Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007/07/09 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Study SessionCity Council Study Session July 9, 2007 6:30 p.m. Council Chambers Discussion Items 1. 6:30 p.m. Future Agenda Planning 2. 6:35 p.m. Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report 3. 6:50 p.m. Marketing and Branding 4. 7:20 p.m. Police Mapping 5. 7:50 p.m. Community Video 6. 8:20 p.m. Council Policy Definition of Separate Living Unit Written Reports 7. EDI Status Report 8:35 p.m. Adjourn Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administrative Services Department at (952) 924-2525 (TDD (952) 924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 1 - Future Study Session Agenda Page 1 1. Future Study Session Agenda Planning Administrative Services PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION: To assist the City Council and the City Manager in setting the next study session agenda. BACKGROUND: At each study session, approximately five minutes are set aside to discuss the next study session agenda. For this purpose, attached please find the tentative agenda and proposed discussion items for the regularly scheduled study session on July 23. Attachment: Future Study Session Agenda Planning Prepared by: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 1 - Future Study Session Agenda Page 2 Future Study Session Agenda Planning Tentative Discussion Items Monday, July 23, 2007 – 6:30 p.m. A. Future Study Session Agenda Planning – Administrative Services (5 minutes) B. Council Policy on Use of Land Sale Proceeds – Community Development (30 minutes) Council to begin discussions on the approach to use which would govern how proceeds from land sales can be used. C. DUKE Business Terms TIF District – Community Development (45 minutes) Council and staff will review the proposed terms of the redevelopment agreement business terms and the proposed TIF District with Duke. Council will be asked if staff should proceed with finalizing a redevelopment agreement and prepare it for EDA action D. Discuss 2008 Budget – Finance (30 minutes) Staff proposes to give Council an update on the budget developed to date as a means to set the stage for future budget conversations. E. Vision/Strategic Directions Update – Administrative Services (30 minutes) Staff will update the Council on staff’s work on the Strategic Directions the Council adopted last March Reports  Mid-Year Housing Activities – Community Development  Financial Report - Finance  Quarterly Investment Report - Finance  Wireless Update – Information Resources 8:50 p.m. End of Meeting St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 1 2. Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Community Development PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION: The Board of Zoning Appeals (BOZA) has completed its annual report and would like to present it to the City Council for review. The annual report details the number and type of variance applications received in 2006, and provides a brief summary of each of the applications. The annual report is attached for your review. BOZA members will attend the Council Study Session, and look forward to discussing the report with you. Attachment: 2006 BOZA Annual Report Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 2 2006 St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals Ryan Burt, Chair James Gainsley, Vice-Chair Susan Bloyer, Board Member Paul Roberts, Board Member Henry Solmer, Board Member St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals 2006 Annual Report St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 3 The following pages are brief descriptions of all variances heard by the Board of Zoning Appeals in 2006 There were 14 property owners that requested variances. Some requests involved multiple variances, resulting in a total of 24 variances requested in 2006. The BOZA approved 23 variances and denied one. The Council heard one appeal resulting in BOZA’s decision being overturned (BOZA denied, Council approved.) The following is a summary of the types of variances requested. RESIDENTIAL Setbacks: 9 Attached Garages: (side setback – 2) (rear setback – 2) (side yard abutting the street – 1) Living Space: (front setback – 1) (side setback – 2) Covered Porch: (front setback – 1) Open Lot Area: 2 (Required a 20 foot by 20 foot or 20 foot by 30 foot open area in back yard. This requirement has since been removed from the code) Living Space: 1 Attached Garage: 1 No Build Area: 3 (Open area required when a back yard is adjacent to a neighbor’s front yard) Attached Garage: 3 Eave: 2 Gravel Driveway: 1 COMMERCIAL Setbacks: 2 (side yard abutting the street: 1) (rear yard: 1) Floor Area Ratio: 1 Parking: 1 Restaurant to Residential Property Line: 2 Bufferyard: 1 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 4 James Kelly Roslansky 2904 Edgewood Ave. S. BOZA Date: January 26, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved a variance to allow a 12 x 30.2 foot addition on to the back of the home. The variance allowed the addition in the open lot area with a minimum depth of 16.4 feet, instead of the required depth of 20 feet. Before Photographs: After Photographs: St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 5 Matt & Meighan Fredrick 3800 Joppa Avenue S. BOZA Date: March 23, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved three variances to allow the addition of an attached two car garage with an 8 foot 1 inch rear yard instead of the required 25 feet, a variance to allow a restricted area that is 8 feet 1 inch wide instead of required 25 feet, and a third variance to allow an open lot area that is 8 feet in width instead of the required 20 feet. As part of the home remodel, the applicant also constructed a second level master bedroom and an expansion to the existing living room. These additions meet all zoning ordinances and did not require a variance. Before Photograph After Photograph St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 6 Earl & Viola Brown 3981 Princeton Ave. S. BOZA Date: May 25, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved two variances to allow an addition to the house with a 28.4 foot front yard instead of the required 39.7 feet, and a 6.8 foot side yard instead of the required 13.3 feet. Before Photographs After Photographs St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 7 James Fischer 1816 Jersey Ave. S. BOZA Date: May 25, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved a variance to allow an open covered porch with a 10.5 foot front yard setback instead of the required 20 foot setback. Before Photograph After Photograph The interior remodel is complete, which includes relocating the front door. The open covered porch was started last fall by completing the deck portion. The roof and railings will be completed this spring. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 8 Brad & Allison Martinsen 4121 Salem Ave. S. BOZA Date: July 27, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved a variance from the side yard setback to allow a porch eave with a 7 inch setback instead of the required 4 foot setback with the requirements to install and maintain gutters along the entire length of the home. Before Photographs After Photographs St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 9 Randy Reese 8200 Virginia Circle N. BOZA Date: July 27, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved a variance from the side yard setback to allow a garage addition to convert a one car garage to a two car garage. The variance resulted in a 2 foot, 3 inch side yard setback instead of the required 6 foot setback. Before Photograph After Photograph St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 10 Jennifer & Ryan Chapeau 9511 Cedar Lake Road BOZA Date: October 17, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved three variances. A three foot variance to the required 25 foot rear yard, an 8 foot variance to the rear property line for the required 30 foot open lot area, and a 15 foot variance to the side yard abutting the street property line for the required 30 foot open lot area. Before Photograph After Photograph St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 11 The following applications either had no visible changes outside, or were not completed Johnny & Betty White - 2537 Inglewood Ave. S. BOZA Date: January 5, 2006 BOZA Action: Denied the request for a variance to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches. The variance allowed for the construction of a 22 foot by 13 foot (286 square foot) master bedroom suite off the back of the house. The addition resulted in a side wall that is 63 feet in length from front to back. The applicant appealed BOZA’s decision to the Council. The Council heard the report on February 21, 2006, and approved the variance as requested by the applicant. The applicant did not complete the building addition, and the variance expired. Aaron Parker & Associates 4200 Minnetonka Blvd. BOZA Date: January 26, 2006 BOZA Action: Approval of four variances to allow a 10 inch side yard abutting a street instead of the required 15 feet, to allow a 15 foot rear yard instead of the required 20 feet, to allow a floor area ratio of 1.6 instead of the allowed maximum of 1.2, and to allow 42 parking spaces instead of the required 47. Daniel LaSage 4611 Excelsior Blvd. BOZA Date: February 28, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved two variances to allow a 23 foot setback instead of the 25 feet required when a restaurant is adjacent to a property zoned residential, and a variance to allow a reduction in the required Bufferyard E to allow 113 points of landscaping in stead of the required 275 The building is an existing strip mall, and the coffee shop (Dunn Bros) has moved in and is open for business. Some exterior façade improvements were made. Cotty Lowry 5551 West Lake Street BOZA Date: March 23, 2006 BOZA Action: Approval of a variance to allow a restaurant (coffee shop) to be located 15.6 feet from the property line adjoining a residential property instead of the required 25 feet. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 2 - Board of Zoning Appeals Annual Report Page 12 The building is an existing strip mall, and the coffee shop (Caribou Coffee) has moved in and is open for business. Some exterior façade improvements were made to accommodate the Caribou Coffee look. Kevin Schreifels 4349 Browndale Ave. S. BOZA Date: April 27, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved a variance to allow an attached garage with a 1 foot 8 inch side yard abutting the street setback instead of the required 15 feet. The applicant did not construct the addition, and the variance expired. Thomas & Andrea Snook 3725 Huntington Ave. S. BOZA Date: June 22, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved two variances from the side yard setback to allow a garage and living space addition with a 2.5 foot setback for the garage instead of the required 4 foot setback and a 1.5 foot setback for the garage instead of the required 3.5 foot setback. The applicant revised the plans and submitted a new variance application to be heard on May 24, 2007. Dentley Haugesag 4118 Cedar Lake Road BOZA Date: June 22, 2006 BOZA Action: Approved a variance to allow an existing gravel driveway to remain gravel instead of being paved as required by code. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070906 - 3 - Marketing & Branding Page 1 3. Marketing & Branding Information Resources PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION: To introduce Periscope, the firm staff recommends be used to assist the city with its marketing and branding initiative. Staff is also interested in any initial feedback from the Council that should be considered as staff works with Periscope to develop a final scope of work. BACKGROUND: In 2006, City Council directed staff to pursue increased marketing and brand development of the city in 2007. This directive was based on conversations with the school district and other community members. At the time Council adopted the 2007 budget, funding was included for consultation services related to marketing and branding. City staff solicited interest in this initiative from consultants through a Request for Information process. After interviewing more than one dozen firms, staff recommends the city pursue a contract for services with Periscope, a Minneapolis firm that staff believes will make a great partner in discovering our brand as it exists in the city, and then aid the city in creating uniform messages to be utilized in our everyday communications. Attached, please find a brief description of Periscope’s approach to brand development and a tentative timeline for the project. Communications Coordinator Jamie Zwilling will introduce the firm, represented by Martha Burnett, vice president and director of PR & Brand Advocacy, and Jim Detmar, associate creative director. Attachments: Brand Development Document (supplement) Project Timeline (Supplement) Prepared by: Jamie Zwilling, Communications Coordinator Reviewed by: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070906 - 3 - Marketing & Branding Page 2 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070906 - 3 - Marketing & Branding Page 3 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070906 - 3 - Marketing & Branding Page 4 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070906 - 3 - Marketing & Branding Page 5 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070906 - 3 - Marketing & Branding Page 6 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070906 - 3 - Marketing & Branding Page 7 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 1 4. Police Incident Mapping Police and Information Resources PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION: Staff desires to update the City Council on the status of Police incident mapping and report back to Council on enhancements made and community feedback received. When staff last updated the Council on this initiative, council members asked that we solicit input from residents and consider additional context to the statistics. Staff requests direction as to whether or not it should proceed with this initiative. BACKGROUND: Earlier this year, several cities in the metropolitan area began including maps on their websites that show selected types of crime incidents. The Star Tribune wrote a story on these cities. At that time, St. Louis Park indicated its interest