Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/02/06 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA February 6, 2006 7:30 PM 6:00 p.m. Boards and Commission Interviews –Boxed Lunches 7:30 p.m. City Council Meeting 1. Call to Order 1a. Pledge of Allegiance 2b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of December 19, 2005 3b. Study Session Minutes of January 9, 2006 3c. City Council Minutes of January 17, 2006 3d. Study Session Minutes of January 23, 2006 Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. Action: Motion to approve the agenda as presented and to approve items listed on the consent calendar (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, motion to move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion and to approve those items remaining on the consent calendar). 5. Boards and Commissions 5a. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions Recommended Action: Motion to appoint citizen representatives to each of the following Boards and Commissions: Community Education Advisory Council, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, Planning Commission and Police Advisory Commission. 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing to consider an appeal of the Board of Zoning Appeals denial (2-2 vote) of a variance from the Zoning Ordinance to allow an addition. Case No. 05-68-VAR: Variance Appeal to the home located on the property at 2537 Inglewood Ave S. - John White applicant Recommended Action: • Mayor to close the public hearing. • Motion to adopt resolution denying the application for a variance to section 36-163(f)(8) of the Zoning Ordinance to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches at 2537 Inglewood Ave S. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Hoigaard Village - Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Final Plat Case No. 05-61-S and 05-62-PUD Union Land, LLC. SW Quadrant of Highway 100 and Highway 7 Recommended Action: • Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Final Planned Unit Development, subject to conditions as recommended by Staff. • Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Final Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Hoigaard Village 1st Addition, subject to conditions as recommended by Staff. 8b. Comprehensive Plan Amendments for three Excess Land Parcels Case No.: 05-71-CP; 05-72-CP; 05-73-CP Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan for 7701 Edgebrook Drive from P – Park to RL – Low Density Residential and approve publication of the summary resolution. Motion to adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan for a portion of 9019 Cedar Lake Road from P – Parks and Open Space to RL – Low Density Residential as shown on the attached map and approve publication of the summary resolution. Motion to adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan for 2715 Monterey Avenue South from P – Park to RL – Low Density Residential and approve publication of the summary resolution. 8c. Agreement Between the City of St. Louis Park and Torah Academy Relating to Joint Use of Facilities. This agreement is for the joint use and cost sharing of three areas of the School and Fern Hill Park: the playground area, parking area, and southeast ball field. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and Torah Academy for joint use of facilities. 8d. First Reading: Proposed Ordinance Amending Chapter 12, Section II – Private Residential Pools Proposed ordinance amendment adding a requirement to enclose pool circulating pumps and motors within a building or other structure designed for sound attenuation. Recommended Action: Motion to approve first reading of the amendment to the Environmental Code – Private Residential Pools section of the Ordinance Code. Set 2nd reading for February 21, 2006. 9. Communications 10. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF February 6, 2006 SECTION 4: CONSENT CALENDAR NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. 4a. Motion to authorize staff to execute an Agreement with Unplugged Cities related to partnership to deliver Broadband Access and Public Safety and Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Network in an amount not to exceed $26,000. 4b. Item was removed. 4c. Motion to adopt Agreement between the Friends of the Arts and the City of St. Louis Park. 4d. Motion to approve Resolution establishing a special assessment for the installation of a fire suppression sprinkler system at 4300 36 ½ Street, St. Louis Park, MN 55416, rescinding Resolution No. 04-143 adopted December 6, 2004. 4e. Motion to approve resolution establishing a special assessment for the installation of a fire suppression sprinkler system at 4003 Wooddale Avenue, St. Louis Park, MN. 4f. Motion to approve Resolution for year 2006 Liquor License Renewals for license year to run March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2007. 4g. Motion to adopt Resolution approving a minor amendment to a Planned Unit Development (Tower Place PUD) for exterior changes at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. (Timberlodge Steakhouse, now known as Granite City Food and Brewery). Case No. 05-75-CUP 4h. Motion to approve resolution to designate Marcia Honold as the Deputy City Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk. 4i. Motion to approve a resolution supporting the City of St. Louis Park’s application to the Minnesota Housing and Finance Agency (MHFA) for assistance in funding the citywide inspection – home rehab program. 4j. Motion to adopt Resolutions Imposing Civil Penalties for Liquor License Violations according to the recommendation of the City Manager. 4k. Motion to approve Resolution for Final Payment to Cool Air Mechanical for replacement of HVAC. City Project No. 2005-1600 Contract No. 112-05 4l. Motion to designate Rainbow Tree Care, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and to authorize execution of a contract for the 2006 Arbotect 20-S Elm injection program at a cost of $12.15 per diameter inch. 4m. Motion to accept Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of September 22, 2005 for filing. 4n. Motion to accept Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of October 27, 2005 for filing. 4o. Motion to accept Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of January 5, 2006 for filing. 4p. Motion to accept Human Rights Commission Minutes of November 16, 2005 for filing. 4q. Motion to accept Human Rights Commission Minutes of December 21, 2005 for filing. 4r. Motion to accept Planning Commission Minutes of December 21, 2005 for filing. 4s. Motion to accept Planning Commission Minutes of January 4, 2006 for filing. 4t. Motion to accept vendor claims for filing. (supplement) AGENDA SUPPLEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING ***February 6, 2006*** Items contained in this section are those items which are not yet available in electronic format and which are identified in the individual reports by inclusion of the word “Supplement”. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 1 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA December 19, 2005 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Council members present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, Jim Brimeyer, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt and Sue Santa Councilmember Susan Sanger was absent. Staff present: City Clerk (Ms. Stroth), City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Jamnik), Civic TV Coordinator (Mr. Dunlap), Community TV Coordinator (Mr. McHugh), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Director of Technology and Support Services (Mr. Pires), Finance Director (Ms. McGann), Housing Supervisor (Ms. Schnitker), Human Resources Director (Ms. Gohman), Fire Chief (Mr. Stemmer), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Stegora-Peterson). 2. Presentations 2a. Farewell to Sue Santa, departing Ward 3 Councilmember and Jim Brimeyer, departing Ward 4 Councilmember Mayor Jacobs presented a plaque to Councilmember Santa and thanked her for her years of service on the Council. Councilmember Finkelstein added his appreciation. Mayor Jacobs presented a certificate of appreciation to Councilmember Brimeyer and thanked him for his dedication to the Council and the community. Councilmember Brimeyer stated they should discuss transitioning someone from the Council onto the Light Rail Transit Commission within the next year. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of December 5, 2005 Councilmember Santa indicated on page three, the third paragraph (6a), should state, “Councilmember Santa asked the hours they were open.” On page five, the second from the bottom paragraph should read, “Councilmember Santa believed … considered senior, but do not want to be labeled as such.” Councilmember Brimeyer stated on page 14, second paragraph from the bottom, after “environmental issues” to insert “open space enhancements, beautification projects, public art, improvements at the Westwood Nature Center, etc. The Council should look at trust fund options so there is no mistake in ten or fifteen years that this money had been set aside for a variety of purposes and a trustee group is responsible for administering it.” St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 2 Mayor Jacobs indicated the last paragraph on page 14, to insert a period after “General Fund.” The minutes were approved as corrected. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. 4a. Approve the St. Louis Park Community Celebration Service Agreement with Parktacular, Inc. 4b. Approve Resolution No. 05-186 accepting Work Copeland Building Corp for Construction of Browndale and Nelson Park Buildings City Project No. 20050090 Contract No. 45-05. 4c. Authorize execution of a one (1) year extension to Contract No. 122-04 with ENSR Consulting and Engineering for consultant services related to the implementation of the Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation (Reilly) Remedial Action Plan (RAP) during year 2006. 4d. Authorize execution of a contract extension to Contract No. 1893 with Severn Trent Services (STL - Denver) for laboratory services related to the Reilly Tar & Chemical Corporation groundwater sampling program through year 2006. 4e. Approve Resolution No. 05-187 authorizing Gambling Premises Permit for Community Charities of Minnesota operating at TexaTonka Lanes, 8200 Minnetonka Boulevard. 4f. Authorize execution of a contract in the amount of $60,000.00 with Ostvig Tree, Inc. for 2006 Tree Pruning (trimming). 4g. Adopt Resolution No. 05-188 rescinding parking restrictions on the south side of Republic Avenue from the driveway apron in the 1st Street Northwest right-of- way to a point 110 feet to the northwest. Traffic Study No. 592. 4h. Approve Resolution No. 05-189 authorizing Renewal of Gambling Premises Permit for Hopkins Raspberry Festival Association, Inc., operating at Al’s Bar, 3912 Excelsior Boulevard. 4i. Adopt Resolution No. 05-176 accepting a grant from the Minnesota Department of Natural Resource (DNR) for partially funding the construction of a local trail connection to the regional trail system. 4j. Approve Resolution No. 05-190 accepting Work from Penn Contracting for Watermain Relocation City Project No. 2005-0100 Contract No. 33-05. 4k. Accept Joint School/City Minutes of November 29, 2005 for filing. 4l. Accept Planning Commission Minutes of November 2, 2005 for filing. 4m. Accept Planning Commission Minutes of November 16, 2005 for filing. 4n. Accept Telecommunication Commission Minutes of October 6, 2005 for filing. 4o. Accept Housing Authority Minutes of November 9, 2005 for filing. 4p. Accept vendor claims for filing (supplement). It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar. The motion passed 6-0. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 3 5. Boards and Commissions 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing to consider granting an off-sale intoxicating liquor license to Trader Joe’s East, Inc., DBA Trader Joe’s, 4500 Excelsior Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN Ms. Stroth presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs asked if there was a time frame to have a store manager in place, so they could do a background search? Ms. Stroth replied the background check must be completed before the paperwork is sent to the State for final approval of the license. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt to approve an off-sale intoxicating liquor license for Trader Joe’s at 4500 Excelsior Boulevard contingent upon successful background check of new designated store manager. The motion passed 6-0. 6b. Time Warner Cable TV Franchise Renewal Mr. Pires presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. Jim Erickson, Fiber First Minnesota, asked Council to consider a proposed ordinance that would require fiber optic connectivity in all new construction in the City. Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Santa to approve first reading of the attached franchise renewal ordinance and set the second reading for January 3, 2006, and extend the term of the current franchise agreement to January 3, 2006. The motion passed 6-0. Mayor Jacobs suggested the fiber optic issue be put on a study session agenda. Councilmember Omodt agreed and would like to hear Comcast’s thoughts as well. Mr. Pires suggested it was an appropriate topic for the Telecommunications Advisory Committee and possibly the Planning Commission. Mr. Harmening thanked Mr. Pires, Mr. McHugh and Mr. Dunlap for their work, as well as Mr. Jamnik and Mr. Grogan. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 4 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Comcast Transfer - Resolution No. 05-177 Mr. Pires presented the staff report. Councilmember Santa stated she was disturbed Comcast had not responded to the requests of Council and residents about the issue of their Internet provider changing and asking for assistance with a transition. Mayor Jacobs agreed with the concern. Internet addresses would change with the transfer. Mr. Pires responded this concern was raised early and they communicated concerns to Comcast. They had not heard Comcast’s plan to assist in transition of domain names and e-mail addresses. Past transitions from AT&T to Comcast had caused e-mail address confusions for subscribers. Emmett Coleman, Director of Government Affairs for Comcast, stated he understood the concern. The only time he knew this question had been posed was in front of the Telecommunications Commission and Ms. Donnelly-Cohen attempted to address the question. They recognized this is a concern for customers and is a business transition issue. With the AT&T transition, they provided a very long transition period for customers to migrate to the Comcast addresses. Specific details hadn’t been worked out between Comcast and Time Warner. He believed the process would be similar to the AT&T transition. A window would be made available to all customers to migrate, where both addresses will work simultaneously. Comcast customers are going to Time Warner as well and this is a cooperative relationship where both companies are trying to make the process efficient. Mayor Jacobs asked if there would be a customer service number or a web page where customers could go to with questions. Mr. Coleman replied he would presume there would be a number of communication methods and information provided to customers, telling them how to set up new e-mail addresses. Councilmember Brimeyer stated these were permitted monopolies regulated at a level over which they had no control. This would happen regardless of whether they approved the transfer. Mayor Jacobs added this is a federally regulated transfer and they did not have a lot of control over it. Mr. Pires indicated they had the ability to look at the legal, technical and financial capabilities of the company. Staff made a request of Comcast on a number of occasions for this information and evaluated what they could with regard to the transfer application. Councilmember Santa asked if Council could be assured that Comcast would address their concerns and consider the issues surrounding the transition since they were now aware of the concerns. Mr. Coleman responded some of the details were not yet available. He would pass along the Council’s concern. They wanted to have solid communication with customers and that they knew what to do. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 5 Mayor Jacobs indicated he had heard concerns from people running businesses as well who depended on the ability of their e-mail. Councilmember Finkelstein asked when the public could expect to get an answer from Comcast regarding the procedure. Mr. Coleman responded the specific details of the process probably would not be revealed until closer to the close of the transfer, sometime at the end of the first quarter, start of the second. Brian Grogan indicated historically they have begun with bill inserts to notify people. He did not expect that until after closing. Next they would send e-mail tutorials directing the customer to an on-line tutorial, allowing them to transition e-mail addresses, then send letters. People who failed to take advantage of either of those steps would be contacted by phone and requested to take advantage of that step. There is a significant delay before there is a cut off of an e-mail address. Mr. Pires stated this would be a long-term arrangement with Comcast and he hoped Mr. Coleman would do everything possible on Comcast’s behalf to establish a good relationship with the community. He suggested they could present more specifics to the Telecommunications Commission and Council as details became known. Mayor Jacobs agreed. Information needed to be provided to residents and businesses. Councilmember Omodt welcomed Comcast to St. Louis Park. What they hear from their constituents is a big need to stay connected. There is a lot of angst about changing Internet access and the more comfort they can provide, the better off they would be. He hoped they heard them and understood the message they were sending. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to adopt Resolution No.05-177 approving the transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance and cable system from Time Warner Cable, Inc. to Comcast Cable Communications, LLC. The motion passed 6-0. 8b. Adopt 2006 Property Tax Levy, 2006 Budget, 2005 Revised Budget, HRA Levy for 2006, 2004 Fund Balance Allocations, and 2006 – 2010 Capital Improvement Program Resolution No.’s 05-178, 05-179, 05-180 and 05-181 Ms. McGann presented the staff report. Councilmember Santa thanked Ms. McGann for her work on the budget. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to: 1) Adopt Resolution No.05-178 approving the 2005 Property Tax Levy collectible in 2006, adopting the Budget for 2006, and adopting the Revised Budget for 2005; 2) Adopt Resolution No.05-179 authorizing the HRA Levy for 2006; 3) Adopt Resolution No.05-181 transferring reserves out of the General Fund; 4) Approve 2006 – 2010 Capital Improvement Program; and, St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 6 5) Adopt Resolution No. 05-180 approving an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Year 2000 to Year 2020 for the City per Minnesota Statutes, incorporating the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Year 2006 to Year 2010; approve summary resolution for publication. The motion passed 6-0. Mr. Harmening stated a lot of work had gone into the document the Council had approved and Ms. McGann had to made many improvements to the budget document. 8c. First Reading of Fire Department Service Fees Ms. McGann presented the staff report. Councilmember Santa asked for clarification of fee requirements to residents and if their required services would be affected. Chief Stemmer replied residents, for the most part, would not be required to pay a fee. State Statue says in the event of a hazardous incident, a resident could be responsible for a large hazardous materials release, which could result in a fee for a response. It was not the intent to charge residents for fire calls. State Statute allowed them to charge for railroad right of ways, public right of ways and hazardous materials and they had been doing that based on industry standards, not actual cost. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to approve first reading of an ordinance establishing Fire Department Service Fees and set second reading for January 3, 2006. The motion passed 6-0. 8d. Excelsior and Grand – Phase NW Preliminary and Final Plat of Park Commons East 4th Addition; Major Amendment to the Park Commons East Planned Unit Development for Final PUD approval for Phase NW. Location: 4730 Park Commons Drive, Case No.: 05-64-PUD & 05-65-S, Applicant: TOLD Development Resolution No. 05-182 and 05-183 Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs stated this had been a good process and to be talking about the final phase was amazing. Councilmember Finkelstein stated this process had been improved by neighborhood involvement and future developers could take a lesson from that to listen to neighbors. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution No.05-182 approving the Preliminary and Final Plat of Park Commons East 4th Addition. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 7 Bob Cunningham, TOLD Development, stated they were selected by the City in July of 2000 to work on this project. The redevelopment agreement had them wrapping up in the summer of 2007 and with approval this evening that would happen. He thanked the Council for their support. They were concerned in the beginning about owner-occupied housing and would only agree to 35 units in the redevelopment agreement. As of tonight, they had sold 228 units and were still going strong. Councilmember Brimeyer asked if the price points were consistent the others? Mr. Cunningham replied price points on the final phase were higher than the previous phases. Construction costs had escalated significantly over the three years, which was reflected in the pricing. Pricing on average was $40-60/square foot higher than Phase NE. They believed there was still a market and they were about 40% pre-sold on this building. