HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014/03/17 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session I/f St. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES
MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK,MINNESOTA
MARCH 17, 2014
The meeting convened at 6:30 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Anne Mavity, Susan Sanger, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: None.
Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Director of Engineering (Ms. Heiser), Senior
Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Elkin), Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Sullivan),
and Recording Secretary(Ms. Hughes).
1. Highway 169—W. 16th Street Access Closure
Ms. Heiser presented the staff report and introduced Phillip Elkin, Senior Engineering Project
Manager.
Mr. Elkin explained that MnDOT has requested the closure of the 16th Street access because it
does not meet MnDOT's minimum standards and is asking for the City's verbal consent in
exchange for a visual barrier wall to complement the sound barrier. He added the City held an
open house to obtain resident input and completed a traffic study to document existing traffic.
Councilmember Brausen stated he attended the open house and the vast majority of residents
were against closing this access. He indicated approximately two hundred people in this area use
this access and there was some interest expressed by residents of putting a pocket park in the
area if the access is closed. He added the Crestview neighborhood was surveyed about the
closure and 21 residents responded with the majority stating they were against closing the access.
He stated it was important to note that in 2017 MnDOT is scheduled to rebuild the Cedar Lake
Road access at TH 169 and it is possible that the 16th Street access would be closed as a part of
that project, adding that 16th Street would provide an alternative access to TH 169 during this
penod of construction and that access is important to residents. He indicated he would prefer to
delay the 16th Street closure and recommended that Council not provide consent at this time.
Councilmember Sanger noted that the traffic study was done in December and asked if there
would have been any difference in the analysis if the traffic study had been done during the
summer months.
Mr. Elkin replied that the traffic study prorated the traffic counts to account for the summer
traffic and did not believe it would have made a significant difference in the analysis.
Councilmember Lindberg asked about the cost of the visual barrier.
Mr. Elkin replied that the cost for constructing the visual barrier is $800,000.
Councilmember Spano questioned how realistic it would be for the City to require a visual
barrier as part of its municipal consent when MnDOT undertakes a major project along TH 169.
Mr. Elkin advised that he asked MnDOT what would prompt MnDOT to close this access
without any consent from the City and MnDOT indicated they would close the access if there
Special Study Session Minutes -2- March 17, 2014
were a very serious accident or a series of accidents attributable to the access. He added that
another scenario for closing the access without the City's consent is if MnDOT was doing a
major construction project in which the lanes were being widened.
Councilmember Mavity stated that this is an opportunity for the City to get the visual barner and
to have MnDOT pay for it. She stated the record should indicate that by going with what
appears to be neighborhood sentiment against the visual barrier, the City is not promising that the
City would pay for an $800,000 barrier in the future.
Councilmember Spano stated there does not appear to be any compelling reason to close this
access and felt the access should be left open for now and the City should discuss a visual barrier
with MnDOT during municipal consent when the time comes for a major project.
It was the consensus of the City Council to not support MnDOT's request to close the TH 169
access at 16th Street.
2. 2014 Connect the Park! Projects
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
Mr. Sullivan advised that staff reevaluated the 39th Street sidewalk design between Lynn and
Inglewood Avenues and presented several options for Council consideration. He stated that most
trees along this corridor were previously replaced after the removal of diseased Elm trees and a
boulevard design impacts a total of eleven boulevard trees and a back of curb design impacts ten
boulevard trees. He stated it is possible to construct a back of curb design on the south side that
would save a few additional trees and would require the removal of eight trees, two of which are
significant trees.
Councilmember Mavity stated it appears Option #1 and Option #2 are about the same, adding
that when the City started this project, one of the principles included minimizing the number of
trees that would be removed, particularly the larger ones. She requested further information
about plowing around trees and any damage that can occur if a sidewalk is not straight.