in such mapping; however, we wanted to consider the context in which such data would be presented so as to present an accurate interpretation of incidents and other community policing efforts in St. Louis Park. Crucial to this context is the notion that people reporting crimes or other types of disturbances (not crimes) is helpful to the Police Department in its overall efforts to help create a safe community. As a result, staff has partially developed a web-based mapping application that includes both selected crimes and other calls for service (completed development would only occur following Council feedback). This includes the last 30 days of incidents at a citywide view, and the last 90 days of incidents at a neighborhood level, with updates provided monthly. In addition, it does so in a way that allows an overlay of neighborhood boundaries. More important than anything else, it provides links to crime prevention tips. Since staff last met with council, context has been added to the site to further explain the statistics, and we’ve received the results of a community survey. Council asked for specific feedback from community members about how they would feel about publishing these statistics online and if there were concerns about the context in which they were presented. City staff surveyed neighborhood leaders, a cross-section of block captains, other residents and business owners by sending them the direct link to the test application and an on-line survey, and asked questions related to: the usefulness of the data, features, map navigation and potential concerns. They also received links to several neighboring communities utilizing other mapping applications for comparison. SURVEY RESULTS: Staff received about a 20 percent return rate including representation from all of the groups mentioned above. The respondents overwhelmingly supported the application and found it useful and easy to use. They expressed excitement about its continued development. There was no concern expressed about publishing these statistics, but respondents were supportive of additional context and comparative St. Louis Park data and trends from previous years. They appreciated the neighborhood detail and did not call for comparative data from other cities. The respondents overwhelmingly preferred the detailed information and the calls for service aspect of our application compared to other cities. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 2 COUNCIL POLICY DECISION: Staff requests Council feedback as to whether Staff should proceed with police incident mapping with updated statistics and enhancements for an August 2007 website debut. Twelve survey respondents indicated they would participate in a focus group if council deems it necessary for further study. The Police Advisory Commission has provided a recommendation to proceed. VISION ST. LOUIS PARK REALTIONSHIP: Community Connectedness. Attachments: Survey results Survey comments Prepared by: Jason Huber, Web Coordinator and Applications Developer Marney Olson, Community Liaison Jamie Zwilling, Communications Coordinator Through: John Luse, Police Chief Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 3 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 4 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 5 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 6 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 7 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 8 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 4 - Police Incident Mapping Page 9 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 5 - Community Videos Page 1 5. Community Videos Information Resources PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION: To discuss advertising involved in a community video promotional opportunity city staff proposes to develop in conjunction with CGI Communications, Inc., and to provide background information about other advertising and sponsorships currently in place. Staff requests Council direction as to proceeding with the community video initiative. BACKGROUND: City Staff was contacted in May by CGI Communications, Inc. about the opportunity to promote the city through the development of six community videos for our website. CGI provides an end-to-end video solution for municipalities, from writing movie scripts to filming, editing and streaming the video using its own video technology. The videos, each 60 seconds to 90 seconds in length, would appear on our website for three years. CGI develops four basic community topics: general welcome and overview, education, economic development and real estate. Two additional videos could be on any topic of our choice -- for instance, Children First or the environment. In addition to being available 24/7 online, we will have the ability to distribute the videos by email to anyone we choose. Under a three-year agreement, the city would agree to locate an icon (which we can customize) on our homepage, and we would sign a letter of authenticity for CGI to use in its advertising sales. The development of the videos is completely free to the city; CGI sells limited advertising space to local advertisers whose logos would appear around the video player. Clicking on those logos would take the viewer to a video about that business, but the viewer is not required to visit these advertisers to view the community videos. Partnering with advertisers or sponsors is a practice which has been in place by the city for some time now related to publications, events and facility advertisements. The city enters into revenue- sharing agreements to sell or place ads with a variety of contractors. For instance, the city-school calendar typically costs more than $30,000 to produce and mail. With the sale of ads, the city and the school district are able to cut each of their costs down to about $5,000. The Community Handbook, which is a city publication, also sells ads. The cost of producing this publication for the city, without the benefit of advertising sales, would also cost more than $30,000. Our Parks and Recreation Department sells advertising and sponsorships to offset the cost of events, etc While the city will not share in revenue from the advertising sales related to the videos, we will receive six professionally produced videos, valued at more than $40,000, at no cost. CGI will handle all production related to the videos, but city staff would have direct oversight and approval for video, scripts, etc. The product is endorsed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors and the videos can now be found on websites of communities, business organizations and convention and visitor bureau websites. In Minnesota, Burnsville and Moorhead have added videos to their sites and in the coming months, Albert Lea, Alexandria, Hibbing and Robbinsdale will add videos. Please see examples of the videos by clicking on the “Burnsville Community Movies” button on the “Featured Item” portion of their homepage: www.ci.burnsville.mn.us. Or visit Moorhead’s homepage at www.ci.moorhead.mn.us and click on “Video Library” at the top center of the page. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 5 - Community Videos Page 2 NEXT STEPS: City staff would like to enter into a contract with CGI Communications and commence with video production. The process takes 14 to 18 weeks to conclude, so the videos would likely debut this fall. City staff would also like to initiate the creation of a web/publications sponsorship/advertising policy that would apply to this project as well as other city programs or initiatives. The city attorney has recommended that we consider creating a policy that would exclude adult-oriented businesses and businesses selling tobacco or off-sale liquor from advertising in city publications or on the Web. Other types of businesses should perhaps be considered as well. Staff would like input from Council about pursuing such a policy. Related to this project, CGI allows us to approve all advertisers, but an actual policy on our end would make the most sense related to this and any future projects. COUNCIL POLICY DECISION: Staff requests Council’s approval to move forward with the production of the video and would like direction on any types of businesses it would not deem acceptable for advertising. Staff recommends that adult-oriented businesses, off-sale liquor and tobacco sales, and political advertising not be allowed. Prepared by: Jamie Zwilling, Communications Coordinator Through: Clint Pires, Chief Information Officer Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 6 - Council Policy - Definition of Separate Living Units Page 1 6. Council Policy - Definition of Separate Living Unit Community Development PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION: To determine if the City Council would like the staff to study the zoning definitions and requirements related to “dwelling units”. Councilmember Sanger has requested a discussion on this matter. BACKGROUND: The definition of separate living units is a matter of discussion that comes up when it is suspected that there is more than one legal unit existing or planned in a single family home. The City’s zoning ordinance currently has definitions of dwelling, dwelling unit, single family dwelling and family. Together these definitions limit how homes in our residential districts can be used. These definitions are provided below. Within the R-1 and R-2 districts only single family homes are allowed. However the definition of family includes households with up to 4 unrelated adults; and, up to two boarders or roomers are allowed in single family homes provided the living area does not constitute a “separate dwelling unit”. As noted above “dwelling unit” is defined in the zoning ordinance. By ordinance dwelling unit “means one or more rooms physically arranged so as to create an independent housekeeping establishment for occupancy by one family with separate toilets and facilities for cooking and sleeping”. Each lot in the R-1 and R-2 district may have only one dwelling unit. The definition is pretty clear; however, application of the definitions to real-life situations can be difficult at times. It is not unusual for homes to have multiple bathrooms. Occasionally residents want or have second kitchens. Nothing in the building code or zoning ordinance precludes people from having multiple bathrooms or even a second kitchen. But, the zoning ordinance allows only one independent housekeeping unit per lot in the R-1 and R-2 districts. Any configuration of rooms and facilities in a single family district that creates more than one housekeeping unit is not allowed under the zoning code. Some existing homes have spaces that resemble separate dwelling units. They have second kitchens with bedrooms, bathrooms and living space separate from the rest of the house. If these spaces were created with valid building permits issued in the past, the City cannot require the owners to remove the improvements. However, just because someone has space that looks like a separate independent dwelling unit, doesn’t mean that they are allowed to use it as such. It may be difficult to enforce, but in those situations where someone does have space suitable to be rented out as a separate unit, the City has the authority to make them cease this use in R-1 and R- 2 districts. There are several things considered when evaluating whether home plans are attempting to create a second dwelling unit in an R-1 or R-2 zone. These include making the property owner aware that more than one unit is not allowed, nor are separate utilities or separate addresses permitted. Staff evaluates the internal layout of the house. The home must be “a single housekeeping unit” as required in the ordinance, so the living spaces should be physically connected internally, and there should not be separate outdoor entrances. In practice this can be difficult. For example, a St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Discussion Item: 070907 - 6 - Council Policy - Definition of Separate Living Units Page 2 boarder may be legally living in a house and have a bedroom in a walkout basement, which may or may not constitute a separate entrance. Second, staff evaluates whether or not there is more than one kitchen. More than one is not prohibited by the building code or zoning code, and many single family homes may have a second kitchen in a finished basement, or have a second kosher kitchen. In the past, we have not allowed an additional stove and oven. Third we look at separations of living areas with key locked doors. While locks on doors are allowed, the existence of a key lock seems to indicate a separate living unit. We have inquired with a few other cities about this matter, and it is not a clear cut issue for any city. However, it does not appear to be a widespread problem. Typically the neighbors notice and a neighbor who suspects an illegal unit will report it to the city. City staff pursues the items above to determine if it is an illegal duplex or triplex. If it is, we work with them to cease the use and reconfigure the home back to a single family dwelling. ZONING REQUIREMENTS AND DEFINITIONS: In the R-1 and R-2 zoning districts, single family dwellings are the only type of dwelling unit currently allowed. The definition is as follows: Dwelling means a building or one or more parts of a building occupied or intended to be occupied exclusively for residence purposes, but not including rooms in motels, hotels, nursing homes, boardinghouses, trailers, tents, cabins or trailer coaches. Dwelling unit means one or more rooms physically arranged so as to create an independent housekeeping establishment for occupancy by one family with separate toilets and facilities for cooking and sleeping. Single-family dwelling means a fully detached dwelling located on an individual lot and intended for occupancy by a single-family. Family means one of the following: (1) Any group of people living together as a single housekeeping unit, all of whom are related by blood, marriage, or adoption plus children who are under foster care. (2) Up to four people not so related, living together as a single housekeeping unit. (3) Any group of people living together as a single housekeeping unit, if no more than two adult members function as the heads of the household group and the remaining members are dependent upon them for care and direction due to age, physical disability, a mental incompetency or for other reasons. (4) Any individual, who is the owner, living