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if the build out cost was about $275-300/square foot? Mr. Cunningham replied about $275/square foot on average. Councilmember Brimeyer stated having this come to fruition after the planning process was good to see. The motion passed 6-0. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution No.05-183 to approve a Major Amendment to the Park Commons East PUD granting Final PUD approval for Phase NW (Excelsior & Grand Phase NW) subject to conditions recommended by staff. The motion passed 6-0. 8e. Request of Julie L. Murphy for a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment from Industrial to Medium Density Residential; and a Zoning Map Amendment from General Industrial (IG) to Two Family Residential (R-3), Resolution No. 05-184 Location: 6300-6312 Cambridge Street, Applicant: Julie L. Murphy, Case No.: 05-50-CP and 05-51-Z Mr. Morrison presented the staff report. Steve Murphy, applicant, stated they had issues with the property because it was a non- conforming use. Last August the state changed the law with regard to rebuilding or repairing properties that have non-conforming uses. Mr. Murphy wanted to rezone the property and start the process to amend City ordinance to reflect current state law. A way to solve the problem would be to have a certificate of rebuild stating that the City would allow the building to be rebuilt, which was necessary to get financing on a non- conforming use property. He asked where the City was in their process to change the non-conforming ordinance? St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 8 Mr. Morrison responded they were continuing with his application to amend the zoning and comprehensive plan maps. They were also looking at the non-conforming ordinance. Last year the state had changed the law. Previously if a structure were destroyed by more than 50 or 60% the property owner couldn’t rebuild. Today under state law a structure could be rebuilt if it was destroyed or removed in its entirety. The City ordinance had not been changed to reflect the new law. Mayor Jacobs asked if the City’s ordinance was changed to reflect the change in state law, would it solve the applicant’s problem? Ms. McMonigal responded that state law supersedes City ordinance. Mayor Jacobs stated it wouldn’t change the status as a non-conforming use. It would enable him to rebuild. The issue was they couldn’t refinance or sell it. Mr. Murphy replied a mortgage company wouldn’t finance a property that could be worth a lot less than the money they were lending for it. Mr. Harmening stated State Law superseded City ordinance and it was not necessary for their ordinance to be amended to allow state law provisions to be enacted. Ms. McMonigal indicated they had asked the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance consistent with state law. They had also been advised by the Attorney that the state law spoke for itself and mortgage and insurance companies could research that. Mayor Jacobs asked if the change in State law solved this problem and the issue of refinancing? Councilmember Finkelstein believed as a result of the change in state law, city ordinance no longer met that and as a result mortgage companies were refusing to let them get insurance so they could rebuild. Mr. Murphy indicated they were refusing to grant loans. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if they changed the ordinance would they be creating a bad precedence? They had less than 10% industrial in the City and he had a concern. Mr. Jamnik responded the request was to conform the ordinance to the Statutes. The Statute provided more rights to owners. The ordinance change would eliminate any ambiguity. Councilmember Basill stated he didn’t have a problem looking at the ordinance to make sure it was conforming to state law. He couldn’t support the change. This had been industrial since 1959. It was zoned the correct way. State law had made it more advantageous to be non-conforming. The property should be more attractive to buyers and mortgage companies because they could rebuild if something happened. Prior to the law change, they weren’t. The applicant’s request to match City ordinance to State Statute was reasonable. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 9 Mr. Murphy asked the time frame to change the ordinance? If they try to sell the property, an appraisal would be done and state it was non-conforming. Ms. McMonigal responded they had asked the City Attorney to prepare a draft ordinance and expected to bring it forward in the next month. It would take 60 days for it to be in place. Mr. Murphy asked if the City at that point would be able to issue a rebuild certificate? Mr. Jamnik replied they would attach a copy of the State Statute on non-conformities to the certificate. If state law changed in a few years, the certification would change. They would not have staff warrant a commitment that this could be rebuilt for the term of the mortgage. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution No. 05-184 to deny the request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use designation from Industrial to Medium Density Residential; and, to adopt Resolution No05-184 to deny the request for a zoning map amendment to change the zoning designation from IG – General Industrial to R3 – Two Family Residential. The motion passed 6-0. 8f. First Reading of a Zoning Ordinance Amendment to create a category titled “Places of Assembly” and allow such uses in the C-1, C-2 and O zoning districts by Conditional Use Permit, Case No. 05-60-ZA Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report. Councilmember Omodt asked if there was anything related to the recently changed smoking ban that came into play with this and had there been any discussion with the County or other municipalities related to this? Ms. McMonigal replied no. She didn’t believe there would be any effect. Mr. Jamnik also believed there wouldn’t be an impact. Ms. McMonigal clarified if it is more than 50% of the area, it would be classified as a restaurant and fall under the restaurant rules. Mayor Jacobs stated this is potentially categorized as a private club and there was some language in the most recent pronouncement from the County about private clubs. It would be better to check. Mr. Harmening indicated staff could check between first and second readings. It was moved by Councilmember Finkelstein, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to approve first reading of Zoning Ordinance amendment, and set second reading for January 3, 2006. The motion passed 6-0. 8g. Authorization to Direct Staff to Prepare the Required Documents for a Deferred Loan to the Louisiana Court Limited Partnership to Assist with Capital Improvements at Louisiana Court Ms. Schnitker presented the staff report. Councilmember Omodt asked if it was a deferred loan to be paid back in 30 years? Mr. Locke replied yes, or under certain circumstances if they sold the property or refinanced it. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 10 Councilmember Omodt asked if the City expected to be paid back within those 30 years? Mr. Locke replied they needed to be clear that there would be several loans positioned ahead of this loan on the property; and that it will depend on how well the real estate market does and how well the project operates over the coming years. Councilmember Omodt stated he didn’t expect to see the money paid back. There was a strong discussion at study session that Council expected PPL to live up to their commitments to run a good project. Now six months later PPL created another crisis to deal with on a deadline, US Bank pulled out and now there was a new deadline. He would be voting against this, not because of the people that lived there, but because of his belief that this was throwing bad money after bad money. For all the money the City, County, Federal and State government put into this, they could have done a much better project starting from scratch. Councilmember Brimeyer didn’t believe any of them would vote for or against this because of the people living there. He didn’t know if it was throwing good money after bad or trying to leverage the position that they already had. Not doing this didn’t resolve whether or not they made a mistake in 1999. This project needs to be watched very carefully. It would have been nice to have a pro forma. Mr. Locke indicated they could share the pro formas as new ones are created. Regarding deadlines, they’re always tricky. It has been a struggle to keep things moving forward with the project over the last six months while a new partner has been sought. They were at a point, from a physical standpoint, where improvements were needed. Those improvements would benefit people living there today and the ability for the owners and the partners to make it a success, but also would protect the millions of dollars the City had lent to the project. There had been improvements with the new management team. One of the key pieces that had come out of the process was the level of commitment from the other housing funding agencies and their direct involvement. Councilmember Brimeyer stated if they didn’t provide the additional funding, it won’t get done and the development could get worse. They have a chance to salvage this now. Councilmember Finkelstein stated in 1999 the Council made a very difficult decision. The neighborhood had a number of deteriorating apartment buildings. The hope was to put them under common ownership and management would assist to get control of the situation. That hadn’t worked out the way they intended it to, but by walking away from it now and not putting in the $400,000, it would all go to heck and they would be left as one of the guarantors holding the bag. He suggested adding the following conditions: 1) PPL not to have the unilateral right to hire a general contractor. Previous money had been provided and there was a concern about the work that had been done. He preferred to see either ESIC (Enterprise Social Investment Corporation) and the City hiring the general contractor, or PPL hiring a general contractor, with the written approval of the City so they could ensure that they had someone doing this appropriately; 2) City assistance was conditioned on getting the money mentioned on pages two and three of the staff report. They were talking about using the $400,000 City loan to leverage 3.1 million, and he wanted to be sure they got the money if they were making a decision based on that; 3) Trying to expand a Meadowbrook model to Louisiana Court. PPL would agree that one apartment could be utilized for purposes of a “Meadowbrook” type St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 11 of collaborative where they could have after school programs, volunteers, a library or homework help. Ms. Schnitker replied that PPL had already taken the initiative to use one of the units and create a community center/room. They have a Vista volunteer and a part-time social worker. Councilmember Finkelstein asked for how long? Ms. Schnitker replied it had been close to two years. Councilmember Finkelstein suggested that be continued. Mayor Jacobs indicated his preference would be to have a community building police presence, which was something for the City to deal with. The relationship at Meadowbrook is a good model to use for having more passive, as opposed to an active police presence. That was something to be discussed in the future. Steve Cramer, Executive Director of PPL, noted that was the essence of the cooperative grant proposal that Ms. Schnitker alluded to and that the proposal included a restorative justice component. They hoped that funding would come through. It was collaboration between Perspectives, PPL and the Police Department. They took the initiative to write the grant and continue to look for opportunities to have a fuller range of activities. Mayor Jacobs stated he agreed with a lot of what Councilmember Omodt said, but disagreed that he did expect to be paid back. The City had a lot of money into this. He sensed their chances of recouping the money would increase rather than decrease, but recognized that there was a risk. Councilmember Finkelstein added under point number five where PPL was committing to participate in supporting and cooperating with a joint housing committee to prepare and monitor a five-year plan, he wanted to see that commitment in writing by a date certain, with a report to the City Council. City staff could determine details. Mr. Cramer stated they would be happy to provide it. Councilmember Santa stated this was one of the first issues she dealt with as a Councilmember. Things change a lot. They were all aware the chances for failure were high, everyone was going to work hard and there were going to be bumpy roads. Part of the issue was that the Council had not felt like they had gotten regular updates. She recommended Council be informed of the issues and be able to be more prepared to respond. Councilmember Basill also had concerns. He was glad to switch from US Bank to ESIC. The City would have to put up another $400,000, but were not giving up the position of being the first right on the mortgage. In return they would leverage about $3.1 million and would make about $1.7 million in improvements. If the property defaults, the City would benefit from the additional money being invested in the property and the City would retain control. The property would be valued at more than the $400,000 they put in. They had to be prepared for an exit strategy and know how to recapture the $400,000 if it didn’t go well. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 12 Councilmember Santa added this was an investment, but it was also a City asset and a part of their community. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if the conditions he suggested were reasonable to add as part of the negotiation process? Mr. Locke replied yes. Mr. Cramer also agreed. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein to approve Resolution No. 05-191 directing staff to undertake the steps required to utilize CDBG and TIF funds from the Park Center TIF District to finance a deferred loan for $400,000 to the Louisiana Court Limited Partnership, and prepare the necessary documents in accordance with the terms as discussed with the Council for approval, with the following additional conditions: 1) Either ESIC (Enterprise Social Investment Corporation) and the City hire the general contractor, or PPL hires a general contractor, with written approval of the City; 2) City assistance is conditioned on getting the $3.1 million (on pages 2 & 3 of the staff report); 3) PPL agree that one apartment could be utilized for purposes of a “Meadowbrook” type of collaborative where they could have after school programs, volunteers, a library or homework help. Councilmember Basill mentioned he had some reservations. He hoped this wouldn’t be coming back to the Council and that they ran it right. The motion passed 5-1 with Councilmember Omodt opposed. 8h. Resolution to confirm 2006 employee compensation Resolution No. 05-185 Ms. Gohman presented the staff report. Councilmember Brimeyer stated the idea behind car allowance was to compensate employees that needed to be on call and move around a lot without having to worry about mileage. He recommended the Council look at the policy regarding car allowances and why it was granted and not granted. Mayor Jacobs agreed it should be for people required to be on call at all hours. That was something they should look at. Councilmember Omodt shared the concern. The report said the reason was parity, but that didn’t address service to residents. He didn’t see a compelling reason for a car allowance. It was something that should be offset in an overall salary package for some of the positions. A $250/month car allowance was a $3,000/yr. raise. The parity argument didn’t speak to service to citizens. Councilmember Basill saw the service to the citizens in retention of employees. If other cities are doing this, to recruit and retain the best employees for the citizens and get the best service, they needed to be sure they were competitive. There were different tax implications for a car allowance and putting it into the salary that can make you competitive. The question was if they wanted to keep the best department heads in St. Louis Park. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3a - CC Minutes Dec. 19, 2005 Page 13 Mayor Jacobs asked if they wanted to wait on the car allowance issue? Councilmember Finkelstein didn’t believe that would be fair to the employees. He would like to see it added on to salaries and suggested this be studied further. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to adopt Resolution No. 05-185 confirming a 3% general increase for non-union employees, setting the salary for City Manager, updating the car allowance in the Personnel Manual and increasing Performance Program Pay for Paid-on-Call Firefighters for 2006. The motion passed 5-1 with Councilmember Omodt opposed. 9. Communications Mayor Jacobs indicated an open house would be held on January 12, 2006, from 4-7 PM at Benilde High School to discuss Highway 100. Councilmember Santa stated the annual New Year’s Eve party would be held at Oak Hill Park. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:50 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3b - SS Minutes Jan. 9, 2006 Page 1 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION January 9, 2006 The meeting convened at 6:33 p.m. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, C. Paul Carver, Paul Omodt, and Susan Sanger. Councilmember Phil Finkelstein arrived at 6:40 pm and Councilmember Loran Paprocki arrived at 6:50 pm. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt), Director of Finance (Ms. McGann), Director TSS (Mr. Pires), Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffman), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin), City Engineer (Mr. Brink), Fire Chief (Mr. Stemmer), Recreation Superintendent (Mr. Birno), Environmental Coordinator (Mr. Vaughan) and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). Others present: Gail Dorfman, County Commissioner District 3; Steve Kelley, Senator District 44; Steve Simon, State Representative District 44A; Ron Latz, State Representative District 44B; Mark Ruff and Stacie Kvilvang, Ehlers & Associates; John Choi and Stephen Bubul, Kennedy & Graven. 1. Legislative Issues and Priorities for 2006 Senator Steve Kelley began the discussion on priorities and concerns. Senator Kelley said the central business of the 2006 session will be passage of the bonding bill and the bill will be passed on time. Representative Ron Latz agreed with Senator Kelley’s comment regarding the bonding bill and stated in the end, the voters will judge us (the elected officials) on what is accomplished more than on the process. Representative Steve Simon said the bonding bill probably will be the centerpiece. City Manager Thomas Harmening said a sponsor would be needed to pass a bill that would allow homeowners to replace or upgrade relatively simple fixtures and appliances without obtaining an inspection permit. Director of Inspections Brian Hoffman discussed statutory requirements for permits, which should be in rules and not in the statutes. Mr. Hoffman said it should be done under the Minnesota Building Code, so that it would apply statewide. Senator Kelley suggested the City scope it out with the League of Minnesota Cities and see what they want to do. For Mayor Jacobs, the most important issue to be resolved from the Legislative Priorities Report for 2006 is the grade separated crossing at Highway 7 and Wooddale. Representative Latz said he is on the bonding committee, so he and Senator Kelley can sit down and figure out how best to handle this politically. Councilmember Basill said the EDA has been proactive on acquiring property in and around Highway 7 and Wooddale. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3b - SS Minutes Jan. 9, 2006 Page 2 Mr. Harmening asked the legislators for their support regarding transportation funding issues. Councilmember Sanger asked if anything could be done as part of the bonding bill to earmark money for a permanent solution for Highway 100. Representative Latz said earmarking has not been well received. He added that bonding is a short-term solution. Representative Latz would prefer to spend his energies defending the percentages of the amendment that would go toward transit. Fire Chief Stemmer discussed a fire surcharge, i.e., repeal the 0.5% fire insurance tax on residential and commercial properties and replace with a $5 surcharge on residential and $86 on commercial policies. The proposed surcharge would raise $20 million annually (as compared to $6.9 million collected under the current tax structure). Fire Chief Stemmer said the insurance industry favors the surcharge. Environmental Coordinator Jim Vaughan discussed pest control funding. County Commissioner Gail Dorfman said the bonding request on reforestation is for $20 million. In regard to eminent domain for redevelopment purposes, Mr. Harmening said the City of St. Louis Park goes to great lengths to avoid the use of eminent domain. Decisions to use eminent domain should be used at the local level by mayors and city councils, as opposed to a one-size- fits all approach at the state level. Senator Kelley said this year or next year a bill will pass, so the three legislators should figure out what to try to delete or what the League of Cities should work on to delete or amend in a bill so that the legislature can establish some general guidelines. Mayor Jacobs is concerned about lone holdouts. Senator Kelley replied we should ask if a bill passes, what it will look like. Councilmember Carver said we are not making an argument in opposition right now—and that is the job of the City Council. He said Hoigaard’s is the example of our restraint, we did not seek to take the two properties that held out, we redesigned around them. Mayor Jacobs said, unfortunately, we will get an inferior project because of it. Attorney John Choi said his advice is to stay very close to the League of Cities. Mr. Harmening asked the legislators for their support for the bonding request that DEED and MHFA are seeking. Mr. Harmening also requested legislators for support to not implement levy limits. In regard to St. Louis Park Family Service Collaborative—Cuts in Funding, County Commissioner Dorfman said one county collaborative would do a lot of the administrative work, which is federally funded; there will be a proposal for new governance. Councilmember Sanger would like to start a discussion on group homes and get the same ability as Minneapolis and St. Paul have to require those homes to be ¼ mile apart to avoid concentration of group homes on the same block. