HomeMy WebLinkAbout2014/05/05 - ADMIN - Minutes - City Council - Study Session J/1 St. Louis Park OFFICIAL MINUTES
MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION
ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA
MAY 5,2014
The meeting convened at 6:23 p.m.
Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, Tim Brausen, Steve Hallfin, Gregg Lindberg,
Anne Mavity, and Jake Spano.
Councilmembers absent: Susan Sanger.
Staff present: City Manager(Mr. Harmening), Director of Engineering(Ms. Heiser), Director of
Community Development (Mr. Locke), Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal),
Senior Engineering Project Manager (Mr. Sullivan), Housing Supervisor (Ms. Schmtker),
Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Olson), Rec Center Manager (Mr. Eisold), Recreation
Superintendent (Mr. West), Marketing and Communications Coordinator (Mr. Zwilling), and
Recording Secretary(Ms. Hughes).
1. Southwest LRT Preliminary Design Plans—Continued Discussion
Mr. Locke presented the staff report and the municipal consent plan summary table for the
Beltline station area as well as information from the Transitional Station Area Action Plan
(TSAAP) related to the Beltline station access and circulation. He explained that the table
includes a list of changes needed to the SWLRT base plan including changes in the vehicle, bus
and pedestrian circulation; treatment of CSAH 25 as a boulevard; adjustments in the location of
the traffic signal proposed at Lynn Avenue to establish logical crossings of CSAH 25 that will
support future redevelopment of the park and ride that integrates a parking structured into the
project. The table notes that the base plan must indicate the intent to pursue joint development
where the park & ride parking lot is shown in the current SWLRT plans. He stated the frontage
road is currently the only way for Nordic Ware trucks to get in and out of this area and staff has
suggested there needs to be a right in/right out in order to keep left turn movements from backing
up traffic on Beltline. He discussed the other changes needed to the base plan as well as the
locally requested capital improvements and stated that other projects not related to light rail but
which are enhanced by the light rail project include the City's work with the County on the
redesign of CSAH 25 and the City's interest in being involved in the planning of a joint
development for the park and ride site as well as the County site.
Councilmember Mavity reiterated her concern that this plan does not reflect the years of resident
involvement in trying to make this a pedestrian oriented area and creating a safe and welcoming
area and stated the City needs to make sure that the designs previously created by residents are
reflected in the design. She added it was unclear to her how the Nordic Ware trucks have been
accommodated in this design.
Councilmember Hallfin stated it had always been his impression that the vacant lot owned by the
County would house the park and ride but that is not indicated in this design.
Mr. Locke indicated that the timing for building the parking lot would be toward the end of the
Southwest LRT project and one of the challenges has been in getting the SPO to provide the City
with some assurance that the parcel will be an FTA Joint Development project, incorporating a
parking structure rather than a surface parking lot. The goal is to have a mixed-use development
built at the site, with CSAH 25 transformed into a boulevard style roadway with sidewalks and
landscaping.
Special Study Session Minutes -2- May 5, 2014
Councilmember Mavity asked about the City's previous discussions with the SPO about the
station itself and possibly having a bike bridge over the station.
Mr. Locke stated that the SPO has not made any commitments related to a bike bridge over
Beltline Blvd and the station or the joint development idea.
Council continued its discussion regarding the traffic circulation issues in this area.
Councilmember Mavity stated the City has had great expectations of what could be created in
this area and she was not sure the proposed infrastructure allows for that to happen.
Councilmember Spano stated the City could sell its site to a developer as a prime spot and build
into that development the construction of a collaborative partnership with Metro Transit to build
a structure before getting to the point where Met Council is ready for a parking lot.
Mr. Locke agreed and stated the key will be to reach a clear understanding of a mutual goal and a
commitment to pursue that goal prior to the time of the municipal consent vote.
Mr. Harmening advised that Council will discuss the municipal consent process at its next study
session with the City Attorney and that discussion will include the process for working through
issues related to the Southwest LRT project as part of the municipal consent process.
Mayor Jacobs recessed the Special Study Session at 7:16 p.m. in order to convene the EDA and
City Council meetings.
Mayor Jacobs reconvened the Special Study Session at 7:56 p.m
2. Update on Community Center Project
Mr. Harmening presented the staff report.
Mayor Jacobs stated he still has concerns about the pnce of a community center but felt that a
community center could be done in phases rather than all at once. He stated that residents have
indicated they want to see a community center built and felt it would be worthwhile to do some
of the preliminary work at this time.
Councilmember Mavity stated that residents have asked for a community center but was not sure
if they realize the impact of the cost. She stated she had some hesitation given the number of
financial demands on City resources over the next five years related to Southwest LRT. She
indicated if it was the will of the Council to move forward, she could consent with caution
because the City needs to make sure it has a better understanding of its obligations related to
Southwest LRT.
Councilmember Spano stated that he does not want to see a community center built in phases and
if the decision is made to build a community center, he felt it should be done all at once, but he
was not ready to invest money in the schematic design phase given the unknown financial
commitments related to Southwest LRT.