Mr. Sullivan advised the City is able to do some curvilinear sidewalks to save trees on the north
side and the majority of the eleven trees are small and would be replaced or transplanted by the
City. He stated the 20" Norway Maple and 20" Linden are both m a situation where the City
would be on private property if the sidewalk swerved behind them and the sidewalk would
swerve in front of the trees with a back of curb design, however, the City Forester has indicated
he does not believe these trees would survive. He stated the 28" Linden could be preserved by
placing a sidewalk behind the tree or in front of the tree and staff is currently reviewing this to
see if it is possible, adding that staff believes the existing privacy fence is on public property and
the City would move the fence back to the nght of way to provide enough room to install the
sidewalk and staff has talked to the property owner but no solution has yet been agreed upon.
Councilmember Spano asked if the sidewalks could be installed without removing the larger
diameter trees and then removing them only if the trees do not survive.
Mr. Sullivan stated one of the two trees has to come out because of its placement. He stated that
staff is working with the City Forester on options including other types of tree trimming,
Special Study Session Minutes -3- March 17, 2014
available pre-treatments, and different types of soil amenities as the roots are exposed, adding
that the City cannot guarantee the tree would survive.
Councilmember Sanger stated she was in favor of Option #1 and was not in favor of any options
that do not have a boulevard strip because it provides a place for trees to be replanted as well as a
place for storing snow. She stated that the definitions of community and neighborhood
sidewalks overlap significantly and requested a study session discussion regarding the
classification of community versus neighborhood sidewalks.
Councilmember Hallfin felt that Option #2 represented the least burden on homeowners and
asked if a 5' sidewalk would provide a better option for saving trees. He felt this sidewalk
should be designated a community sidewalk to lessen the burden on homeowners.
Mr. Sullivan advised that another option to consider is to reduce the sidewalk to 5' at the tight
pinch points rather than reducing the entire corridor.
Councilmember Lindberg agreed that a study session discussion about community versus
neighborhood sidewalks was important, adding that he asked staff for information about how
many neighborhood sidewalks are to the curb to better understand the impact if that were added
as part of the criteria for designating community versus neighborhood sidewalks. He stated that
this project was designed for safety, connectivity, and healthy living and it was important to
balance that greater good with the burden placed on homeowners and he felt that Option #3 was
the best option but would require more public process.
Councilmembers Spano and Mavity recommended that Council approve Option #1 for this
segment and to designate this segment a community sidewalk.
Councilmember Spano recommended that Council also approve the reduction of the sidewalk to
5' if staff feels it will help save trees. He added there is a strong likelihood that the City will
have this same issue in other areas and he did not want to have this same argument for every
segment being proposed in this project.
Councilmember Mavity suggested providing staff with the flexibility to reduce a sidewalk to 5'
wherever appropriate throughout this project and to be creative in a way that works to save as
many trees as possible.
It was the consensus of the majonty of the City Council to direct staff to pursue Option #1
relative to the 39th Street sidewalk design and to designate this segment as a community
sidewalk. It was also the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to narrow the sidewalk to
5' where appropriate to minimize tree loss.
Council then discussed filling sidewalk gaps on street segments adjacent to the 2014 project.
Councilmember Mavity felt that the City should install connector sidewalks if homeowners are
requesting the City to fill a sidewalk gap and those sidewalks should be designated as residential
sidewalks.
Mr. Sullivan indicated that staff would notify residents and reach out to them about the missing
segments, adding that staff has already heard from some residents that they would be on board
with that.
Special Study Session Minutes -4- March 17, 2014
Councilmember Sanger asked about the implications for the rest of the community, stating that
she felt if the City is going to construct the missing segment in this area, it should be doing the
same thing elsewhere and provide residents with an opt out if they do not want a missing
segment filled in. She also felt that Council should revisit its policy that requires residents to pay
for installation of a sidewalk.
Mr. Harmening indicated that the City's practice has been to communicate with property owners
to inform them that the City is considering filling a sidewalk gap to make a connection, adding
that there are not many more examples like this throughout the community.
It was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to contact property owners on street
segments adjacent to the 2014 Connect the Park! project to see if they are interested in having
their sidewalk gaps filled.
The meeting adjourned at 7:28 p.m.
Y1 7aC-
NancyStr�y Clerk Jeff c , M yor