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3b - SS Minutes Jan. 9, 2006 Page 3 County Commissioner Dorfman announced that the County is prepared to install a traffic light at the intersection near Lennox Senior Center at no cost to the City. The County would like to do it this year. County Commissioner Dorfman said the Highway 100 closing should not coincide with the bridge work on Minnetonka Blvd. by Aquila. She will wait to hear from St. Louis Park Staff. Senator Kelley, County Commissioner Dorfman, Representative Simon, Representative Latz and Mr. Choi left the meeting at 7:32. 2. CSAH 25 Pedestrian Crossing Project Update – City Project No. 2005-1800 City Engineer Scott Brink informed the Council on the status and progress for the CSAH 25 Pedestrian Crossing Project. Mr. Brink said the tunnel, as opposed to a bridge, is slightly less. There have been no public meetings yet. Mayor Jacobs commented that the bridge is better. Councilmember Sanger said a tunnel would create safety issues. The consensus from the Council is to go with a bridge. Director of Public Works Mike Rardin said because the County is involved, a stipulation from the County would include a compromise for their participation—the County will require that the pedestrian crossings at CSAH 25 and Beltline/Ottawa be removed (i.e., not be a pedestrian crossing). Mayor Jacobs’ preference is to place a bridge as close as possible to Ottawa to provide a safer intersection at County Road 25 and Beltline, and he would like to connect the trails too, but both probably cannot be accomplished with one bridge. Most of all, Mayor Jacobs wants a safe intersection at Ottawa. Mr. Harmening said we can do that - it just might be on our nickel. Councilmember Finkelstein thinks both can be done. He said the City may lose County money but it can be designed so that the City can accept money from Three Rivers Park District and connect to the trail, and yet shift it to the east somewhat so we have that and the crossing at Ottawa. Councilmember Sanger suggested a wider median so that pedestrians could have refuge halfway across, then it wouldn’t be so bad if the bridge is closer to Highway 100. Councilmember Basill said we must have public input meetings. Mr. Harmening said this item will come back for more discussion. Councilmember Carver requested cost figures for each of the choices. Staff will return with information. 3. Tax Increment Financing 101 Director of Finance Jean McGann introduced Mark Ruff from Ehlers & Associates. Mr. Ruff was accompanied by Stacie Kvilvang, also from Ehlers & Associates. Mr. Ruff provided a presentation on the basics of tax increment financing, i.e., the tools of tax increment financing and the policy issues. Stephen Bubul from Kennedy & Graven was present for the discussion. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3b - SS Minutes Jan. 9, 2006 Page 4 4. Tax Increment District Update Mr. Ruff reviewed the City’s financial condition, debt management and future value of the City’s tax increment districts. A City of St. Louis Park Executive Summary -- EDA Financial Plan report and a map of TIF districts were distributed to the Council. 5. Developer Background Checks Councilmember Finkelstein would like to do more to gather information on the backgrounds of developers. Economic Development Coordinator Greg Hunt assured Councilmember Finkelstein that Staff has the bases covered to scrutinize developers. Mr. Harmening said the three areas of concern he has been hearing are: The City’s financial risks associated with being involved with unsavory developers; the City’s reputation for being associated with a developer gone bad; or a project being half done. Mr. Harmening continued, the first and third scenarios are not really serious issues; in terms of the City’s financial risk (e.g., TIF) the way the deals are structured the City is not at a financial risk. Councilmember Finkelstein said when the City is using TIF money the City should put a higher degree of scrutiny on the project/developer. Councilmember Finkelstein would like more information on developers, (i.e., what they have done, background information, explanations about the companies and what they do), and get that information into the Council’s hands. 6. Agenda Planning Mr. Harmening asked the Council for comments to make meetings as productive and policy based as possible. Councilmember Sanger said it is draining to have so many controversial items on the same agenda. Councilmember Omodt said it was wrong to put out those who came to speak at a recent public hearing which lasted until midnight. Councilmember Carver said it does matter how late the Council convenes in terms of what treatment an item receives. Councilmember Sanger would not want to set time limits on items. She would prefer the Council receive more written information in advance, and don’t have Staff repeat what is in the written reports. Also, don’t give a summary of Staff reports but use the time on the agenda strictly for purposes of discussion and questions and answers about what has already been read. Councilmember Carver agreed, and Councilmember Omodt favors a general guideline. The meeting adjourned at 10:12 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 1 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA January 17, 2006 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 pm. Councilmembers present: Mayor Jeff Jacobs, John Basill, C. Paul Carver, Paul Omodt, Loran Paprocki and Susan Sanger Councilmember Phil Finkelstein was absent. Staff present: City Attorney (Mr. Scott), City Engineer (Mr. Brink), Community Development Director (Mr. Locke), Community Outreach Coordinator (Ms. McDonell), Director of Technology and Support Services (Mr. Pires), Human Resources Director (Ms. Gohman), Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Stegora-Peterson). 2. Presentations 2a. Annual Human Rights Award Mayor Jacobs presented the Human Rights Award to John Anderson, and Tom and Maureen Marolt. Councilmember Omodt added his congratulations to Tom and Maureen Marolt and thanked them for their work in the community. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Study Session Minutes of December 12, 2005 The minutes were approved as presented. 3b. City Council Minutes of January 3, 2006 Councilmember Paprocki indicated in item 5a, first paragraph the words “for” and “the” were transposed. The minutes were approved as corrected. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. 4a. Approve Resolution No 06-011 recognizing the Contributions of and Expressing Appreciation to Officer Mark Muckelberg St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 2 4b. Approve Resolution No 06-012 approving the Fifth Amendment to the Amended and Restated Contract for Private Redevelopment by and between St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority and City of St. Louis Park and Meridian Properties Real Estate Development LLC dated July 23, 2001; and the Subordination Agreement between U.S. Bank National Association, the City of St. Louis Park, the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, and Excelsior & Grand III LLC relative to Phase NW of the Excelsior and Grand redevelopment project. 4c. Approve Resolution No 06-013 authorizing lawful gambling premises permit license for VFW Post 5632 operating at the Frank Lundberg American Legion Post 282, 5605 West 36th Street. 4d. Approve Resolution No’s 06-014 and 06-015 to reconvey tax forfeit property at 2005 Louisiana Ave S and 2715 Monterey Ave S. to the City of St. Louis Park. 4e. Moved to Agenda Item 8a - Bid Tab Meshed Wireless Broadband Network. 4f. Approve Resolution No. 06-016 Accepting Work from Frattalone Paving Inc. for Reconstruction of Cedar Knoll Park/Carlson Field Parking Lot City Project No. 20050050 Contract No. 120-05. 4g. Accept Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of September 14, 2005 for filing. 4h. Accept Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of October 26, 2005 for filing. 4i. Accept Housing Authority Minutes of October 9, 2005 for filing. 4j. Accept vendor claims for filing (supplement). It was moved by Councilmember Paprocki, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and Commissions – See Item 8c Mayor Jacobs moved item 5a to 8c. 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing to consider an intoxicating on-sale and Sunday sale liquor license for Steak and Ale of Minnesota. Inc, DBA Bennigans Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Sanger to approve an intoxicating on-sale and Sunday sale liquor license for Steak and Ale of Minnesota, Inc., DBA Bennigans, 6475 Wayzata Blvd. The motion passed 6-0. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 3 6b. Public Hearing to consider granting an off-sale liquor license to Woody Vines Enterprises LLC, DBA Vino 100, 5601 Wayzata Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. No speakers present. The public hearing was closed. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Carver to approve an off-sale intoxicating liquor license for Woody Vines Enterprises LLC, DBA Vino 100, at 5601 Wayzata Boulevard. The motion passed 6-0. 6c. Public Hearing on the Mn/DOT Trunk Highway 100 Temporary Lane Addition Project: State Project 2734-43 Mr. Rardin reviewed the project history. Tom O’Keefe, MnDOT Area Program Manager, and Wayne Norris, MnDOT Area Engineer, described the project. Mayor Jacobs stated the importance of Highway 100 to the City of St. Louis Park and clarified that this was a State project. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. Harlan Nelson, Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital, said there are in excess of 12,000 visits a day to the hospital and clinics and he supported this project. State Representative Steve Simon, 3000 Raleigh Av. S, stated there had been a lot of dissatisfaction with the pace of this project and changing dates. He credited MnDOT for stepping up, but urged the Council and citizens to ask MnDOT how the interim project would affect the final project. He feared MnDOT would build the interim project and it would affect when the final project will be built. Mr. O’Keefe stated they had worked with the City to make the assurances as iron clad as they could be. The full build project is scheduled for a 2014 letting. Since MnDOT proposed the interim project, they had added the full build to the list of advanced design projects and were working to get it ready for possible early letting in 2009. The advanced design list made it a strong candidate to keep it on the current schedule, it could advance the project. They were not proposing to build noise walls with the interim project. They were agreeable to the City’s suggestion as a condition of their noise exemption for this project, and they would start noise wall construction no later than 2015. MnDOT needs to acquire the right-of-way necessary for the full build project. A significant amount of grading and structures need to be built before MnDOT can construct the noise walls. The bridges and storm sewers are deteriorating and they estimated no more than 10-15 years of useful life, which would keep pressure on MnDOT to keep this project on schedule for no later than 2014. One commissioner couldn’t bind another commissioner to a course of action. Priorities and funding can change, so they were only able to go so far in offering commitments. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 4 Mayor Jacobs stated a group of representatives from St. Louis Park and Edina met with Commissioner Molnau and expressed the same concerns. It depended on what the Legislature did. It was important for the public to recognize that, but they needed to keep up the pressure. If the early letting process occurred, could the project be done earlier than 2014? Mr. O’Keefe replied yes, they were developing it for a potential letting as early as November 2009, with construction beginning in 2010. Samara Eugene, 2738 Utica Av S, stated this was a commuter fix, not a community fix. Utica did not have sidewalks and was in disrepair and she was concerned with construction traffic on the road. They had been waiting to repair the road with the construction. How much construction traffic would be on their road? Mr. Norris replied there would be periods of increased traffic on Utica Avenue. Their intent was not to have construction equipment use Utica at all. Ms. Eugene asked where traffic would be detoured when the Minnetonka exit is closed? Mr. Norris replied the traffic that normally used the access point on 27th would likely filter through the neighborhood. They were directing all detours to trunk highways and the project would be signed as such. They could not prevent people from finding their own way, so there would be increases in local traffic. Ms. Eugene asked what the estimated reduction in congestion at Utica Avenue and 27th at the on-ramp? Mr. Norris replied currently about 600-800 vehicles per day use the ramp in the peak periods. By adding 500-1000 vehicle capacity per hour, they expected to draw some of the traffic (currently using the local roads) back to the highway. Ms. Eugene asked what safety measures would be taken on their street without the sidewalks? At the minimum the City could block off the road during construction. Mayor Jacobs responded that was something they would need to take into consideration. Jack Moskowitz, 2764 Utica Av S, stated he was not in favor of noise walls being constructed. He also had concerns about the street disrepair. He referenced a letter to the state he believed was sent by Councilmember Sanger proposing a sound barrier and wondered if they had contacted residents on Utica. Mayor Jacobs responded there is a public process to determine if they build noise walls. Councilmember Sanger stated the issue of noise barriers could mean a wall or a berm. It was not her letter to the state. The city gave MnDOT a list with issues associated with construction of this project. One of the items raised was the issue of noise barriers, not a statement that they must be built. They wanted them included if that was what the neighbors wanted. Mr. Moskowitz hoped when the final project was done that the Utica residents would be contacted. Mr. O’Keefe replied when they do the full build project, they would propose a noise wall. A city may choose not to have it built. They have public involvement to show what it would look like and the city surveys the homeowners and makes a decision. Councilmember Sanger clarified it wouldn’t be only the houses on Utica Avenue, they would involve the larger neighborhood because other streets were also impacted. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 5 Les Wanninger, 5521 Warden Av, Chair of the Edina Transportation Commission, is currently in the process of doing a study of traffic in NE Edina/SE St. Louis Park. There is a lot of traffic in the area and a lot of complaints about traffic problems. They created a study advisory committee to represent those impacted and St. Louis Park had representatives. They were collecting data, analyzing it, prioritizing it and considering solutions. Highway 100 is nearly a parking lot during rush hour. People get off and cut through the neighborhoods: 30% of the traffic driving in this area is drive through and 70% of the traffic is generated by people who live there. Once Highway 100 is fixed, some of the cut-though traffic will remain on the highway and not drive through the neighborhoods. JC Beckstrand, 4386 Wooddale, member of the Edina Transportation Commission, stated the same thing was likely happening in other neighborhoods. He was grateful they were working with neighboring communities on this project. Anything they can do to reduce the traffic on residential streets would help. He was in favor of taking traffic off of residential streets and putting it onto the arterials and trunk highways and state highways. If that meant the interim project was a good project, then he was for it. Councilmember Basill thanked the residents for volunteering on this committee. State Rep. Ron Latz stated the importance of coming up with a long-term solution to the bottleneck at Highway 100. They had been encouraging MnDOT to commit to a permanent reconstruction, for the Legislature to find funding, and to make sure that the Highway 100 reconstruction remained a number one Metro priority. One of the results of the community pressure was the interim project. He was speaking in favor of the interim project because it would take some of the cut-through traffic off residential streets and improve the traffic flow generally throughout the Metro system. It needed to be done with great caution. It was important to stress this is only an interim and not permanent solution. They would continue to maintain the pressure and try to find State funding for the reconstruction. He encouraged residents to participate. Barb Overshaw, Twin West Chamber, stated they were speaking on behalf of the business community. In the fall of 2004, Twin West identified the Highway 100 bottleneck as their “pet project”, meaning it was their local and regional issue of greatest importance. It was the number one issue identified because of time lost in traffic, and time equates to the thousands of businesses as money. They were concerned about getting employees to and from work and about moving goods and services. This was a regional issue as well as a local issue. In March 2005, Twin West was instrumental in forming the Highway 100 Alliance to capture some attention and keep the heat on Highway 100. Members include the Twin West Chamber, the Edina Chamber of Commerce, Cities of St. Louis Park and Edina, and many concerned citizens, residents and business leaders. After many meetings, the Board decided in October 2005 to adopt an official Twin West position on the bottleneck. Lee Engler, Chair, Twin West Chamber, said Twin West supports the proposed Minnesota Department of Transportation temporary lane addition project for Highway 100 as described in the MnDOT Metro District Project summary from September 2005. Something needs to be done now. The temporary project will facilitate future completion St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 6 of the major reconstruction plan. Many components of the temporary fix are also part of the 2014 project. MnDOT has designated this project as an advanced design project which means, in Lieutenant Governor Malnau’s words, “makes Highway 100 among the very strongest candidates for advancement with new funding.” Ms. Overshaw stated they remain very committed to the final fix and advocating for long term and a permanent increase in transportation funding. A. Frances Thorne, 2910 Utica Av S, stated she was opposed to a noise wall being constructed. She couldn’t continue to live there if a wall was constructed. Mayor Jacobs stated it was not proposed in the interim project. There will be a discussion with residents about a noise wall when they do the larger project. Matt Berg, 2758 Utica Av, indicated Utica Avenue was one of the worst roads he had driven on. There is a problem with run-off and rain water accumulates in front of his home. The project keeps getting pushed back which was a detriment to property values. Traffic will be pushed onto these streets. Mr. Rardin indicated there were two issues, the street and the water main beneath it. The city needs to replace both of those. They were planning to do that in conjunction with the major reconstruction project that was originally scheduled for bid letting this fall. They were struggling with what to put in and if it would end up being torn up again. At this point, with the project being put into the advanced design phase, they should be able to answer those questions by the end of the year because they will know the geometric layout. Part of the question was what Utica Avenue on the west side of Highway 100 would look like. The original proposal had it as a frontage road, which was significantly different than it currently was. Mr. Berg stated the water that builds up on the street adds to the wear and tear. Councilmember Sanger indicated this concern had been raised for years. This was an issue listed on the letter to MnDOT. Mr. Berg believed that noise already exceeded state standards and by adding a third lane, it would create more noise. It was proven if they put up a noise barrier it would add to the value of the homes. Anthony Geier, 2901 Toledo Av S, expressed concern about the safety of the off-ramp and the sharp turn and also the merging of the northbound ramp from Toledo. Mr. Norris replied the northbound ramp from Minnetonka Blvd currently merges into a thru-lane. With this project, there would be three eleven-foot lanes, plus they would build an auxiliary lane between the entrance ramp and the exit ramp at 25 ½ to provide some distance that cars could weave in and out of the third thru-lane. Mr. Geier asked how people that lived there would access their garages? Mr. Norris replied they would not impact the existing alley. This would make it safer by building a portable barrier between Highway 100 and the existing alley. Mr. Geier stated a concern about the bridges being wide enough to handle three lanes, with fast moving traffic. Mr. Norris responded in their study on twelve-foot lanes versus eleven-foot lanes, there was little difference between the safety of operation. They compromised capacity by about 3% on the narrower lanes. The bridge will be painted St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 