Councilmember Hallfin felt that with the amount of unknowns related to Southwest LRT and the
potential commitment required of the City, he did not want to spend any money on a community
Special Study Session Minutes -3- May 5, 2014
center at this time. He added that the main reason Council pushed back on the community center
was because the City wanted answers on Southwest LRT and he wanted those answers before
doing anything on the community center project.
Councilmember Lindberg felt that Council should move forward with the community center
project and not delay it any further. He stated he felt it was worth the investment to keep moving
forward into the schematic design phase.
Councilmember Brausen felt that a community center represented an important community
resource and was in support of moving forward into the schematic design phase. He
acknowledged that $300,000-$400,000 was a lot of money for schematic design but pointed out
the source of these funds is the Park Improvement Fund and not money for Southwest LRT and
the schematic design would give Council the necessary information it needs to go back to the
community to see if they support the project.
Mr. Harmemng explained that the schematic design phase would provide refined cost estimates
for a community center and would also provide important information related to the soils.
Councilmember Spano stated that if the schematic design process provides clarity in terms of the
soil issues, along with architectural aesthetics and price, he was amenable to moving forward and
then going back to the community with detailed information.
It was the consensus of the City Council to continue to move forward with the project by
entering into schematic design.
3. Review of City's Housing Goals
Ms. Schnitker presented the staff report and advised that the draft housing goals have been
revised to include Council's comments at its meeting on April 21st• She also distributed a copy
of Councilmember Sanger's comments.
Affordable Housing
Ms. Schnitker stated there was a suggestion that the first bullet in the earlier draft under the
affordable housing section be moved to the top as a lead-in sentence that indicates the City is
committed to promoting affordable housing options for low and moderate income households.
She stated the third bullet has been revised pursuant to Council's earlier discussion to indicate
the City's housing goals promote the inclusion of affordable housing opportunities in new
developments located near the Southwest Light Rail Transit corridor and other transit nodes,
retail and employment centers and commercial mixed use distncts, adding that the term
"promote"was not replaced with the term"require."
Mayor Jacobs stated he was okay with leaving the term"promote" and not "require."
Councilmember Brausen spoke in favor of the term "require" instead of"promote," adding he
would like to see some type of percentage requirements, e.g., 15%, to make sure the City
continues to develop a mix of housing. He stated if the City does not require it, developers will
not include affordable housing in their projects.
Councilmember Mavity supported the term "require" instead of "promote" and stated if
affordable housing does not work in a particular project, developers can provide money toward
Special Study Session Minutes -4- May 5, 2014
subsidizing another project. She added the City would need to make sure the buyout is
significant enough that the City can use it to create affordable housing units someplace else.
Mayor Jacobs urged Council to consider what impact that requirement might have on developers
who want to build in the City and whether some developers would shy away from building in the
City or whether developers would look to the City for increased financial assistance as a result of
an affordable housing requirement.
Mr. Harmening stated that requiring a developer to include affordable housing might be
appropriate only for those projects where the developer is asking for assistance from the City.
Councilmember Lindberg agreed there were some areas that should require affordable housing
such as the transit areas, but did not think the policy should contain a blanket statement that the
City requires affordable housing, adding he would like more concrete legal rationale before
requiring affordable housing.
Mayor Jacobs stated he was okay with using the term "promote" as a broad policy statement and
felt that in certain instances, it should be required, e.g., next to transit nodes.
Councilmember Mavity indicated the previous goals stated "promote and facilitate, a mix of
housing types, prices and rents that maintains a balance of affordable housing for low and
moderate income households," but no affordable housing units were added and stated if Council
wants to change what is happening in the City, the housing policy needs to be reflected in a
clearer way.
Councilmember Spano stated his agreement with requiring affordable housing along Southwest
LRT. He stated that requiring every residential building to have affordable housing represented
a radical departure from what has been done in the past and would rather have the policy use the
term "promote" and to direct staff to come back to Council with strategies for including
affordable housing in new projects.
After further discussion, it was the consensus of the City Council to direct staff to develop
strategies that tie the idea of requiring affordable housing in projects where developers are
requesting some type of financial assistance as well as to other specific locations, particularly
transit nodes. It was also the consensus of the City Council to include an option where a
developer could contribute to a fund if it was not practical to have affordable units as part of a
particular project.
Single Family Homes
Ms. Schnitker reviewed the changes to this section of the policy.
Councilmember Mavity suggested that the first bullet remove the word "large" when describing
family sized, owner-occupied, single family housing.
It was the consensus of the City Council to remove the word "large" from the first bullet under
Single Family Homes.
Multi-Family
Ms. Schnitker stated this goal was created in response to Council's desire to have a goal focused
on multi family.
Special Study Session Minutes -5- May 5, 2014
Councilmember Hallfin indicated that multi family does not only mean high density and could
mean medium density as well as high density.
Councilmember Spano suggested that the sentence be revised to state the City is committed to
promoting quality multi-family developments and not mention high density.
It was the consensus of the City Council that no changes were required to the three bullets listed
under Multi-Family.
Affordable Housing
It was the consensus of the City Council that no changes were required to the second bullet listed
under Affordable Housing.
Preservation, Safety and Sustainability
It was the consensus of the City Council that no further changes were required to this section.
The meeting adjourned at 9:08 p.m. r
Nancy Stroth, ity Clerk Jeff J-c is, Mayor