and maintaining a common household and using a common cooking and kitchen facility. NEXT STEPS: If the City Council believes review and potential revisions to the city’s zoning ordinance definitions are needed, staff should be directed to pursue options and ideas for consideration. Prepared by: Meg J. McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 1 7. EDI Status Report Community Development PURPOSE OF REPORT: This report responds to the questions asked by the City Council at the 6/25/07 council study session discussion of the Park Nicollet’s Eating Disorder Institute (EDI). BACKGROUND: At the 6/25/07 City Council Study Session, the City Council requested that staff prepare, 1. A chronology of past council action regarding the Bass Lake site and its use for and eating disorders facility; and, 2. A present value analysis comparing the financial impact of the EDI as a taxable land use versus a tax-exempt land use. Attached below are the responses to these requests and a brief list of “talking points” regarding the location of the EDI in St. Louis Park in general and the Bass Lake location specifically. The chronology of City Council actions and discussions regarding the Bass Lake site, and the EDI begins with the resolution adopted by the City Council in December of 2005 which stated that the Bass Lake site should be retained for future development. It ends with the most recent City Council discussion on June 25 of this year. Also included in the chronology are the City Council actions regarding the Parkland rezoning and Parkland Sales Procedures adopted last year in the midst of the EDI discussions; plus, the recent decision to build the replacement of the Bass Lake tennis courts in Aquila Park. Ehlers & Associates has prepared a present value analysis of the EDI under both taxable and non-taxable scenarios. The analysis is attached. After 40 years, the city is over $400,000 ahead under the tax-exempt scenario. Even after 60 years the tax-exempt scenario is ahead of the taxable alternative from a present value analysis perspective. It is possible that the tax-exempt approach would be of even greater benefit to the City depending on exactly how the land sale proceeds are split between the City and Hennepin County. For the sake of this analysis it was assumed that the land sales proceeds are split 50/50 between the City and county. This is the worst case scenario for the city. For further detail, please see the attachments Attachments: Chronology Regarding Bass Lake Site and EDI Ehlers & Associates Present Value Analysis Talking Points on EDI Prepared by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 2 Chronology of Action Regarding Bass Lake Site and EDI Summary Including the 6/25/07 council study session discussion, the Bass Lake site has been before the City Council a dozen times starting in December 2005. Key council actions regarding 3515 Belt Line Blvd and the Eating Disorders Institute (EDI) are highlighted below. In addition, while the Council has been considering the future of the 3515 Belt Line Blvd site and the possibility of an using part of it for the EDI, the council created a new Park zoning district, amended its zoning district map to show where park land is located; and, adopted an ordinance establishing criteria and procedures for the sale or long term leasing of park land. It is significant that during the discussion and decision making regarding which parcels would be designated parks and fall under the new park land sale requirements, the designation for 3515 Belt Line Blvd was not changed from its RC – high density residential designation. While Bass Lake itself was rezoned to Park and Open Space, the 3515 Belt Line Blvd site was not. 1. 12/5/05 – City Council passed a resolution stating that the 3515 Belt Line Blvd site should be retained for future development; and that single family homes should be considered for this site. This was the conclusion of the year long Excess Land Task Forces work which began in January 2005. 2. 12/12/05 – City Council discussed the possibility of the Park Nicollet Eating Disorder Institute being located in St. Louis Park. Council’s conclusion was that the EDI was a good asset for the community and that we should continue moving forward on a partnership. 3. 02/13/06 – Discussion of the character and potential of the Bass Lake site. 4. 02/27/06 – Discussion of locations for the EDI both in SLP and elsewhere. 5. 04/10/06 – Oral update on concept planning by PNC for EDI on Bass Lake site. 6. 5/22/06 – Alternative development ideas for the 3515 Belt Line Blvd site were presented and discussed, including use of the site for single family homes. The consensus of the City Council was to move forward with EDI on the site; staff was directed to prepare a draft preliminary development agreement for Council approval. 7. 6/12/06 – Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with United Properties. 8. 6/19/06 - EDA and City Council authorized the Mayor and City Manager; and, the EDA President and Executive Director to execute the Preliminary Development Agreement with United Properties for a portion of 3515 Belt Line Boulevard property. 9. 09/25/06 – Written update on EDI development agreement. 10. 11/6/06 and 5/14/07 – Proposed business terms for redevelopment contract and updated development plans discussed at City council study sessions. 11. 06/25/07 – Discussion of business terms under a tax-exempt proposal. The full list of Council discussions and actions is provided below. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 3 Meeting Synopsis 1. 12-05-05 CC Regular meeting - Disposition and Retention of Excess Public Land for Building Single Family Homes – a. Resolution for Parcel 20, 3515 Beltline Blvd. “The City will retain the property located at 3515 Belt Line Boulevard; and identified as Parcel 20 for future development. Building single family homes should be considered as a component of future development proposals for this site.” b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve Resolution No. 05-168 related to disposition and/or retention of 17 public parcels. Councilmember Sanger indicated one of her concerns goes to the parking lots and making sure that whatever they did, they retained public access. She was particularly concerned about the parcel on Englewood Avenue because there are quite a few adjacent businesses whose employees and customers may need to use those spaces. It would be problematic if it were sold or leased for the exclusive use of one particular parcel. Ms. Larsen responded the resolution states, “ensure that parking remains available to the general public at these lots.” Councilmember Basill stated he supported the motion, but made a friendly amendment that the one at 3515 Belt Line Boulevard there be a message, “if in the future it is developed, consideration will be given to single-family homes,” so future Council’s will know what they were thinking. Mayor Jacobs noted that was already in the resolution. The motion passed 7-0. 2. 