7 underneath a whiter color so when people approach them they don’t look so impending. The additional lane would reduce the incidence of stop and go traffic, which seemed to be the major issue on rear-end crashes along this segment of 100. By providing the auxiliary lane between the on-ramp from Minnetonka and the off-ramp at 25 ½, they were not forcing traffic to have to get into a thru-lane. They were giving some time to make that decision, which was safer. Mr. Geir was skeptical of this interim fix and didn’t believe it would solve their problems. Mayor Jacobs noted many people were concerned about three eleven-foot lanes underneath the bridges. Maybe they could have signs indicating that there were narrow bridges ahead. Dean Montray, 2644 Toledo Av S, asked if emission testing had been done? He was concerned about the emissions and wondered if it would become worse in his yard with the road moving closer? Mr. Norris responded in the Environmental Assessment Worksheet, they looked at the carbon monoxide levels existing and expected after the project is completed. Analysis indicated they would only see minor increases in carbon monoxide concentration. They were below the standards set by the Pollution Control Agency (PCA). The PCA reviewed their analysis and have given approval for the temporary project. He would provide the air quality standards to Mr. Montray. Mr. Montray also stated concern about the interim fix becoming the permanent solution. Mayor Jacobs replied many people had the same concern. MnDOT staff indicated the bridges had a limited lifespan and would need to be replaced, which may drive the final project. They will need to hold the Governor’s office, etc, to this and continue to make sure your comments are heard. Mr. Montray indicated he was stuck with a house that nobody wanted and he didn’t want to put money into it because they would take it anyway. Mayor Jacobs responded the date of the project been a “moving target” and difficult to predict. Steven Schachtman, 5402 Parkdale Dr, Minnetonka Terrace Apts, stated it is very difficult to get to their building during rush hour. During the time when Grove School was constructing their addition, there was a traffic problem. The other issue was entrance and exit. They didn’t want a sound barrier installed. He believed they should do the temporary project. There was deterioration and a tremendously large traffic problem. He suggested a stoplight be installed on Minnetonka Blvd at the bus stop, so people could cross safely. Another issue was the traffic exiting to Highway 100 when school gets out. Lee Cheerch, 2910 Utica Av S, asked if Utica would be opened as a thru-street? Mr. Rardin replied no, that wouldn’t be changed as part of this project. Ms. Cheerch stated MnDOT put in their driveway years ago and when it rains, the water accumulates in their driveway from Utica Avenue. It is especially difficult in the winter with ice. Utica really needed help with the water problems. Mayor Jacobs responded when they reconstruct the road that would be addressed. Mr. Rardin added assuming MnDOT went ahead with the geometric layout and they could work through those issues, St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 8 they would know where they were at for Utica. Then it was a matter of if they could reconstruct it sooner than later. At the least, they may be able to do part of it next year. Zack Rethlake, 3148 Salem, was concerned this was a “band-aid” approach and with the changes on the exit ramps to Highway 7. It would bring the road closer to the neighborhoods and the addition of stop lights would cause traffic issues on Highway 7, when there wasn’t one presently. Idling traffic on the ramp would increase pollution. He was also concerned about construction continuing for years. He had seen different plans and wondered which was the correct one? Mayor Jacobs asked if the work that was done in 2006 would need to be re-done? Mr. Norris replied this would be stage one of the major reconstruction project. They needed to have the cloverleaf removed so they could facilitate speeding up the major reconstruction project. The bridge on Highway 7 needed to go higher. On the east side they were proposing a diamond interchange. On the west side they were proposing a standard diamond. The future project called for signals at both of those locations. They were looking at feasibility of using non-signalized intersections (round-about designs). They could construct a standard diamond if the railroad bridge was not a barrier. This project reduced the bigger project construction time frame by approximately a half a year. Mr. Rethlake asked why they would clog up Highway 7 with more lights? Mr. Norris replied they were introducing the signals during the temporary lane project to facilitate safe movements. Mr. Rethlake asked if they were temporary lights? Mr. Norris replied yes, they were on wood poles. They would be replaced with permanent fixtures, with either signals or a roundabout. Councilmember Basill asked when the lights would be in and how long they would be there? Mr. Norris replied they were calling them temporary signals because they were mounted on wood poles in lieu of standard light poles. They did not want to invest money in signals for a short-term period. They expected the temporary signals to be in place and operating for no more than ten years. Mr. O’Keefe added if they went with the design that had been on the table to this point, there would be signals there after the full build project. They were looking at rounds about as an alternate, which would not require signals on Highway 7. Councilmember Basill wanted to be sure they looked at the ramp carefully to make sure they put as much distance between the road and the neighborhood as they could while still making a safe entry onto the highway. Has that been looked at and was there a way to configure it to put more distance? Mr. Norris responded with the future proposed reconstruction project, the intersection moved closer to Highway 100. Signals were in this location to provide a long enough left-turn lane to meet the demands for making the Eastbound 7 to Northbound 100 move. Mr. O’Keefe added they were still working on the plan and MnDOT would finalize it with the city by the end of the year so they could move ahead with right-of-way acquisition. Their goal was to have the full plan out in the fall of 2006. They had been working on the full plan for four or five years, now it was more tweaking. The plans displayed in City Hall were what they would move ahead with. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 9 Keith Robinson, 2575 Vernon Av, stated his concern was this was a temporary fix that would become the permanent fix. He did not have a lot of space in his back yard. With the changes to Highway 100 there will be increased noise, traffic and pollution and they will not be able to use their back yard. He believed they needed to push the state hard that this not be a temporary fix. Mayor Jacobs indicated they met with the Lieutenant Governor and pushed as hard as they could to let them know this wasn’t a permanent fix. The fix needed to include the bridges in the final plan. It came down to a question of money from the Legislature. Janet Weivode, 2750 Yosemite, stated a concern about the eleven-foot lanes under the bridges. Mr. Norris replied by narrowing the lanes, they provide some, even though minimal, lateral reaction to the bridge abutments in the median bridge piers. Ms. Weivode believed that twelve-foot was already tight and had concerns about the merging traffic. She wondered how the traffic merging on to Highway 100 would change and she was concerned about safety. Councilmember Sanger stated they had talked about how eleven-foot lanes would decrease rear end crashes, but hadn’t said anything about sideswiping crashes. What does the research show and is there a place in the Metro area with eleven-foot lanes on a freeway? Mr. O’Keefe replied there are regularly eleven-foot lanes through construction zones and those are often places where the barrier is flush with the lane. He didn’t know of anyplace with permanent eleven-foot lanes. They are fairly common on the East coast. The research they had seen suggested there was no real difference in safety between eleven-foot and twelve-foot lanes. The safety benefit was not gained from narrowing the lanes, it was from adding capacity. Tracy Joyce, 2855 Toledo Av S, asked if they went ahead with the temporary fix and make due, why would they ever spend their money here? Mayor Jacobs hoped they would do it because it was not a satisfactory fix for traffic or safety. MnDOT’s interest is to move traffic efficiently and safely and this wouldn’t cut it. They had spent a considerable amount of time and money on engineering and designing the final project and that is not done lightly. It needed to be done at some point because the bridges needed to be replaced with a more modern bridge. Mr. O’Keefe added they should see progress this year. They hoped to begin right of way acquisition in 2007. The intent was to get on the “fast track” schedule. Carol Becker, 27th & Utica, asked the cost of the temporary fix? Mr. O’Keefe replied about $5.5 million. Ms. Becker asked the permanent cost? Mr. O’Keefe replied $96 million. Ms. Becker how much of the money spent on the temporary project would have to be re- spent on the final project? Mr. Norris replied the temporary lane project is like phase one of the larger reconstruction projects. The $5 million they would spend on this project would reduce the overall cost of the major reconstruction, which would place it better on the list for advanced design projects. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 10 Gaylord Fries, 2742 Utica, asked if MnDOT had a studied traffic patterns on Highway 100 in six years? Mr. Norris replied they didn’t look at how much the traffic would go up in five to six years after this project is completed, but had looked at the demand for the roadway with the larger project. MnDOT estimates that to be in the range of 128- 130,000/day vehicles in the year 2031. It would probably be 5,000-6,000 vehicles/day. The temporary lane will function adequately for eight to ten years. Mr. Fries stated the Minnetonka bridge was hit last year and the concrete had hairline cracks in the sidewalk. He asked if they watched that? Mr. Norris replied they do bridge inspections every one to two years. If they warrant repairs, they do maintenance. These structures cause their maintenance staff a lot of time and effort and they would like to see them replaced as well. Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. Councilmember Sanger suggested adding in contact information for MnDOT officials on the city web site. Councilmember Carver asked what an advanced design project was and how many there were? Mr. O’Keefe replied they have tended to get money from the Legislature in fits and starts. When they get the funding allocation, the Legislature wants to see the projects under construction and if they don’t have projects ready to go, they were at a disadvantage. They decided to take projects to 30% of completion, which makes them ready for a design/build letting. It is an attempt to anticipate and be ready if they get funding increases. In the Metro area the current list has six projects. Councilmember Carver indicated in November there would be a proposed constitutional amendment to dedicate motor vehicle sales tax to transportation, which would include this project. Is this project more likely to happen if that amendment is passed? Mr. O’Keefe replied it was more likely to happen either on the 2014 schedule or earlier. That money by itself would not be enough to advance it to 2009 because it is phased in and because MnDOT gets a portion of that amount. Councilmember Carver asked if Highway 100 would be a detour when work is done on 62 and 35W? Mr. O’Keefe responded there would be times, including several weekends, when they will close 35W and/or 62 and Highway 100 would be the likely official detour. Councilmember Carver asked when the 62/35W work was scheduled? Mr. O’Keefe replied July 2006 and be completed in 2009. Councilmember Carver asked if the interim project went forward, at what intervals does MnDOT plan to come back and monitor levels of congestion, noise and air quality? Mr. O’Keefe responded they had continual data collection for traffic issues. They could report annually or on intervals the Council would like. For air quality and noise analysis, they will be doing an Environmental Assessment for the full build project and because they are advancing that design, they will be working on that over the next year or two and should see analysis in that time period. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 11 Councilmember Carver reviewed the options and asked about the appeal board process? Mr. Scott replied there is an appeal board process and even if the appeal decided one way or the other, the Commissioner of Transportation could ignore the appeal panel and do what they chose. Going to an appeal panel would be an unusual step. The City needed to act within 90 days one way or the other. Mayor Jacobs asked if that would have the impact of delaying the project? Mr. Scott replied correct. If the City did not consent to the project, it could not go forward until the other processes were completed. Mayor Jacobs asked if the city did not approve this project, would there be an appeal process. How long would that take? Mr. Scott was unsure. Mr. O’Keefe believed they would lose a construction season if they went through that process. Councilmember Sanger asked how MnDOT could help neighborhoods manage cut- through traffic? Does MnDOT have an ability to pay for law enforcement to help direct traffic in neighborhoods or other steps to help mitigate the side effects of cut through traffic? Mr. O’Keefe replied they are working with the city on a traffic study to understand the impacts. They are very difficult to forecast. They have weekly meetings during construction with the city to identify problems and possible mitigations for those problems. He was not aware of a situation where they have paid for additional local law enforcement to deal with changes in local traffic patterns. Councilmember Sanger asked if there is cut-through traffic, what steps could they take? Mr. O’Keefe replied most cities accept that the goal of the project is to reduce cut- through traffic in the long term. While there is some pain during the construction, in this case it is one construction season. To get that greater good of the reduction of cut- through traffic on a more long term basis, the city will need to accept some short term problems. They will work with city to identify signing and sometimes make changes in signal operations to help with traffic during construction. Councilmember Basill felt it was good for the community to know what they could and couldn’t do in this process. The only way they could have more control is if financially they were to try to support this project. They couldn’t do it without significant bonding, nor should they do it. Highway 100 serves much more than St. Louis Park and that meant that the burden should not come out of their residents, but should come out of the State. They needed the Representatives to keep pressure on that and that was the way they would get the permanent fix, which would take care of the things they were concerned about. Councilmember Paprocki asked if they acted within 90 days, would it give them a better chance at getting the project done this summer? Mr. O’Keefe replied their intention was to advertise for bids in mid March. It becomes difficult to advertise if they don’t have a response from the City. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 12 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public – None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Bid Tabulation: Pilot Meshed Wireless Broadband Network. Mr. Pires presented the staff report. It was moved by Councilmember Carver, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to authorize execution of a contract with Ingenious Network Solutions, Inc. (d.b.a. First Mile Wireless, Inc.) for the purchase of a pilot meshed wireless broadband network in an amount not to exceed $133,171.00, contingent upon execution of a pilot partnership agreement to deliver broadband access and public safety and service applications over a meshed wireless broadband. Councilmember Carver indicated he had already received calls from residents waiting to sign up for the service. Mayor Jacobs indicated he had also received similar comments. Councilmember Paprocki stated he had not seen an evaluation of the pilot project on the activities needed to be done. He was skeptical and wanted to be sure they did a good evaluation and made a good decision. Specifically he was interested in knowing 1) if they made high-speed internet more accessible to people who weren’t being reached before, and 2) if they signed up, and 3) if they were subsidizing current DSL and broadband users, and 4) to have a clear picture of who they were serving and at what cost. Mr. Pires replied the evaluation criteria was put together as part of the original study and they would add those items. The pilot neighborhoods were not randomly selected. They were in areas of town that met the criteria set by the Council. When they come back with the evaluation results, they will need to put it in that context to show how representative the neighborhoods were. Councilmember Paprocki requested the survey and the matrix in place early so when they do marketing and advertising they have the ends in mind. If they want to make this available to people who don’t have access, that they have a concerted effort to reach those people and not just take those who would sign up regardless. The motion passed 4-1, with Councilmember Basill opposed. 8b. Partnership to Deliver Broadband Access and Public Safety and Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Network Mr. Pires presented the staff report. Councilmember Basill asked if the city would help market this, help make it successful and service it. Mr. Pires replied correct. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3c - CC Minutes Jan. 17, 2006 Page 13 Councilmember Carver asked if City Hall was within one of the areas? Mr. Pires replied the boundaries were interesting and they would need to look from an engineering point of view where the coverage would be. Coverage depended on building densities, winding streets and a range of factors. They were hopeful City Hall would be covered by the pilot project as they were right on the edge of the boundary. It was moved by Councilmember Carver, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to authorize staff to negotiate and execute an agreement with Unplugged Cities for the provision of services related to a pilot partnership agreement to deliver broadband access and public safety and service applications over a meshed wireless broadband network, and to pursue negotiations with another organization that submitted an attractive response to the RFP in the event that a mutually agreeable contract cannot be reached with Unplugged Cities. Councilmember Omodt indicated he had a client involved and would be abstaining. The motion passed 5-0-1, with Councilmember Omodt abstaining. 8c. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to defer this item to a study session and bring it back to the next City Council meeting. The motion passed 6-0. 9. Communications Councilmember Paprocki reported Life Track Resources is holding an event on January 30th, 4:30 PM - 6:30 PM. He can be contacted for more information or see lifetrackresources.org. Mayor Jacobs displayed an award from America’s Promise Organization for being one of the seven best communities for kids in the State of Minnesota. Ms. Gohman noted there was a committee of community members planning a celebration of this award and there would be more to follow. Mayor Jacobs indicated that the Visioning Process was underway and events will be held on February 2, 5-9 PM at City Hall and February 12, 1-4 PM at the St. Louis Park High School Field House. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:13 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ City C lerk Mayor St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3d - SS Minutes Jan. 23, 2006 Page 1 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION January 23, 2006 The meeting convened at 7:12 p.m. Councilmembers present: John Basill, Phil Finkelstein, Paul Omodt, Loran Paprocki, Susan Sanger, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Councilmember C. Paul Carver joined via conference call. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Harmening); Community Development Director (Mr. Locke); Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt); Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin); City Engineer (Mr. Brink); Human Resources Director (Ms. Gohman); Management Assistant (Ms. Honold); Director of Parks and Recreation (Ms. Walsh), Recreation Superintendent (Mr. Birno); Manager of Buildings/Structures (Mr. Panning); and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). 1. Hoigaard Village Business Points Community Development Director Mr. Locke and Economic Development Coordinator Mr. Hunt presented an overview of a proposed redevelopment contract with Union Land II, LLC. Mr. Hunt said staff is still negotiating with the developer; therefore, the staff report discusses only the preliminary business points. Councilmember Finkelstein asked for a dollar amount for the remaining 75% of the pond’s construction cost, which would come from the City’s Development Fund. Mr. Hunt said the cost of the pond is about 1.25 million dollars. City Manager Tom Harmening said the redevelopment rate for the City has been much faster than the anticipated 25 to 30-year horizon. Councilmember Sanger asked why TIF is being provided for green space. It is her understanding that every redevelopment requires green space. The response was that some of the green space is related to the pond. Councilmember Sanger asked if there are any guarantees in the contract for the developer to finish all phases. Mr. Hunt said a letter of credit will be required. Councilmember Sanger asked about having a stronger look back provision. She would like to have the formula reviewed. Mr. Locke said the City will realize about $660,000 in park and trail dedication due to developer fees. 2. Aquatic Park Visioning Director of Parks and Recreation Cindy Walsh, Recreation Superintendent Rick Birno, and Manager of Buildings/Structures Craig Panning discussed the future vision for the Aquatic Park. Mayor Jacobs said he has heard complaints about the following: crowding, St. Louis Park residents not being able to get in, and 40-50 kids to a bus with only two adults to supervise. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3d - SS Minutes Jan. 23, 2006 Page 2 Councilmember Basill asked if there could be fewer groups per day and perhaps increase fees— to strike an equilibrium. Councilmember Sanger has heard complaints of too many groups being allowed in and that they are unruly and unsupervised. Mr. Birno said about 3,000 season passes were sold in 2005. Councilmember Omodt said not only is crowding a distraction but also the rowdiness. Ms. Walsh asked the Council if buses should be parked offsite, and the Council replied yes. Mayor Jacobs would like to resolve the discipline issues and supervisors must be highly visible. Mr. Birno remarked that a lifeguard floater position may be in order. Councilmember Carver said he is not convinced that it is a group issue, as in groups from somewhere else. He would hesitate to raise prices to solve behavioral issues. Mayor Jacobs agreed; address the behavioral issues directly. Ms. Walsh asked if the Parks and Recreation staff may survey residents as to what they would like to have available in the future. Mayor Jacobs said ask the residents what they want. Councilmember Paprocki would like to have more splash pads around town. Councilmember Sanger would to have a year-round, indoor community center for adults. 3. CSAH 25 Pedestrian Crossing Project Update City Engineer Scott Brink presented a report. Mr. Brink said staff met with representatives of Three Rivers Park District and Hennepin County. They agreed to a location further east and are still committed to the funding they had talked about previously. Mr. Brink said the County will tolerate a pedestrian crossing. From the staff report, Exhibit A, CSAH 25 Bridge Pedestrian Bridge Crossings (Preliminary), Councilmember Basill said Option 2 has more merit. Councilmember Finkelstein said he likes Option 2 using the “green line” going north. Like Councilmember Sanger, Councilmember Finkelstein would like to have a wide median at the pedestrian crossing for pedestrians to seek refuge and enough room for bikes. Mr. Harmening stated that Option 2 modified would be a range of costs of roughly $435,000- 585,000; and to include improvements on the CSAH 25/Beltline intersection would add another $150,000-250,000, therefore, the total cost would be about $585,000-835,000. Director of Public Works Mike Rardin suggested Council think of Option 1 and Option 2 as Location 1 and Location 2. Mr. Rardin said MNDOT may only spend money on MNDOT’S right-of-ways. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3d - SS Minutes Jan. 23, 2006 Page 3 Councilmember Sanger asked from where the funds will come from. Mr. Harmening said funds will come from the HRA levy which is intended to be used for infrastructure improvements, and money from park and trail dedication fees. Mayor Jacobs summarized that the Council favors the modified Option 2. Councilmember Sanger added: and “a bridge with stairs, if possible.” 4. France Avenue Turn-Back Councilmember Sanger introduced Sharon Abelson, who is the president of the Lake Forest Association. Councilmember Sanger said St. Louis Park should take back France Avenue only if it is agreed that improvements will be made. Improvements would include narrowing France Avenue enough to create space for a sidewalk and/or a bike trail. She said a concurrent commitment would be necessary and if no commitment, let’s not do it. Councilmember Sanger said a public process would be necessary to ask residents what to do with the whole thing. Ms. Abelson said it needs to be safer; to go anywhere in her area residents must use France Avenue. Ms. Abelson would like for St. Louis Park to take control of France Avenue and build a sidewalk on the west side. Mayor Jacobs and Councilmembers Basill, Finkelstein and Omodt want control of France Avenue. Councilmember Sanger does too, but can the public process be started to review options for improvements? It was the consensus of Council for staff to move ahead with the steps Mr. Rardin listed on page 2 of his report for this item. Mr. Harmening said staff will begin to work on the necessary agreements. Mayor Jacobs would like to know the status of the Comprehensive Sidewalk and Trails Program. As work on the next CIP begins, Mr. Harmening said from a policy perspective, staff can look at how to fit in improvements to France Avenue, i.e., planning, cost and a priority perspective. Councilmember Sanger said more police patrols would be needed for speeding. Mr. Rardin said probably later this year, he will bring back looking at a sidewalk along Ottawa Avenue and get away from the trail aspect. 5. Boards and Commissions Council discussed candidate appointments to various commissions with Human Resources Director Nancy Gohman and Management Assistant Marcia Honold. Councilmember Paprocki requested a matrix of who is applying and for what boards or commissions. Ms. Gohman went through the commission application and interview process with Council. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 3d - SS Minutes Jan. 23, 2006 Page 4 6. Administrative Services Department Update Mr. Harmening presented an update on the Administrative Services Department. Ms. Gohman said for communication purposes, the City has contracted with City Image for communications. Ms. Gohman said staff will return to the Council to report on internal discussions for Council input. 7. Future Study Session Agenda Planning Mr. Harmening and Council discussed study session agenda planning. Councilmember Sanger requested the Council get written information from NORC (Nurturing Our Retired Citizens) prior to any discussion. Councilmember Basill and Mayor Jacobs agreed. For the February 13th study session agenda, added a policy discussion regarding Wayside House and deleted the Whistle Quiet Zones Update. The meeting adjourned at 10:11 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4a - Partnership To Deliver Broadband Access Page 1 4a. Motion to authorize staff to execute an Agreement with Unplugged Cities related to partnership to deliver Broadband Access and Public Safety and Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Network in an amount not to exceed $26,000 BACKGROUND: At its January 17, 2006 meeting, Council authorized staff to negotiate a contract with Unplugged Cities for the provision of services related to a pilot partnership to deliver broadband access and public safety and service applications over a meshed wireless broadband network. This followed Council action of December 5, 2006 to authorize staff to advertise for bids and proposals for a pilot project for wireless high-speed Internet service at a cost not to exceed $280,000 with the intention of subsequently establishing a citywide wireless high-speed Internet service unless the results of the pilot study suggest that it is unadvisable to proceed further. This report relates to proposals to provide broadband access and public safety and service applications over meshed wireless broadband network equipment necessary to implement the pilot project. This proposal complements the wireless mesh network equipment and includes services to conduct the pilot program in 4 areas of the City. Staff has negotiated an agreement with Unplugged Cities to provide these complementary services for an amount not to exceed $26,000 during the pilot project. PILOT PROJECT: The pilot project includes several objectives, goals, and action steps. In summary, this pilot is intended to test many of the technical and operational conclusions of the wireless study and provide a platform to move to a city-wide implementation. Here are some of the highlights of what is included in proposed pilot project: • 4 residential areas • 1 business area (which is part of a residential neighborhood) • 1 multiple-dwelling building (apartment, condo, other) area • Public safety and public services application testing • Educational testing (e.g., Power School) • Test various City geographies / structures / current access to high-speed Internet • Pilot in each of the four wards • Encourage various private firms to participate • Refine plans and customer materials in anticipation of citywide implementation • The estimated time frame for municipal, educational, citizen, and business use of the pilot is March – May 2006 • Service to the Pilot areas is to continue through citywide build out (if directed by Council) without interruption • The estimated cost of a pilot project is approximately $280,000, which is provided through an internal loan from the Economic Development Fund • The pilot project is structured such that the investment would be carried forward and not duplicated in a citywide project. A citywide project is estimated to cost approximately $4.445 million • It is intended that all monies borrowed for a citywide project be repaid by only those who choose to subscribe to a wireless high-speed Internet service and municipal uses, not from general property taxes (i.e., those who use the service pay for it) St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4a - Partnership To Deliver Broadband Access Page 2 SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED: To achieve project objectives and goals, Unplugged Cities will provide the following services as outlined in the RFP: 1. Help Desk • Answer technical questions regarding: - Hardware - Wireless bridge problems - Cable issues - Wireless access - Software issues - Navigating the net and your computer - Log on issues • Provide 24 x 7 staff availability • Support billing inquiries • Provide bi-weekly reports 2. ISP Hosting • Provide and maintain servers • Provide and maintain ISP connection (redundant) • Incorporate disaster recovery • Provide physical facilities for back-office equipment • Monitor the network • Provide website content and links/keeping it current • Track customer sign-ins • Provide data file for St. Louis Park billing • Provide bi-weekly reports • Respond to subpoenas regarding consumer traffic • Account creation and maintenance • Email service and support • MAC address authentication and maintenance • Security practices • Email forwarding solutions • Roaming to/from other systems • Provide DCHP and static IP’s • Support of multiple connections (i.e. laptop, PDA, other) • Support of one-time visitors • Parental controls • Web page hosting 3. Network Operations • Provide 7 x 24 network monitoring • Conduct maintenance on back-office equipment & servers • Provide bi-weekly reports St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4a - Partnership To Deliver Broadband Access Page 3 4. Retail ISP • Lease network access from St. Louis Park on a per customer basis • Conduct sales and marketing • Operate the ISP business • Issue bills and collect payments • Respond to subpoenas regarding consumer traffic • Provide bi-weekly reports (service levels and customers) • Account creation and maintenance • Email service and support • MAC address authentication and maintenance • Security practices • Email forwarding solutions (upon termination of pilot, citywide implementation, or other domain changes) • Roaming to/from other systems • Provide DCHP and static IP’s • Support of one-time visitors • Support of multiple connections (i.e ., laptop, PDA, other) • Parental controls • Web page hosting 5. Shared benefits for Public safety-service applications. 6. Provide redundant access to the Internet. 7. Email forwarding (domain name change) FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS: The budget for the pilot project approved by Council is $280,000. The amount of $117,626 for equipment with First Mile Wireless reflects general consistency with the estimate for that equipment portion of the pilot project. The remaining budget amount was allocated for the project infrastructure and this management partnership agreement designed to deliver services during the pilot project. Staff is finalizing expenditures for the remaining infrastructure components of the pilot project, to which the balance of the $280,000 pilot project budget will be allocated. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above analysis of proposals and financial considerations, it is recommended that Council authorize staff to execute a contract with Unplugged Cities to deliver broadband access and public safety and service applications over a meshed wireless network during the pilot phase of this project in an amount not to exceed $26,000. The agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney and is attached. Prepared by: Clint Pires, Director of Technology and Support Services Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4a - Partnership To Deliver Broadband Access Page 4 AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES This Agreement is made on the 6th day of February 2006, between the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (“City”), whose business address is 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416-2216, and Unplugged Cities (“Contractor”) whose business address is 6041 University Ave NE, Fridley MN 55432. PRELIMINARY STATEMENT The City has adopted a policy regarding the selection and hiring of consultants to provide a variety of professional services for City projects. That policy requires that person, firms, or corporations providing such services enter into written contracts with the City. The purpose of this contract is to set forth terms and conditions to deliver Retail Broadband Access and Public Safety and Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Broadband Network. The City and Contractor agree as follows: 1. Contractor’s Services. The Contractor agrees to provide professional services as described in the response to the Request-for-Proposal For Partnerships To Deliver Retail Broadband Access And Public Safety & Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Broadband Network dated January 9, 2006. 2. Time for Performance of Services. The Contractor shall perform the services outlined in the response to the Request-for-Proposal For Partnerships To Deliver Retail Broadband Access And Public Safety & Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Broadband Network dated January 9, 2006 and complete them by the end of the pilot project estimated to be June 30, 2006. 3. Compensation for Services. City agrees to pay the Contractor for services as described in the response to the Request-for-Proposal For Partnerships To Deliver Retail Broadband Access And Public Safety & Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Broadband Network dated January 9, 2006. Compensation for these services shall be $6000 for a setup and initial programming fee and $5,000.00 per month for the months of March through June of 2006. The fee that the City will pay under this Agreement shall not exceed $26,000.00 unless agreed to by the City and the Contractor. 4. The Contractor, upon direction of the City, agrees to perform the following: A. Services detailed in retail ISP service as described in the response to the Request-for-Proposal For Partnerships To Deliver Retail Broadband Access And Public Safety & Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Broadband Network dated January 9, 2006 with limited sales and marketing efforts. B. City agrees to pay Contractor for extra services (beyond those described in 4 A above) by the Contractor or Special Contractors when authorized in writing by the City. 5. The City agrees to provide the Contractor with the complete information concerning the scope of the Project and to perform the following services: St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4a - Partnership To Deliver Broadband Access Page 5 A. Access to the Area: The City shall obtain access to and make all provisions for the Contractor to enter upon public and private lands as required for the Contractor to perform such work as surveys and inspections in the development of the Project. B. Consideration of the Contractor’s Work: The City shall give thorough consideration to all reports, sketches, estimates, drawings, and other documents presented by the Contractor, and shall inform the Contractor of all decisions within a reasonable time so as not to delay the work of the Contractor. C. Standards: The City shall furnish the Contractor with a copy of any design and construction standards they may require in the preparation of the report for the Project. D. Owner’s Representative: A person shall be appointed to act as the City’s representative with respect to the work to be performed under this Agreement. He or she shall have complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret, and define the City’s policy and decisions, with respect to the materials, equipment, elements, and systems pertinent to the work covered by this Agreement. 6. Method of Payment: The Contractor shall submit to the City, on a monthly basis, itemized bills for professional services performed under Section 4 of this Agreement. Bills submitted shall be paid in the same manner as other claims made to the City. A. Progress Payment. Contractor shall verify all statements submitted for payment in compliance with Minnesota Statutes Sections 471.38 and 471.391. For reimbursable expenses, if permitted in the response to the Request-for- Proposal For Partnerships To Deliver Retail Broadband Access And Public Safety & Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Broadband Network dated January 9, 2006, the Contractor shall provide such documentation as reasonably required by the City. B. Abandoned or Suspended Work. If any work performed by the Contractor is abandoned or suspended in whole or in part by the City, the Contractor shall be paid for any services performed on account of it prior to receipt of written notice from the City of such abandonment or suspension, all as shown on the response to the Request-for-Proposal For Partnerships To Deliver Retail Broadband Access And Public Safety & Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Broadband Network dated January 9, 2006. 7. Accuracy of Work. Contractor shall be responsible for the accuracy of the work and the utilization of all determinant data, and shall promptly make necessary revisions or corrections resulting from errors and omissions on the part of Contractor without additional compensation. If the date or materials furnished by the City, and used in the conduct of this work are found to be in error, incorrect, or inappropriate, the City shall direct Contractor to St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4a - Partnership To Deliver Broadband Access Page 6 modify, update, and/or correct the affected work product. All such corrective work performed by Contractor shall be considered to be additional services for which additional compensation shall be paid to Contractor on the basis of Contractor’s standard fees or actual costs incurred. 8. Project Manager and Staffing. The Contractor has designated Henry Camacho to serve on the Project. He shall be assisted by other staff members as necessary to facilitate the completion of the Project in accordance with the terms established herein. Contractor may not remove or replace Henry Camacho from the Project without the approval of the City. 9. Audit Disclosure. The Contractor shall allow the City or its duly authorized agents reasonable access to such of the Contractor’s books, premises, facilities, and records as are pertinent to all services provided under this Agreement. Any reports, information, data, etc. given to, or prepared or assembled by, the Contractor under this Agreement which the client requests to be kept confidential shall not be made available to any individual or organization without the City’s prior written approval. All finished or unfinished documents, data, studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, and reports prepared by the Contractor shall become the property of the City upon termination of this Agreement, but Contractor may retain copies of such documents as records of the services provided. 10. Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from February 6, 2006 through June 30, 2006, the date of signature by the parties notwithstanding. This Agreement may be extended upon the written mutual consent of the parties for such additional period as they deem appropriate, and upon the terms and conditions as herein stated. The Contractor and the City agree to negotiate in good faith with the Contractor to provide these services to the City should a full scale implementation of the Retail Broadband Access And Public Safety & Service Applications Over a Meshed Wireless Broadband Network project be approved by the city. Both parties acknowledge that the City may use the Contractor or any other service provider in its subsequent projects. 11. Termination. This Agreement may be terminated by either party by seven (7) days’ written notice delivered to the other party at the address written above. Upon termination under this provision if there is no fault of the Contractor, the Contractor shall be paid for services rendered and reimbursable expenses until the effective date of termination. If however, the City terminates the Agreement because the Contractor has failed to perform in accordance with this Agreement, no further payment shall be made to the Contractor, and the City may retain another contractor to undertake or complete the work identified in Paragraph 1. 