- May 28, 2013
Councilmember Hallfin asked if the FEIS process is similar to the DEIS process.
Mr. Fuhrmann explained that the SPO is required to evaluate and respond to all the comments
received during the DEIS process and the FEIS document is expected to be completed and
published in fall 2014. He advised the SPO will want to have some community engagement and
outreach as part of the FEIS before the document is ultimately published in the Federal Register.
He added that when the FTA is comfortable that the SPO has responded to all the comments
submitted on the DEIS, the SPO will work with the EPA to publish the FEIS document.
Mayor Jacobs thanked Mr. Fuhrmann and Mr. Alexander for the update and recessed the study
session at 8:08 p.m.
3. Pedestrian and Bicycle System Implementation Plan Update
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report and provided a brief history of the pedestrian and
bicycle system implementation plan, noting this is the second generation of the City's sidewalk
and trail system planning, with the first plan done in the late 1990s that resulted in significant
trail, sidewalk, and bridge improvements. He advised that these efforts were the result of the
City's visioning process undertaken first in 1995 where the community made a strong statement
that residents wanted more sidewalks and trails from a walkability perspective and the City heard
the same thing in 2005 during the second visioning process. He recited the purpose and several
of the goals and objectives of this long range plan. He stated after the goals were established,
staff had conversations with Council that resulted in a preliminary system plan that was
presented to the community last fall and was called "Connect the Park." He stated the City
started to contact potentially impacted property owners along the system through direct mailings
and the City received a lot of comments that are included in Council's packet. He indicated the
City also received some comments after the packet was delivered to Council, including a study
done by residents on 40th Street, that will be included as part of the official record.
Mr. Brink distributed a petition from residents on Westmoreland Lane who are opposed to a
sidewalk and also distributed copies of several emails received regarding support for sidewalks
on 39th and 40th.
Councilmember Spano expressed general support of the plan and stated increased connectivity
was important to residents based on the community input received and staff put a lot of effort
into outlining a plan that achieves these goals.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if the sidewalk on 41St Street would be done this year.
Mr. Brink advised the City will be doing survey work and after the plan is put together, the City
will begin the public process, adding he was skeptical this sidewalk could be done in 2013
because of timing, and the City has other projects already scheduled this year.
Councilmember Hallfin acknowledged several resident concerns regarding the potential impact
on their trees and stated there is a way to engineer the sidewalks to go around the trees and keep
them healthy, adding the City took this into consideration when it built sidewalks in the past to
minimize impacts to landscaping and trees.
Councilmember Mavity stated that she respected that Council's initial inclination was to prepare
a plan and take it to the neighborhoods but felt the plan lacked sufficient detail. She indicated
Study Session Minutes -7- May 28, 2013
she would not vote for a plan that would take all the trees and felt that staff was asking Council
to vote on a plan where the impact is not yet known.
Mr. Harmening advised that if Council adopted the proposed system plan, it would be adopting a
big picture plan and reminded Council that plans change all the time and if Council found
something in the plan during the next phase that would not work for a neighborhood, then the
plan would be changed.
Councilmember Mavity requested information regarding the matrix or analysis used for each of
the sidewalk segments. She indicated there are blocks with one or two houses with a sidewalk
and it does not appear these gaps are addressed in the final plan. She stated residents have
partnered with the City to plant trees and it was her understanding that Council asked staff to
make sure that residents are coordinating their tree planting with the City but she has seen
locations where trees have been marked for planting in a location where a sidewalk might be
installed. She requested information about landscaping and other investments residents have
made in their property and asked if the City would be replacing these items for residents in
locations where a sidewalk is installed.
Mr. Walther advised this plan was driven from the City's Vision process with the goal of
creating a system with a quarter-mile sidewalk grid and a half-mile bicycle grid. He stated the
City then worked with its consultant and the citizen advisory committee to determine how the
grids would work given the City's existing sidewalks and streets; in addition, the process
identified a significant gap in north-south connections in the community.
Mr. Brink stated the City is working closely with the City Forester and has contacted residents
who had questions regarding their trees and to make sure people do not plant trees where a
sidewalk is being proposed. He noted that underground sprinklers and landscaping placed in the
right-of-way are permitted uses but residents do so at their own risk.
Mr. Rardin stated the proposed plan should not be aimed at the specific project level but should
focus on whether Council feels these are the routes the City needs to move people around the
community, adding the City will work with residents on potential impacts as projects commence
to make sure there is the least amount of impact on landscaping and trees, etc.
Councilmember Ross indicated this is a ten-year plan and some residents might not be living in
the same place when a sidewalk project is started in their neighborhood. She suggested
implementing a system for notifying people when they move into the City that their street is
slated for sidewalk construction. She stated she did not see Westmoreland as a priority given the
pushback from residents. She noted the City is not proposing a sidewalk on the west side of
Virginia and stated she and Councilmember Santa earlier agreed that going under the railroad
bridge in this area is a significant safety concern and requested that the City fix the sidewalk in
that area on the east side. She added she has also expressed concern about the area along
Louisiana Avenue and Cedar Lake Road because people have to stand in the street in the winter-
waiting for the bus because there is no sidewalk on the east side.
Councilmember Santa stated she talked to a resident who won an Evergreen Award about their
landscaping in the right-of-way and the resident said she knows she planted in the right-of-way
and that she did so at her own risk. She indicated residents previously had the same concerns
about their trees and landscaping during the earlier iteration of this plan and reminded Council
that the City worked hard with residents to preserve trees wherever possible and those trees are
Study Session Minutes -8- May 28, 2013
thriving today. She stated the proposed plan presented by staff and the final result will be very
different in many cases because the plan will be fine-tuned and residents will be significantly
involved in the process as before. She expressed support for the overall plan and added staff has
instructions from Council to work with residents to find optimum solutions to every segment of
sidewalk in this process.
Mayor Jacobs expressed support for sidewalks throughout the City but felt that if residents do
not want a sidewalk on their street, then they can choose not to have a sidewalk and the City
should not force sidewalks on them.
Councilmember Spano stated that residents have indicated they want greater connectivity in the
community and Council gave direction to staff to move forward with a plan that achieved those
goals. He acknowledged there are legitimate concerns but felt it was a process that Council
needed to work through and felt the plan was worth pursuing.
Councilmember Hallfin asked if any of the sidewalk segments should be pulled off the plan
tonight, e.g., Westmoreland.
Councilmember Ross indicated she was not comfortable doing that tonight.
Mr. Rardin suggested that Council go through the public hearing process first and then make
changes to the plan including removing sidewalks from the list.
It was the consensus of the City Council to schedule a public hearing for June 17, 2013.
Communications/Meeting Check-In (Verbal)
None.
The meeting adjourned at 9:32 p.m.
Written Reports provided and documented for recording purposes only:
4. Complete Streets Policy/Resolution
5. April 2013 Financial Report
Nancy Stro�y Clerk Jeff Ja bs, Mayor