12-12-05 CC Study Session – a. The purpose of this discussion is to update the Council on recent discussions between Staff and Park Nicollet Health Services regarding construction of an Eating Disorders Institute (EDI) in St. Louis Park. Mick Johnson, president, Park Nicollet Foundation and senior vice president, Park Nicollet Health Services, will be in attendance at the meeting and will provide an overview of what the Eating Disorder Institute is and PNHS’s concept for a new facility. b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: Duane Spiegle, Vice President of Real Estate and Support Services, said the new facility would be 63,000-75,000 square feet. Potential sites were discussed. Mr. Johnson said it is not their intent to seek City funds. Mr. Locke said not to focus on a site tonight but he emphasized the need to move efficiently with the timing in making choices. The Council consensus was that this was a good asset for the community and to continue moving forward on this partnership. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 4 3. 02-13-06 CC Study Session a. As a follow-up to a conversation by the Council at its last study session, this item is being presented to allow for a discussion on site characteristics, and the potential for future uses of the Bass Lake Site. b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: i. Councilmember Sanger said this may be a good site for single-family homes. Councilmember Basill agreed. ii. Councilmember Finkelstein suggested a land trust or affordable row housing. iii. Mayor Jacobs would like to consider having move-up housing. iv. Councilmember Carver asked, “What don’t we have in St. Louis Park that we need?” Councilmember Carver said this site is important because it links directly to the Rec Center, which links to the park, which links to Excelsior and Grand. Councilmember Carver continued: It is critical as part of creating that community synergy in a central place when we consider what might need to be there. v. Mayor Jacobs said he would like to get feedback from what the Vision St. Louis Park process brings to the Council. vi. Councilmember Sanger said the slowing down makes a lot of sense. She would like information on what might work on this size parcel; and let’s put clear architectural designs principles in place. 4. 02-27-06 CC Study Session a. The purpose of this discussion is to review with Council potential locations for a new facility for the Park Nicollet Eating Disorders Institute (EDI). Ten possible sites have been identified by Park Nicollet; seven of them are in St. Louis Park. Representatives of Park Nicollet, EDI and United Properties (who is working with PNC to identify possible sites) will be in attendance at the study session to present the potential sites. Park Nicollet and United Properties will also share their evaluation of each site. The City Council discussed this topic previously at the December 12, 2005 study session. The consensus from that meeting was that a new state of the art EDI would be a good asset for the community and that we should continue working with Park Nicollet on this project. If we are to continue, a workable site will need to be identified within St. Louis Park as the home for the new EDI. Due to funding reasons, Park Nicollet has indicated they need to have a site identified by at least the end of the first quarter of 2006. b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: i. Park Nicollet listed the Bass Lake site as their number one choice, the Wayside House site was a close second, and the third preference is to consideration to build onto the Park Nicollet campus ii. Mr. Harmening said the city is not committing to provide this site to Park Nicollet, however, the Council is willing to look at concept designs to get an understanding as to how an EDI could be placed on this site and allow various other uses on this site. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 5 iii. Regarding the Wayside House site, Councilmember Sanger asked if Park Nicollet is willing to reopen the discussion with Wayside and come up with a win-win approach for Wayside and Park Nicollet. Mr. Oehler said he and Mick Johnson would be happy to work with Wayside, not only to help them find another location but also help them raise money. iv. Mr. Harmening summarized: For Park Nicollet/EDI, do some concept planning on the Bass Lake site and undertake another conversation with Wayside House as to possibilities of some kind of deal associated with that property 5. 04-10-06 CC Study Session – Oral Status Report on Bass Lake Site a. Staff desires to provide the City Council with a brief update on the status of concept planning being undertaken by Park Nicollet for this site and the likelihood that Park Nicollet will be available to make a presentation to the City Council in May. b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: Mr. Harmening said there is nothing that compels Council to sell this property. He asked if Council would like to spend the time and energy for staff to develop concept plans for various ways in which Bass Lake could be developed without an EDI. Councilmember Sanger said yes for a point of comparison. Mr. Harmening said the city would have to hire someone to do that. 6. 05-22-06 CC Study Session – Site Alternatives for Bass Lake Site. a. As a follow-up to conversations by the Council at its February 13th, 27th and April 10th study sessions, this item is being presented to allow for a discussion on the potential future uses of the Bass Lake site located at 3515 Belt Line Boulevard (NE corner of the intersection of Monterey Drive, W. 36th Street, and Beltline Boulevard) including the possibility of accommodating Park Nicollet’s Eating Disorders Institute (EDI) on the site. Park Nicollet is looking for direction as to whether the City supports the EDI at the Bass Lake site or not. b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: i. Community Development Coordinator Kevin Locke said the goal tonight is not to pick a site plan or development proposal but to show what could be done on the Bass Lake site. The City’s consultant Mike Gair, with MFRA, presented 10 exhibits depicting various development scenarios. ii. Larry Pobuda, a United Properties representative, presented site plans on EDI and parking options A-E, and many of the scenarios were similar to those Mr. Gair presented. Councilmember Sanger asked how many acres would EDI and its ramp take up. Mr. Pobuda said EDI would cover about three acres on the northern portion of the site. iii. Mr. Harmening said no one is being asked to make a decision tonight. Mr. Harmening asked if the Council wants staff to work seriously with EDI and put together a deal, and if so, the next step would be to come up with a preliminary development agreement. iv. The consensus was to move forward with EDI on the site; staff will prepare a draft preliminary development agreement for Council approval. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 6 7. 06-12-06 CC Study Session – Proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with United Properties – Purpose of this agenda item is to present the proposed Preliminary Development Agreement with United Properties for the possible location of a medical office building on the City’s Bass Lake property located at 3515 Belt Line Boulevard. 8. 06-19-06 EDA/CC Regular meeting - Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Preliminary Development Agreement with the EDA and United Properties for a portion of 3515 Belt Line Boulevard (the Bass Lake property). a. EDA Minutes: It was motioned by Commissioner Basill, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs, to authorize the President and Executive Director to execute the Preliminary Development Agreement with the City and United Properties for a portion of 3515 Belt Line Boulevard (the Bass Lake property).The motion passed 6-0. (Council member Carver Absent) b. CC Minutes: Authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute the Preliminary Development Agreement with the EDA and United Properties for a portion of 3515 Belt Line Boulevard (the Bass Lake property). On consent agenda. It was moved by Councilmember Omodt, seconded by Councilmember Paprocki, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar. The motion passed 6-0 (Carver absent) 9. 09-25-06 CC Study Session Written Report – EDI/Bass Lake Property Update a. Purpose of item is to apprise the City Council of the progress being made under the Preliminary Development Agreement with United Properties relative to the possible location of Methodist Hospital’s Eating Disorders Institute (EDI) on the City’s Bass Lake property at 3515 Belt Line Boulevard. b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: No comments in minutes 10. 11-06-06 CC Study Session - EDI/Bass Lake Preliminary Site Plans and Proposed Business Terms of Redevelopment Contract with United Properties a. Purpose: Staff wishes to discuss preliminary site plans for the Bass Lake property and outline general business terms of a proposed redevelopment contract between the City, EDA and United Properties. Staff hopes to elicit comments from the Council as to whether the parties are on the “right track” with this project. b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: Mayor Jacobs said the Council consensus is to move forward. 11. 05-14-07 CC Study Session – United Properties Application for Tax Increment Financing to facilitate construction of a medical office building for Park Nicollet’s Eating Disorders Clinic at 3515 Belt Line Blvd. a. Purpose: Staff wishes to review and receive feedback on the proposed sale of a portion of 3515 Belt Line Blvd and 4860 35th Street West to United Properties (“the Redeveloper”). Staff also wishes to discuss the Redeveloper’s application for Tax Increment Finance (TIF) assistance and proposed Business Terms to facilitate development of a medical office building on the above site. Specific items staff wishes to discuss include: St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 7 • Proposed site plan and building elevations. • Proposed land use and zoning requirements. • Property sale process. • Amount and term of TIF assistance and other project costs. • Proposed business terms. • Compliance with the city’s TIF policy. • Next steps. b. Council conclusions and direction to staff: Mayor Jacobs asked if she would say no to this proposal. Councilmember Sanger stated she would say no at this point. Councilmember Finkelstein stated he would like to see the financing reworked. Mayor Jacobs stated 21 years would be a long TIF. Councilmember Paprocki stated it does accomplish a lot of the goals the residents have been asking for and it they would be providing a world class EDI Center. Mr. Harmening stated the next steps would be to refine the site plan and put together a development contract. 12. 06-18-07 CC Regular Meeting - Motion to Approve Agreement with Benilde-St. Margaret for Tennis Courts at Aquila Park. a. Action on relocating the tennis courts from Bass Lake to Aquila Park 13. 06-25-07 CC Study Session – Business Terms for Methodist Hospital’s Eating Disorders Clinic at 3515 Belt Line Boulevard a. Purpose: Staff wishes to review and receive feedback on the latest business terms related to the proposed sale of a portion of 3515 Belt Line Blvd and the development of Methodist Hospital’s Eating Disorders Clinic on the site. Specific items staff wishes to discuss include: • Proposed site plan and building elevations. • Property sale process. • Updated project costs. • Proposed Business Terms. • Next steps. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 8 Parkland Rezoning and Parkland Sales Procedures 1. 11-20-06 CC Regular meeting - Motion to adopt first reading of the Ordinance establishing criteria and procedures for the sale of City owned park and opens space and setting the second reading for December 4, 2006. 2. 11-20-06 CC Regular meeting – First Reading of Parks and Open Space Zoning Text and Map Amendment - The proposed ordinances will create a new Parks and Open Space District and related regulations in the Zoning Code, as well as amend the Zoning Map to establish the boundaries of the new zoning district. The proposal includes only city- owned parks and open spaces. 3. 12-04-06 CC Regular meeting – Second Reading of an Ordinance Establishing Criteria and Procedural Requirements for Sale of City Park Land - Motion to adopt second reading of the Ordinance establishing criteria and procedures for the sale of City owned park and open space; authorize summary ordinance and authorize publication 4. 12-04-06 CC Regular meeting – Motion to adopt second readinig of ordinances amending the Zoning ordinance and Zoning Map to create a POS – Park and Open Space Zoning District, approve summary and authorize publication - The proposed ordinances will create a new Parks and Open Space District and related regulations in the Zoning Code, as well as amend the Zoning Map to establish the boundaries of the new zoning district. The proposal includes only city-owned parks and open spaces. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 9 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 10 St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 11 Talking Points for Park Nicollet’s proposed Eating Disorders Institute Background The Bass Lake Property located at 3515 Belt Line Boulevard includes approximately 7.3 acres of tax forfeited property. The property is currently the site of six tennis courts (leased on a short term basis to Benilde-St. Margarets High School) and a “temporary off-leash dog park”. Despite these interim recreational uses, the property is designated for “High Density Residential” use in the city’s Comprehensive Plan. The subject property was the site of the former municipal Bass Lake Dump which was in operation during the 1960s and early 1970s. During that time, approximately 70,000 cubic yards of fill and waste material (primarily incinerator ash) was deposited at the site at a maximum depth of 17.5 feet. This contaminated material was overlaid with between 2 and 12 feet of topsoil to provide a protective cover. The city is considering subdividing the property approximately in half. As proposed the city would sell the northern portion of the property (about 3.5 acres) to United Properties and retain the more visible southern portion (about 3.8 acres). United Properties plans to properly rebalance and regrade the soils on the entire property in conformance with MPCA requirements. It then plans to construct a 3-story, 67,400 square foot medical office building as well as structured and surface parking on the EDI portion of the site. The attractive brick and glass building will be owned and operated by Park Nicollet for its Eating Disorders Institute. The existing six tennis courts on the site would be removed and replaced. Four new tennis courts would be added to the existing courts at Aquila Park to give Benilde-St.Margaret’s access to eight tennis courts in one location during tennis season. Another two courts would be constructed on the southeastern portion of the property retained by the city. In addition, a trail connection would be constructed along the north and eastern portion of the property purchased by United Properties. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 12 Why Proceed with the EDI Project? The proposed project will create many direct community benefits. 1. A world class facility for St. Louis Park. The EDI is a unique and highly regarded facility. It will enhance the image of St. Louis Park to be home to Park Nicollet’s Eating Disorder Institute. 2. Public parcel readied for future community use. A by-product of EDI’s investment in the Bass Lake site will be improvements to the property retained by the City. The improvements will be a significant step toward fully preparing the site for future use. The site will be brought into compliance with MPCA requirements and could be used for any number of civic purposes as expressed in the city’s recently completed Visioning process. The site will be further enhanced with attractive driveway entries, boulevard landscaping, lighting, surface parking, and sidewalks. 3. A 1.3 acre public green space created at a key location. The West 36th Street/Beltline Blvd corner of the Bass Lake site will be established as a potential site for public art or other community use. It will be created at the Eastern terminus of the W.36th street art corridor. It is a highly visible corner adjacent to the Rec Center and W36th Street that could be further developed into a public amenity. This green area could be enhanced as the community sees fit. One possible idea is a potential sculpture garden that would coordinate with the public art and streetscape planned along W36th Street. 4. The Developer will make improvements to the entire Bass Lake site. EDI will make the improvements listed below on the City’s portion of the Bass Lake Site at the developer’s expense. a. addressing on-site contamination b. increasing the structural capacity of the ramp to accommodate future parking ramp expansion, c. new sidewalks, d. lighting e. removing unsightly power poles and utility lines, f. new internal roadways and parking for tennis court and trail users as well as overflow parking for the Rec Center g. landscaped boulevards 5. Enhancement of George Haun Trail. A new section of the George Haun Trail will be created making it possible to walk completely around Bass Lake without using the sidewalk along Beltline Blvd and Monterey Avenue. Parking for the trail will also be provided. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 13 6. Tennis Courts replaced. Four new tennis courts will be built at Aquila Park and two new tennis courts on the city’s Bass Lake property will be built. The new Bass Lake courts will be especially for neighborhood recreation use. The new courts at Aquila Park in combination with the four existing courts at Aquila will serve both the public and be used by Benilde-St. Margaret tennis teams. 7. Increased Rec Center Overflow Parking will be available. Parking access to the surface stalls and parking ramp during evenings and weekends will provide overflow parking for the adjacent Rec Center. The economic benefits of the EDI project for St. Louis Park are also significant. 1. City will receive market value for the Bass Lake Property . The property will be purchased by the developer for $1.8 million or $12/sf, the fair market value for this site. 2. While the property will be tax-exempt, Methodist will make Payments in lieu of taxes for 40 years. For the first 18 years Methodist will pay $20,000 per year. From year 19 to year 40, Methodist will make payments equivalent to the full value of the EDI. It is estimated based on today’s building values, that the amount would be about $96,000. The actual amounts Methodist will pay will be adjusted for inflation annually. In addition, the payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT) will have fewer restrictions on its use than real estate property taxes. This provides the City with greater flexibility in meeting community needs in the future. 3. EDI, a $29 million Project. The proposed EDI project is projected to cost $29 million to construct and will make the EDI building one of the most highly valued buildings in St. Louis Park. Its cost of construction is indicative of the quality of the overall building. It will be a first class facility. 4. Continued growth and success of Park Nicollet. Park Nicollet is St. Louis Park’s largest employer. Its continued success and vitality is important to the continued vitality and economic success of the City. The new medical clinic will enable PNC to expand thus allowing it to further contribute to the city’s economic vitality. 5. New opportunities for PNC Growth created. Park Nicollet would retain several medical disciplines from the existing clinic and the hospital and consolidate them into the EDI thus freeing up existing space at those facilities for future growth. 6. High quality jobs in St. Louis Park. The new facility will retain and create a total of approximately 220 quality jobs in the community. 7. St. Louis Park’s role in Medical Industry enhanced. The EDI facility will further enhance St. Louis Park’s reputation as a strategic location for the medical industry. 8. National and International Visibility for St. Louis Park. The EDI is proposed to be a “world class” center for treating eating disorders and as such the St. Louis Park–based facility would receive ongoing national if not, international, recognition. St. Louis Park City Council Study Session Written Report: 070907 - 7 - EDI Status Report Page 14 9. Benefits to St. Louis Park from EDI Visitors. The clinic will attract patients and their families from the Midwest and beyond. These visitors will be patronizing local hotels, restaurants and stores. This will, no doubt, economically benefit our retailers throughout the city particularly those in close proximity. The EDI facility is not just for the benefit of the City of St. Louis Park. It is an important asset for the broader community. The proposed project provides significant social benefits: 1. More patients will receive treatment. The new facility will enable Park Nicollet to double the number of patients it treats for anorexia, bulimia and other eating disorders. Currently, Park Nicollet treats about 500 patients a year for these illnesses. The new clinic is expected to eventually treat 1,500 patients a year. That’s a substantial annual increase in the number of individuals (primarily young people) who will now be able to receive treatment for these serious illnesses that could prematurely claim their lives. 2. Helping kids consistent with City values. Eating disorders are primarily an affliction of young people. St. Louis Park’s providing a home for Park Nicollet’s EDI is consistent with the city’s commitment to helping young people and would further enhance St. Louis Park’s national reputation as a “Children First” community.