12. Independent Contractor. At all times and for all purposes herein, the Contractor is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. No statement herein shall be construed so as to find the Contractor an employee of the City. 13. Non-Discrimination. During the performance of this contract, the Contractor shall not discriminate against any employee or applicants for employment because of race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4a - Partnership To Deliver Broadband Access Page 7 disability, or age. The Contractor shall post in places available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause and stating that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment. The Contractor shall incorporate the foregoing requirements of this paragraph in all of its subcontracts for program work, and will require all of its subcontractors for such work to incorporate such requirements in all subcontracts for program work. 14. Assignment. Neither party shall assign this Agreement, nor any interest arising herein, without the written consent of the other party. 15. Services Not Provided For. No claim for services furnished by the Contractor not specifically provided for herein shall be honored by the City. 16. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable. If any portion hereof is, for any reason, held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such decision shall not affect the remaining provisions of the Agreement. 17. Entire Agreement. The entire agreement of the parties is contained herein. This Agreement supersedes all oral agreements and negotiations between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof as well as any previous agreements presently in effect between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Any alterations, amendments, deletions, or waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be valid only when expressed in writing and duly signed by the parties, unless otherwise provided herein. 18. Compliance with Laws and Regulations. In providing services hereunder, the Contractor shall abide by all statutes, ordinances, rules, and regulations pertaining to the provisions of services to be provided. Any violation shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement and entitle the City to immediately terminate this Agreement. 19. Waiver. Any waiver by either party of a breach of any provisions of this Agreement shall not affect, in any respect, the validity of the remainder of this Agreement. 20. Indemnification. Contractor agrees to defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, and employees harmless from any liability, claims, damages, costs, judgments, or expenses, including reasonable attorney’s fees, resulting directly or indirectly from an act or omission (including without limitation professional errors or omissions) of the Contractor, its agents, employees, or subcontractors in the performance of the services provided by this Agreement and against all losses by reason of the failure of said Contractor fully to perform, in any respect, all obligations under this Agreement. 21. Insurance. A. General Liability. During the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall maintain a general liability insurance policy with limits of at least $600,000 for each person, and each occurrence, for both personal injury and property damage. This policy shall name the City as an additional insured for the services provided under this Agreement and shall provide that the Contractor’s coverage shall be the primary coverage in the event of a loss. The policy shall also insure the indemnification obligation contained in Paragraph No. 21. A certificate of insurance on the City’s St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4a - Partnership To Deliver Broadband Access Page 8 approved form which verifies the existence of this insurance coverage must be provided to the City before work under this Agreement is begun. B. Worker’s Compensation. The Contractor shall secure and maintain such insurance as will protect Contractor from claims under the Worker’s Compensation Acts and from claims for bodily injury, death, or property damage which may arise from the performance of Contractor’s services under this Agreement. C. Professional Liability Insurance: The Contractor agrees to provide to the City a certificate evidencing that they have in effect, with an insurance company in good standing and authorized to do business in Minnesota, a professional liability insurance policy. Said policy shall insure payment of damage for legal liability arising out of the performance of professional services for the City, in the insured’s capacity as the Contractor, if such legal liability is caused by an error, omission, or negligent act of the insured or any person or organization for whom the insured is legally liable. Said policy shall provide an aggregate limit of $1,000,000. 22. Records Access. The Contractor shall provide the City access to any books, documents, papers, and records which are directly pertinent to the specific contract, for the purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions, for three years after final payments and all other pending matters related to this contract are closed. 23. Ownership of Documents. All plans, diagrams, analyses, reports, and information generated in connection with performance of the agreement shall become the property of the City. The City may use the information for it purposes. Such use by the City shall not relieve any liability on the part of the Contractor. 24. Governing Law. This Agreement shall be controlled by the laws of the State of Minnesota. Executed as of the day and year first written above. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ______________________________ Attest: Mayor ___________________________________ ______________________________ City Clerk City Manager OWNER(S)/CORPORATION By____________________________ Its____________________________ St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 1 4c. Motion to adopt Agreement between the Friends of the Arts and the City of St. Louis Park Background Staff and representatives from Friends of the Arts met with the City Council at a study session in November to discuss the possibility of promoting arts and culture in our community. The proposal contained two components. The first was supporting Friends of the Arts in hiring a part time staff person as a means to further arts initiatives. The second component dealt with a community grant program which would allow neighborhoods and other community members to apply for funds for art projects in the City of St. Louis Park. The agreement before you at this time lays out the terms of our relationship with Friends of the Arts relative to bringing in staff resources. A future study session agenda item will discuss the details of the community art grant program. Funding for both of these initiatives is included in the City’s 2006 budget. Agreement with Friends of the Arts The attached agreement was drafted by staff with the help of our City Attorney and representatives from Friends of the Arts. At the time of the study session, the Council was supportive of staff working out an agreement which provided money to the Friends of the Arts to hire a part time staff person. The staff person will work to further the development of arts in the community by establishing and maintaining a website, re-activating regular communications with the community, undertake fundraising, maintaining a database of artists and resources for the arts and providing press releases regarding city art initiatives. The City of St. Louis Park will contribute $20,000 (in two payments of $10,000 each) for the year 2006. Friends of the Arts will find matching money to add to this contribution. This will not be a City of St. Louis Park employee. The person hired will be employed by the Friends of the Arts. Pending the success of this staff person, the City may choose to continue to contribute money in future years for this purpose. Recommendations Staff recommends approval of the agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and the Friends of the Arts. Attachments: Agreement Friends of the Arts Position Description Prepared By: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 2 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK AND FRIENDS OF THE ARTS THIS AGREEMENT, is made and entered into the 6th day of February, 2006, by and between the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation located at 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 (hereinafter referred to as the “City”), and FRIENDS OF THE ARTS, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation located at P.O. Box 26472, St. Louis Park, MN 55426, that is committed to supporting, promoting, and enhancing the arts in St. Louis Park. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park recognizes the need for providing greater coordination between Friends of the Arts, the City, the schools and the community at large. WHEREAS, Friends of the Arts promotes art events and related activities that create an awareness and appreciation for arts, and wants to hire a person on staff or as an independent contractor to further its development of arts in the community; and WHEREAS, the City finds that the availability of such services to its residents is desirable and serves a public purpose. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: Article I. TERM OF THE AGREEMENT Friends of the Arts shall render services to City in accordance with the set outcomes, for a period beginning on January 16, 2006 and ending on December 31, 2006 and continuing thereafter on an annual calendar year basis under the same terms and conditions unless either party gives written notice to the other by November 30 of any year of its intent to terminate the contract at year end. A. Services. Friends of the Arts shall provide the following services: 1. Promote the arts and art activities in St. Louis Park through the creation and implementation of a broad communications plan to include, but not limited to, the following: Establishing and maintaining a website; Re-activating regular communications with the community most likely in the form of a newsletter; Maintaining database of artists and resources for the arts; and Be in touch with the local press regarding city arts; 2. Serve as liaison between the City, schools, Friends of the Arts and the community on arts programming and issues in the city; St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 3 3. Promote and support the arts in St. Louis Park by fundraising and grant writing to financially enable all aspects of Friends of the Arts; 4. Administer arts programming by the end of 2006 that will be defined as the result of town meetings and community response; 5. Assist with community arts grant program as needed; 6. Coordinate volunteers for arts related activities in the city; 7. In the long term, define and create an “arts niche” for St. Louis Park in the Twin Cities/suburban creative landscape. 8. Friends of the Arts will provide for its own office space. 9. Provide a progress report to the City twice per year (once six months from the beginning of the contract and the second at the end of the year). 10. All of the above services shall be provided by Friends of the Arts in consultation with the City Director of Parks and Recreation or designee. B. Insurance and Indemnification. 1. Friends of the Arts shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officials, volunteers, employees, and agents, from any and all claims, causes of action, lawsuits, damages, losses, or expenses, including attorney fees, arising out of or resulting from Friends of the Arts (including its officials, agents, volunteers or employees) performance of the duties required under this Agreement, provided that any such claim, damages, loss, or expense is attributable to bodily injury, sickness, disease, or death or to injury to or destruction of property including the loss of use resulting there from and is caused by any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct of Friends of the Arts including its officials, agents, volunteers or employees. 2. During the term of this Agreement, Friends of the Arts shall maintain general comprehensive liability insurance in the following amounts: Bodily injury in the amount of at least $300,000 per individual and $1,000,000 for injuries or death arising out of each occurrence. 3. During the term of this Agreement, Friends of the Arts shall maintain property damage liability insurance in the amount of $100,000 for each occurrence. 4. Friends of the Arts shall name the City as an additional insured on the general comprehensive liability and property damage liability insurance policies and provide the City with certificates of said insurance. 5. Friends of the Arts shall carry Worker’s Compensation Insurance as required by the Minnesota Statute, Section 176.181, Subdivision 2. Friends of Arts agrees to provide the City with a certificate of said insurance. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 4 Article III. DUTIES OF CITY A. Consideration. The total annual obligation of the City for all reimbursement to Friends of the Arts in the year 2006 and each year thereafter will be in the amount of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000). B. Terms of Payment. Consideration for all services performed by Friends of the Arts pursuant to this Agreement shall be paid by the City as follows: 1. Two payments of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000) payable in February and August of 2006 and each year thereafter. 2. Payments shall be made by the City within thirty (30) days after Friends of the Arts’ presentation of invoices for services performed. Article IV. MISCELLANEOUS A. Independent Contractor. It is agreed that nothing herein contained is intended or should be construed in any manner as creating or establishing the relationship of copartners between the parties hereto or as constituting Friends of the Arts as the agent, representative, or employee of the City for any purpose or in any manner whatsoever. Friends of the Arts is to be and shall remain an independent contractor with respect to all services performed under this Agreement. Friends of the Arts represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing services under this Agreement. Any and all personnel of Friends of the Arts or other persons, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by Friends of the Arts under this Agreement, shall have no contractual relationship with the City and shall not be considered employees of the City, and all claims that may or might arise under the Workers’ Compensation Act of the State of Minnesota on behalf of said personnel or other persons while so engaged, and any and all claims whatsoever on behalf of any such person or personnel arising out of employment or alleged employment including, without limitation, claims of discrimination against Friends of the Arts, its officers, agents, contracts, volunteers, or employees, shall in no way be the responsibility of the City and Friends of the Arts shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, volunteers and employees harmless from any and all such claims regardless of any determination of any pertinent tribunal, agency, board, commission, or court. Such personnel or other persons shall not require nor be entitled to any compensation, rights, or benefits of any kind whatsoever from the City, including, without limitations, tenure rights, medical and hospital care, sick and vacation leave, Workers' Compensation, Unemployment Compensation, disability, severance pay, and PERA. B. Compliance with General Laws. Friends of the Arts will comply with all federal, state, and. local laws, rules, and regulations in performance of the services. The parties agree that this document shall be governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 5 C. Human Rights. Friends of the Arts will comply with all applicable laws and regulations including the following: 1. The Minnesota State Human Rights Act, Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 363. 2. Federal, state, and local affirmative action and equal employment opportunity principles. D. ADA. Friends of the Arts will comply with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and not to discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment of employment in its services, programs, or activities. Friends of the Arts agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the City from costs, including but not limited to damages, attorney's fees, and staff time, in any action or proceeding brought alleging a violation of ADA and/or Section 504 caused by Friends of the Arts. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all services, programs, and activities. The City has designated coordinators to facilitate compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, as required by Section 35.107 of the U.S. Department of Justice regulations, and to coordinate compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as mandated by Section 8.53 of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development regulations. E. TTY Requirements. Friends of the Arts agree to utilize their own text telephone, the Minnesota TTY Relay Service or Statewide *711 Service in order to comply with accessibility requirements. F. Data Practices. Friends of the Arts will comply with all applicable provisions of the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act, Chapter 13 of the Minnesota Statutes. G. Sublet/Assign. Friends of the Arts may not assign any portion of this Agreement, including the hiring of an independent contractor, except with the written consent of the City. The consent to assign this Agreement shall not be construed to relieve Friends of the Arts of any responsibility for the completion of the Agreement. H. Audit. The books, records, documents, and accounting procedures and practices of Friends of the Arts relevant to this Agreement, are subject to examination by the City and either the legislative or state auditor as appropriate, pursuant to Minnesota Statute 16C.05, Subdivision 5. I. Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire Agreement between Friends of the Arts and the City and supersedes and cancels any and all prior agreements or proposals, written or oral, between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof; any amendments addenda, alterations, or modifications to the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by both parties. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 6 Article V. TERMINATION A. This Agreement may be terminated by the City upon the giving of thirty (30) days written notice by the City to Friends of the Arts for reasons of nonperformance or documented unsatisfactory performance by Friends of the Arts, or because of shortfalls in City revenues. The Agreement may be terminated by either party for any reason pursuant to Article I. B. Upon expiration or termination of this Agreement, any unexpended and unencumbered funds provided to Friends of the Arts under the terms of this Agreement shall be repaid to the City, such amount to be agreed upon by the Chairperson(s)/Director of Friends of the Arts and the City’s Finance Director. C. Upon termination of this Agreement, Friends of the Arts shall be compensated for the services performed prior to notice of termination except for those services which Friends of the Arts failed to satisfactorily perform. D. The City reserves the right to cancel this Agreement at any time in event of default by Friends of the Arts of any provision of this Agreement. The City may take whatever action at law or in equity that may appear necessary or desirable to collect damages arising from a default or violation or to enforce performance of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have set forth their hands as of the day and year first written above. This agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney. FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK: Attest: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeffrey W. Jacobs, Mayor (seal) Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager FRIENDS OF THE ARTS Cynthia Walsh, Director of Parks & Recreation By: Susan Schneck, Co-Chair By: Jim Rhodes, Co-Chair St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 7 Arts Development & Planning Director – part time Job Specifications 1. Job Description Reports to Friends of the Arts board co-chairs and board directors in general. Primary Objective of Position Short Term: To promote the arts in St. Louis Park through the development and execution of a marketing/ communications plan, grant writing and fundraising in accordance with the mission and values of “Friends of the Arts.” Long Term: To define and create an “arts niche” for St. Louis Park in the Twin Cities/ suburban creative landscape. Essential Tasks • Continue development and execution of marketing /communications plan. o Membership database – cleanup, update and elaborate to include email, etc. o Artist database – cleanup, update and elaborate to include email, etc. o Edit, manage publication and distribution of newsletter at least 3 times per year to determined public. o Distribute press releases to Sun Sailor and other news agencies to be determined o at least monthly. (establish press / media list) o Distribute minutes and meeting notices to board members on a timely basis. o Distribute meeting notices to media list on a timely basis. o Continue development and updates of website to make it a key marketing and communications tool for Friends of the Arts. • Grant writing and fundraising to support, promote and enhance the arts in SLP. • Follow board plan to initiate fine arts programming for fall 2006. • Serve as consultant to Parks & Recreation and Community Education for arts programming, and liaison to Friends of the Arts for input on such programming. • Attend monthly Friends of the Arts meetings and serve as secretary to the board. • Coordinate volunteers for art related activities in the city. Maintain database of volunteer opportunities and community volunteers. • Serve as liaison to organizations and neighborhoods in St. Louis Park regarding arts advocacy or support. • Serve as historian to Friends of the Arts – update historical records. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 8 2. Qualifications Minimum Qualifications • Significant experience in marketing and communications. • Strategic and conceptual thinking skills. • Ability to motivate and inspire others. • Excellent communication skills; confident public speaker. • Strong project management skills. • Ability to work independently. • Non-profit and or public sector experience desirable. • Ability to establish and maintain a good working relationship with the general public, staff, City Council, Commissions, volunteer and community groups. • Computer experience including word processing and database management. • Experience creating flyers, articles and documents for publication. • Bachelor’s degree in related field or equivalent years of training and experience. • Ability to maintain a flexible schedule including attendance at evening meetings and weekend events. Other Desirable Qualifications • Website maintenance. • Knowledge of the St. Louis Park community. • Experience as a staff liaison to commissions, boards or community groups. 3. Job Status • “Employee” of FOTA • Part time • Exempt, salaried 4. Work Schedule / Hours • Approximately 20 hours/week • 12 months of the year • Flexible schedule, with some hours varying each week • At least 15 hours with a set schedule, so individuals know when to reach this person in the office. • Remaining hours worked during day, evening, or weekend hours, depending on the nature of the activities. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 9 5. Reporting Relationship • Report directly to FOTA Board co-chairs, Susan Schneck (primary) and Jim Rhodes. • Responsible to entire FOTA Board. 6. Salary • Approximately $20,000 year, depending on experience and qualifications. 7. Benefits • Flexible work schedule • Paid Time Off (vacation, sick, personal days, etc.) – 2 weeks/year on a prorated basis • Paid holidays – yes, same at City’s • Worker’s compensation – yes • Unemployment compensation – yes • Medical/dental insurance – none • Life insurance – none • Disability pay – none 8. Work Location/Office • To be determined • Office equipment & supplies provided – computer, phone, desk, supplies; access to printer, copier. 9. Documentation to Employee • At-will employee • Position funded in part by grant money; no promises regarding length of employment • Expectations regarding time commitment / hours worked St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 10 Arts Development & Planning Director Actions to Fill Position Action Target Completion Date Who Status Preparation Meet with Karen Atkinson of Children First 10/18/05 All Done Write job description 10/31/05 Susan Done Identify qualifications needed 10/31/05 Susan/ Barb/Sue Done Identify goals/expectations - 3 mo, 6 mo, 1 year 10/31/05 Barb/Sue Done Determine if position is “employee” or “independent contractor” 10/25/05 Barb Done Define job structure (PT/# hours, reporting relationship, work schedule, office, salary, benefits, how paid, etc.) 11/4/05 Barb/Sue/ Susan Done Determine target market & where to advertise; budget? 10/30/05 Sue/Susan /Barb Done Place article in Sun Sailor Susan In process Write ad 11/11/05 Susan Done Determine where candidates send resume – FOTA mailbox 11/1/05 Susan Done Place ads 11/18/05 Sue In process Candidate Identification Review applications/resumes against qualifications Identify top candidates “on paper” Interview Process Determine who will interview candidates, based on constituencies done Board Determine interview format: individual/panel, length, who assesses which skills done Board Develop interview questions: job-related, behavior-based, STAR model done Barb Coach interviewers Barb Find location to hold interviews done Schedule interviews with candidates & interviewers Barb/Sue St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4c - Friends Of The Arts Agreement Page 11 Decision Process Create candidate evaluation form for interviewers Barb Schedule decision meeting w/ interviewers Conduct decision meeting to select best candidate Offer job contingent on background check Background Check Check references Barb Physical/drug screen? (Check what City does) Orientation Introduce Director to key individuals; set up schedule? Educate Director on FOTA: history, future direction Set up work space for Director: desk, computer, phone, supplies, etc. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4d - Sprinkler Assess 4300 36 St Page 1 4d. Motion to approve Resolution establishing a special assessment for the installation of a fire suppression sprinkler system at 4300 36 ½ Street, St. Louis Park, MN 55416, rescinding Resolution No. 04-143 adopted December 6, 2004. Background: Ronald E. Clark, owner(s) of the commercial building at 4300 36 ½ Street, have requested the City to authorize the installation of an automatic fire suppression sprinkler system for the commercial building and assess the cost against the property in accordance with the City’s special assessment policy. Analysis: The special assessment policy for installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in existing buildings was adopted by the City Council in 1995. The City promotes the installation of fire suppression sprinkler systems and facilitates their installation to promote the general public health, safety and welfare within the community. The Building Code requires the installation of a fire sprinkler system due to major remodeling project of the building. The property owner will be hiring a contractor to install the sprinkler system throughout the building and bring it up to compliance with the current code. Based on the proposed work, the system qualifies for the City’s special assessment program. The property owner has petitioned the City to authorize the installation of the fire sprinkler system and special assess the cost of the installation. Sprinkler plans have been submitted and approved by City staff. The total eligible cost of the installation has been determined to be $39,236.00. An Administrative Fee of $196.00 will be added to the special assessment. Staff has determined that adequate funds are available through the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to fund this special assessment project. Attachments: Resolution Prepared By: Cary Smith, Fire Marshal Through: Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4d - Sprinkler Assess 4300 36 St Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 06-017 RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 04-143 AND AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT OF FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM AT 4300 36 ½ STREET, ST. LOUIS PARK, MN 55416 WHEREAS, Ronald E. Clark , the Property Owner at 4300 36 ½ Street have petitioned the City of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the installation of a fire sprinkler system in the building on the benefited Property; and WHEREAS, the Property Owner has agreed to waive their right to a public hearing, right of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the Fire Marshal related to the installation of the fire sprinkler system. WHEREAS, Resolution No. 04-143 adopted December 6, 2004 is rescinded and no longer current or valid. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1. The petition from the Property Owner requesting the approval and special assessment for the fire sprinkler system is hereby accepted. 2. The installation of the fire sprinkler system in conformance with the plans and specifications approved by the Fire Department and Department of Inspections is hereby authorized. 3. The total estimated cost for the design and complete installation of the fire sprinkler system is accepted at $39,236.00. 4. An administrative fee of $196.00 for processing shall be added to the special assessment. 5. The total special assessment against the property will be $39,432.00. 6. The Property Owners have agreed to waive their rights to a public hearing, notice and appeal from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by other statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4d - Sprinkler Assess 4300 36 St Page 3 7. The Property Owners agree to pay the City for the cost of the above improvements through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at five point eight percent (5.8%) interest. 8. The Property Owners agree to execute an agreement with the City and any other documents necessary to implement the installation of the fire sprinkler system and the special assessment of all costs associated therewith. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4e - Sprinkler Assess 4003 Wooddale Page 1 4e. Motion to approve resolution establishing a special assessment for the installation of a fire suppression sprinkler system at 4003 Wooddale Avenue, St. Louis Park, MN Background: Wooddale Evangelical Lutheran Church, located at 4003 Wooddale Avenue, has requested the City to authorize the installation of an automatic fire suppression sprinkler system for the commercial building and assess the cost against the property in accordance with the City’s special assessment policy. Analysis: The special assessment policy for installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in existing buildings was adopted by the City Council in 1995. The City promotes the installation of fire suppression sprinkler systems and facilitates their installation to promote the general public health, safety and welfare within the community. The Building Code requires the installation of a fire sprinkler system due to major remodeling project of the building. The property owner will be hiring a contractor to install the sprinkler system throughout the building and bring it up to compliance with the current code. Based on the proposed work, the system qualifies for the City’s special assessment program. The property owner has petitioned the City to authorize the installation of the fire sprinkler system and special assess the cost of the installation. Sprinkler plans have been submitted and approved by City staff. The total eligible cost of the installation has been determined to be $90,000.00. An Administrative Fee of $450.00 will be added to the special assessment. Staff has determined that adequate funds are available through the Permanent Improvement Revolving Fund to fund this special assessment project. Attachments: Resolution Prepared By: Cary Smith, Fire Marshal Through: Luke Stemmer, Fire Chief Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4e - Sprinkler Assess 4003 Wooddale Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 06-018 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION AND SPECIAL ASSESSMENT OF FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM AT 4003 Wooddale Avenue, St. Louis Park, MN 55416 WHEREAS, Wooddale Evangelical Lutheran Church, located at 4003 Wooddale Avenue has petitioned the City of St. Louis Park to authorize a special assessment for the installation of a fire sprinkler system in the building on the Benefited Property; and WHEREAS, the Property Owner has agreed to waive their right to a public hearing, right of notice and right of appeal pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Chapter 429; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the Fire Marshal related to the installation of the fire sprinkler system. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1. The petition from the Property Owner requesting the approval and special assessment for the fire sprinkler system is hereby accepted. 2. The installation of the fire sprinkler system in conformance with the plans and specifications approved by the Fire Department and Department of Inspections is hereby authorized. 3. The total estimated cost for the design and complete installation of the fire sprinkler system is accepted at $90,000.00. 4. An administrative fee of $450.00 for processing shall be added to the special assessment. 5. The total special assessment against the property will be $90,450.00. 6. The Property Owners have agreed to waive their rights to a public hearing, notice and appeal from the special assessment; whether provided by Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 429, or by other statutes, or by ordinance, City Charter, the constitution, or common law. 7. The Property Owners agree to pay the City for the cost of the above improvements through a special assessment over a ten (10) year period at five point eight percent (5.8%) interest. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4e - Sprinkler Assess 4003 Wooddale Page 3 8. The Property Owners agree to execute an agreement with the City and any other documents necessary to implement the installation of the fire sprinkler system and the special assessment of all costs associated therewith. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4f - Resolution Liquor License Renewals Page 1 4f. Motion to approve Resolution for year 2006 Liquor License Renewals for license year to run March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2007. Background: Renewal applications, liquor liability insurance certificates and license fees have been received from all of the City’s 39 establishments. As required in Section 3-70 (7) (e) of the City Code of Ordinances, all property tax payments for establishments are current. As required in Section 3-70 (g) of the City Code of Ordinances, establishments with on-sale intoxicating liquor licenses must meet the requirement of at least 50% of gross receipts attributable to the sale of food. Except for two establishments (Texa-Tonka Lanes and Bunny’s), all renewal applicants are in compliance. The City Clerk has notified these two establishments that their business operations must be modified as necessary over the next year to insure compliance with our ordinance when liquor license renewals are considered in 2007. Recommendations Staff recommends approval of Resolution for issuance of liquor license renewals for all applicants for the next annual term starting March 1, 2006 and ending February 28, 2007. Attachments: List of establishments presented for approval Resolution Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4f - Resolution Liquor License Renewals Page 2 2006 LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS Establishment Name Licensee Name Address Fee Al's Al's Liquor Store Inc. 3912 Excelsior Blvd $ 7,500 American Legion Frank Lundberg American Legion 5605 36th St W $ 500 Applebee's Grill Bar Apple American Ltd 8332 Hwy 7 $ 7,700 Best of India Best of India 8120 Minnetonka Blvd $ 2,750 Bunny's * Rackner Inc. 5916 Excelsior Blvd $ 7,700 Byerly's St. Louis Park Byerly's Inc. 3777 Park Ctr Blvd $ 2,750 Byerly's Wine & Spirits Byerly Beverages, Inc. 3785 Park Ctr Blvd $ 200 Chili's Southwest Grill & Bar Chili's of MN Inc. 5245 Wayzata Blvd $ 7,700 Chin’s Asia Fresh Leeann Chin, Inc. 8332 Hwy 7 $ 2,750 Chipotle Mexican Grill Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. 5480 Excelsior Blvd $ 2,750 Costco Wholesale #377 Costco Wholesale Corp. 5801 W 16th St $ 200 Cub Foods Knollwood Jerry's Enterprises, Inc. 3620 Texas Ave S $ 50 Doubletree Park Place Hotel DT Management Inc. 1500 Park Place Blvd $ 7,700 Europa ABG Restaurant Corporation 600 Highway 169 $ 7,700 Fuddruckers Fuddruckers Inc 6445 Wayzata Blvd $ 7,700 Grand City Buffet Inc Lan Feng 8914 Hwy 7 $ 2,750 Jennings' Liquor Store Jennings Red Coach Inn Inc. 4631 Excelsior Blvd $ 200 Knollwood Liquor Knollwood Liquor Inc. 7924 State Hwy 7 $ 200 Liquor Barrel, Inc. Miracle Mile Liquor Barrel 5111 Excelsior Blvd $ 200 Marriott Mpls West CSM Lodging Services, Inc. 9970 Wayzata Blvd $ 7,700 McCoy's Public House McCoy's of Minneapolis, Inc. 3801 Grand Way $ 7,700 Minneapolis Golf Club Mpls Golf Club 2001 Flag Ave S $ 700 Olive Garden #1424 GMRI Inc. 5235 Wayzata Blvd $ 7,700 Park Tavern Lounge & Lanes Philips Investment Co. 3401 Louisiana Ave S $ 7,700 Sam's Club #6318 Sam's West Inc. 3745 Louisiana Ave S $ 250 Santorini's B & A Inc. 9920 Wayzata Blvd $ 7,700 Shelly's Woodroast Brinda-Heilicher/St. Louis Pk 6501 Wayzata Blvd $ 7,700 St. Louis Park Liquors Nguyen, Lua T.K. 6316 Minnetonka Blvd $ 200 Taste of India Taste of India/St. Louis Pk Inc. 5617 Wayzata Blvd $ 2,750 Texas-Tonka Liquors Texas-Tonka Liquors Inc. 8242 Minnetonka Blvd $ 200 Texa-Tonka Lanes ** H.J.K.S. Inc. 8200 Minnetonka Blvd $ 7,700 TGI Friday's TGI Friday's of MN Inc. 5875 Wayzata Blvd $ 7,700 Thanhdo Restaurant Thanhdo Inc. 3005 Utah Ave S $ 2,750 Timber Lodge Steakhouse Timber Lodge Steakhouse Inc. 5500 Excelsior Blvd $ 7,700 Vescio's Italian Restaurant Vescio's of St. Louis Park, Inc. 4001 State Hwy 7 $ 2,750 Westwood Liquors FC Liquors 2 Inc. 2304 Louisiana Ave S $ 200 WineStyles Chateau Louis, Inc. 3840 Grand Way $ 200 Yangtze River Rest. Yangtze Inc. 5625 Wayzata Blvd $ 7,700 Yum, Inc. Yum, Inc. 4000 Minnetonka Blvd $ 2,750 TOTAL $158,750 * Gross receipts attributable to sale of food 49% ** Gross receipts attributable to sale of food 35% St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4f - Resolution Liquor License Renewals Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. 06-024 RESOLUTION APPROVING ISSUANCE OF LIQUOR LICENSE RENEWALS FOR YEAR 2006 March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2007 WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 340A and St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Chapter 3, provide for liquor licensing in cooperation with the Alcohol and Gambling Enforcement Division of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, and. WHEREAS, no license may be issued or renewed if required criteria has not been met, and BE IT RESOLVED by the City of St. Louis Park City Council that the applicants and establishments listed in Exhibit A have met the criteria necessary for issuance of their respective liquor licenses, and the applications are hereby approved for license year 2006 - March 1, 2006 to February 28, 2007. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: ___________________________________ City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4f - Resolution Liquor License Renewals Page 4 Resolution No. 06-_____ EXHIBIT A 2006 Liquor License Renewals Establishment Name Address Type of License Al’s 3912 Excelsior Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale American Legion 5605 36th St W Club Applebee’s Grill Bar 8332 Hwy 7 Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Best of India 8120 Minnetonka Blvd 3-2 On Sale, Wine Bunny’s 5916 Excelsior Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Byerly’s St. Louis Park 3777 Park Ctr Blvd 3-2 On Sale, Wine Byerly’s Wine & Spirits 3785 Park Ctr Blvd Intoxicating Off-Sale Chili’s Southwest Grill & Bar 5245 Wayzata Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Chin’s Asia Fresh 8332 Hwy 7 3-2 On Sale, Wine Chipolte Mexican Grill 5480 Excelsior Blvd 3-2 On Sale, Wine Costco Wholesale #377 5801 W 16th St Intoxicating Off-Sale Cub Food Knollwood 3620 Texas Ave S 3-2 Off-Sale Doubletree Park Place Hotel 1550 Park Place Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Europa 600 Highway 169 Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Fuddruckers 6445 Wayzata Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Grand City Buffet Inc 8914 Hwy 7 3-2 On Sale, Wine Jennings’ Liquor Store 4631 Excelsior Blvd Intoxicating Off-Sale Knollwood Liquor 7924 State Hwy 7 Intoxicating Off-Sale Liquor Barrel, Inc. 5111 Excelsior Blvd Intoxicating Off-Sale Marriot Mpls West 9970 Wayzata Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday McCoy’s Public House 3801 Grand Way Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Minneapolis Golf Club 2001 Flag Ave S Intoxicating Sunday and Club Olive Garden #1424 5245 Wayzata Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Park Tavern Lounge and Lanes 3401 Louisiana Ave S Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Sam’s Club #6318 3745 Louisiana Ave S Intoxicating Off-Sale and 3.2 Off-Sale Santorini’s 9920 Wayzata Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Shelly's Woodroast 6501 Wayzata Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday St. Louis Park Liquors 6316 Mtka Blvd Intoxicating Off-Sale Taste of India 5617 Wayzata Blvd 3-2 On-Sale, Wine Texa-Tonka Lanes 8200 Mtka Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Texas-Tonka Liquors 8242 Mtka Blvd Intoxicating Off-Sale TGI Friday's 5875 Wayzata Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Thanhdo Restaurant 3005 Utah Ave S 3-2 On-Sale, Wine Timber Lodge Steakhouse 5500 Excelsior Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Vescio's Italian Restaurant 4001 State Hwy 7 3-2 On-Sale, Wine Westwood Liquors 2304 Louisiana Ave S Intoxicating Off-Sale WineStyles 3840 Grand Way Intoxicating Off-Sale Yangtze River Rest. 5625 Wayzata Blvd Intoxicating On-Sale and Sunday Yum, Inc. 4000 Minnetonka Blvd 3-2 On-Sale, Wine St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4g - Granite City Minor Amend Page 1 4g. Motion to adopt Resolution approving a minor amendment to a Planned Unit Development (Tower Place PUD) for exterior changes at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. (Timberlodge Steakhouse, now known as Granite City Food and Brewery). Case No. 05-75-CUP Background: Granite City Food and Brewery is currently planning to open a restaurant in the building formerly occupied by the Timberlodge and Minnesota Steakhouses. Prior to opening for business, Granite City plans to completely replace the existing façade and make modifications to the building’s footprint. The current request for a minor amendment to the Tower Place Planned Unit Development (PUD) is to replace the building’s façade. Granite City will begin work immediately on the façade changes if approval is granted. Granite City submitted a separate application for a building addition, which will be a Major Amendment to the PUD. The building addition will include an increase in restaurant seating area. The building will also be expanded to the east for a ‘brewery’; however, the primary brewing processes will take place off-site, and the on-site tanks will be used only for the final stage of the beer-production process. Granite City’s application for a Major Amendment to the PUD will be heard by the Planning Commission at its February 15, 2006 meeting. Analysis: The Zoning Code allows minor amendments to an approved PUD provided that the proposal does not increase density or required parking or reduce open space. The proposed minor amendment is consistent with the criteria, affecting only the building’s façade. At the present time, the Timberlodge Steakhouse façade is primarily brick and glass. Granite City intends to modify the façade to better fit the Granite City theme. The lower portion of the building will be constructed of cultured stone, above which will be a brick and glass façade that reflects the Granite City chain of stores. Granite City intends to reuse as much brick as possible from the existing Timberlodge Steakhouse. The architectural standards of the Zoning Code are met. As part of the exterior modifications, Granite City will also change the building’s signage. Changes to the signs will require a separate sign permit. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4g - Granite City Minor Amend Page 2 Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of a resolution approving a Minor Amendment to the Tower Place PUD for the purpose of modifications to the exterior façade of Granite City Food and Brewery. Attachments: Resolution Location Map Site Plan – Entire PUD Building Elevations and Future Floor Plan Prepared By: Adam Fulton, Associate Planner Reviewed By: Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4g - Granite City Minor Amend Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. 06-025 RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 02-084 APPROVED ON AUGUST 19, 2002 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 14:6-7 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED “O” OFFICE, C-2 COMMERCIAL AND R-C HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCE DISTRICTS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD AND HIGHWAY 100 Amends and Restates Resolution 02-084 Minor amendment to modify the exterior of the structure at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received on April 5, 1993 from the applicants, and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was mailed to all owners of property within 350 feet of the subject property plus other affected property owners in the vicinity, and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD Plan was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on May 5, 1993, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary PUD concept at the meeting of May 5, 1993, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the meeting of May 17, 1993 and continued the hearing until June 2, 1993 and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary PUD on a 6-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD at the meeting of November 1, 1993, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD on a 6- 0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments in the record of decision, WHEREAS, Resolution No. 93-183 approving the PUD was approved by the City Council on November 15, 1993; and St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4g - Granite City Minor Amend Page 4 WHEREAS, an application for an amendment for a PUD was received on July 26, 1994, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 94-103 approving an amendment to the PUD was approved by the City Council on August 1, 1994, and WHEREAS, an application for an amendment for a PUD was received on November 22, 1994, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 94-180 approving an amendment to the PUD was approved by the City Council on December 5, 1994, and WHEREAS, on June 17, 2002, Frauenshuh Companies filed an application seeking a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow a change in an approved use from a retail use to a restaurant use, and WHEREAS, on July 17, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, reviewed the application, and on a vote of 6-1 recommended approval of the major amendment to the PUD, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, and WHEREAS, on December 21, 2005, Granite City Food and Brewery, Ltd. filed an application seeking a minor amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Tower Place to allow modifications to the exterior of the structure, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff report on the proposed amendment including comments and exhibits, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Recitals The Recitals set forth above are incorporated herein and made part of this resolution. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4g - Granite City Minor Amend Page 5 Findings 1. Frauenshuh Companies has made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 14:6-7 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the “O” Office, C-2 Commercial and R-C High Density Multiple Family Residence Districts located at the northeast quadrant of Excelsior Boulevard and Highway 100 for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Lots 6 and 7, Block 1, Tower Place 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 93-18-PUD) and the effect of the proposed Final PUD and amendments thereto on the health, safety, or general welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that approval of a Final PUD and the proposed amendments thereto will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has determined that the proposed Final PUD and amendments thereto are in harmony with the general provisions, purpose and intent of the City’s Zoning Ordinance and its Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 14:6-7.2(E). 4. The contents of Planning Case File 93-18-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing and the record of decision for this case. Conditions and Approval A Final PUD at the location described in paragraph 1 of the above findings is approved based on the recitals and findings set forth above, the Approved Final Plans, and subject to the following conditions: 1. Approval of the roadway improvement plans submitted as part of the Indirect Source Permit application by the Minnesota Department of Transportation and the Hennepin County Department of Transportation. 2. Approval by the City and execution of a development agreement between the City and Frauenshuh Companies which identifies responsibilities of each relating to the project. 3. Recording of the final plat of Tower Place by Hennepin County. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4g - Granite City Minor Amend Page 6 4. The Contract for Private Development between the Economic Development Authority (EDA) and Frauenshuh Companies is incorporated herein by reference. City Council intent is to implement both the Contract for Private Redevelopment and the development agreement and give effect to all provisions of each, including but not limited to the EDA’s right to review and approve Construction Plans as provided in Section 9.2 of said Contract for Private Development. 5. The approval of this Final PUD applies only to those elements listed as Phase I improvements on Exhibit A – Master Plan Phase I to be completed by Frauenshuh Companies on Lots 6 and 7 and the right-of-way adjacent thereto up to the curb of the adjacent road. This condition is subject to the limitation that the total square footage of the retail and theater development shall not exceed the lesser of 47,200 square feet or the square footage allocated to this development in the Indirect Source Permit as may be amended from time to time. 6. The City reserves the right to require the applicant to install a pedestrian access from any bus stop to be located on the north side of Excelsior Boulevard west of Park Nicollet Boulevard to the development site. 7. Development of Lots 6-7 Tower Place and improvements on adjacent right-of-way up to the curb of the adjacent road shall be in accordance with the following exhibits: Exhibit A – Site Layout (Sheets C2.3) (Amended by Condition No. 11 approved 8-19-02) Exhibit B – Site Utilities (Sheets C3.3) Exhibit C – Site Grading (Sheets C4.3) Exhibit D – Site Planting (Sheet L2.3) Exhibit E – Site Lighting (Sheet E1) Exhibit F – Building Elevations (Sheets A2.00R, A.202R, A2.03R, A2.04R) (Amended by Condition No. 11 approved 8-19-02) The Site Layout (Exhibit A) is approved with the condition that vehicles leaving the site from the driveway on Park Center Boulevard shall be prohibited from making left turns to south bound Park Center Boulevard. The Development Agreement shall make provision for on-going monitoring of the need for the left turn prohibition and removal of the left turn prohibition if such monitoring indicates the prohibition is unnecessary. The Site Layout is based on the assumption the driveway on Excelsior Boulevard will allow both ingress to and egress from the site. The Floor Plans on Exhibit F are illustrative in nature and are subject to modification without amending this resolution. (Amended by Condition No. 8 approved 8-1-94) (Amended by Conditions 9 and 10 approved 12-5-94) 8. Condition number 7, Exhibit F is amended to delete Building Elevation Sheet A.202R and replace it with Building Elevation Sheet A-2 (Amended by Condition No. 9 approved 12-5-94) St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4g - Granite City Minor Amend Page 7 9. Condition number 8, Exhibit F is amended to delete Building Elevation Sheet A-2 and replace it with Building Elevations Sheet A-11 dated November 10, 1994. 10. Condition number 7, Exhibits A through D, is amended by deleting sheets C2.3, C3.3, C4.3 and L2.3 and replacing them with Sheets C2.1, C3.1, C4.1 and Planting Plan, all dated November 16, 1994. These exhibits are modified by Exhibit G, McDonalds Driveway Plan. 11. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 02-36-PUD) on August 19, 2002 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow a change in 3,500 sq. ft. of tenant space from retail to restaurant without intoxicating liquor (Chipotle) and add the following conditions: a. The site shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits (Exhibits A Site Layout and F Building Elevations shall be submitted), in the form of an as-built survey with proposed changes shown and shall be revised prior to signing the exhibits to meet the following conditions for the outdoor seating area on the southwest corner of the theater/mixed use building: 1. The outdoor seating area must provide a 5 foot wide sidewalk that is kept free of temporary and permanent obstruction. Such sidewalk must be 6 feet from and parallel to the building (or continue in a straight line from the sidewalk to the east). 2. The outdoor seating area cannot be enclosed with a fence. 3. A maximum of two existing handicap parking stalls may be removed to accommodate the outdoor seating area. 4. The size of outdoor seating area cannot be more than 10% of the indoor restaurant area. b. Official exhibits as revised per condition 11a. and updated to show as-built conditions on the overall site must be signed by the applicant and owner prior to issuance of a building permit. Such exhibits shall show the approved uses of this development to include: 7,000 square feet as restaurant with intoxicating liquor, 3,400 sq. ft as restaurants without intoxicating liquor and/or food service, retail/service, 3,800 sq. ft. as restaurant with in-vehicle sales/service, and in the Theater/Mixed use building 26,000 sq. ft. for a theater, 900 sq. ft for retail/service, and 5,900 sq. ft for retail or restaurant without intoxicating liquor. c. Required building, plumbing, electrical and other required permits shall be obtained from the City. Such permits may impose additional conditions. d. All required improvements shall be completed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the new restaurant without intoxicating liquor, including: 1. Interior improvements in accordance with permit approval. 2. Compliance with Accessibility Code requirements. 3. Exterior exhaust chase must comply with the MN State Building Code. e. Prior to installation of any new signs the applicant shall obtain sign permits. f. The applicant is responsible for the installation of the on-site regulation signage as recommended by SRF. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4g - Granite City Minor Amend Page 8 12. The final PUD shall be amended (Case No. 05-75-PUD) on February 6, 2006 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions to allow modifications to the exterior of the building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. and add the following conditions: a. The exterior of the building at 5500 Excelsior Blvd. shall be modified as shown on Sheet A200 of the official exhibits. b. Required permits for construction and installation of signs shall be obtained from the City. Such permits may impose additional conditions. c. Any modifications to the building footprint shall require a Major Amendment to the Tower Place PUD. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4h - Deputy City Clerk Designation Page 1 4h. Motion to approve resolution to designate Marcia Honold as the Deputy City Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk. Background: Nancy Stroth is the City Clerk for the City of St. Louis Park. It is important for the City to designate an individual of the City as the back up to the City Clerk for the purposes to handle matters as needed. This designation is needed so clerk’s business can be handled by someone who is authorized to act as the Deputy City Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk. Marcia Honold is the Management Assistant for the City and is able to act on behalf of the City Clerk in her absence. This resolution would extend this type of authority for clerk related activities within the City. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution to formally appoint Marcia Honold, Management Assistant, as the Deputy City Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk for the City of St. Louis Park, and is authorized to act as the City Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk. Attachment: Resolution Prepared By: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4h - Deputy City Clerk Designation Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 06-026 RESOLUTION DESIGNATING MARCIA HONOLD AS THE DEPUTY CITY CLERK IN THE ABSENCE OF THE CITY CLERK FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park City Council desires to designate Marcia Honold as the Deputy City Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Marcia Honold is designated as the Deputy City Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk for the City of St. Louis Park and is authorized to act as the City Clerk in the absence of the City Clerk. Passed and duly adopted by the St. Louis Park City Council this 6th day of February, 2006. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4i - Resolution MHFA Grant Application Page 1 4i. Motion to approve a resolution supporting the City of St. Louis Park’s application to the Minnesota Housing and Finance Agency (MHFA) for assistance in funding the citywide inspection – home rehab program Background: In May 2004, the City Council asked staff to continue the ongoing implementation of a citywide inspection rehab program based on the success of the Pilot Rehab Inspection Program of 2002-3. It was determined that the program should be repeated every four years. Four years has passed since the pilot project began. The program is based on a systematic survey of all single family properties to identify properties with significant exterior violations of the Property Maintenance Code. The program uses a carrot-stick approach to motivate owners to make property improvements; first Inspection Department staff contact residents regarding the violations and then a third-party housing rehab specialist provides technical assistance and information on financial tools available for low and moderate income households. See attached program overview. Please note that the financial incentives being proposed for this year’s program are the same as what we used in 2002/2003. The pilot program leveraged $300,000 of City housing rehab funds, with a MHFA grant of $210,000 and over $1,000,000 of private resident investment. Two hundred homes were identified and 93% of residents complied voluntarily, 21% of the resident used the deferred and discount loans, while 7% underwent legal actions with the city. City Inspection Survey 2005. In October and November of 2005, Inspection Department staff conducted a systematic survey of all single family residential buildings. A total of 213 homes were identified as having exterior violations to the Property Maintenance Code; • nine homes were identified with serious violations, compared to 50 in 2001; • another 90 homes were identified with secondary level exterior violations, • almost half the properties had violations to the garages only, and • 18 of the properties or 8% are non-homesteaded rentals, compared to 7% in 2001. The severity of required improvements to the properties is less than in 2001 and consequently the public funding required to address the properties is less. In the 2006 budget, $200,000 of City Housing Rehab Funds has been allocated for this program. Staff is seeking a MHFA grant for an additional $150,000. The application is due to the MHFA February 9, 2006, and requires a supporting resolution from the City Council. Recommendation: Staff recommends that Council approve a resolution supporting the City’s application to the MHFA. The City’s financial commitment if the project is fully funded is anticipated to be $175,000. The Housing Rehabilitation Fund is the proposed funding source. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4i - Resolution MHFA Grant Application Page 2 Attachments: Citywide Inspection – Home Rehab Program Overview Resolution Prepared by: Kathy Larsen, Housing Program Coordinator Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4i - Resolution MHFA Grant Application Page 3 Citywide Inspection - Home Rehab Program Overview Scope of Proposed Program 1. The target properties will be the 213 properties with exterior code violations that were identified through the Inspection Department’s citywide residential property survey in October/November 2005. Nine properties have significant exterior code violations compared to 50 in the pilot program and approximately 100 homes have lesser exterior code violations. Almost half the properties, 103, had violations to the garage only. 2. Residents will be advised about rehab improvements and financial tools in a two-step process. Inspections staff will meet individually with owners to identify needed improvements. This meeting will be followed up by an onsite meeting with a housing rehab advisor that would assist with rehab and financial advice. 3. Financial Assistance. MHFA income guidelines will be followed for this program, not only to provide consistency with other City rehab programs, but also to increase potential for MHFA funding. Since actual household incomes are currently unknown, data from the pilot program will be used to estimate the household incomes; ten percent of the pilot participants qualified and used the lowest income loan (deferred loan), and 11% of the pilot participants qualified for and used the discount loans. Based on this it is anticipated that • 10 residents will qualify and use the deferred loan for households with income at or below 50% of the median area income, or $38,500 for a household of 4. • 24 residents will qualify and use the MHFA loan for households with incomes at 80%and 115% of the median area income, or $58,000 and $89,000 respectively. The average loan amount is estimated to be $19,600 for the 34 low and moderate income participants. This is based on improvements costs in the pilot program, violations noted in 2005 survey and increased construction costs. This amount will allow for violation improvements and additional improvements. 4. Technical Assistance. Residents will be encouraged to access technical help to assist with determining work to be done, assistance with bids and bid review and construction assistance. Housing rehab specialists from the Center for Energy and Environment will provide this service. Financial Tools 1. The City will discount MHFA loans to 5% and 4% for owners with incomes of $89,000 and less and $58,000 and less respectively. The current MHFA loan is 7%, has a 20 year term and maximum loan amount of $35,000. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4i - Resolution MHFA Grant Application Page 4 2. A deferred “forgiven” loan for owners with incomes of $38,500 or less (4 person household at 50% or less of median area income), will be available. If low income residents remain in their homes for 10 years the loan will be “forgiven” otherwise it will be repaid when the owner sells the property. The repayment of deferred loans has not been included in the program costs. 3. Sub prime MHFA loans will be available to owners with “credit risk”. The sub prime loan has 1% higher interest rate than traditional MHFA loans and more flexible underwriting criteria. 4. Existing City rehab low-income grants and loans will supplement the program. Project Costs The table below shows the estimated program costs. The total program cost is $1,873,000. It is anticipated that residents will invest over $1,500,000 dollars. The grant application provides a one-to one match of City and MHFA monies, except the MHFA does not fund administrative costs. The total administrative costs are estimated to be just over $20,000. The City’s costs are anticipated to be $172,000 with a match of $150,000 from the MHFA. Citywide Inspection Home Rehab Program Projected Costs Activity Number $/action City MHFA Request Homeowner TOTAL Deferred Loan 10 $23,000 $115,000 $115,000 $0 $230,000 Cost to Discount MHFA Loan to 4% 12 $3,553 $21,318 $21,318 $0 $42,636 to 5% 12 $2,410 $14,460 $14,460 $0 $28,920 MHFA loans to residents 24 $19,600 $0 $0 $470,400 $470,400 Administrative costs (CEE) Rehab advisory visits 84 $135 $11,340 $0 $0 $11,340 Post Inspections 21 $70 $1,470 $0 $0 $1,470 Discount loan origination fee 24 $125 $3,000 $0 $0 $3,000 Deferred loan origination fee 10 $550 $5,500 $0 $0 $5,500 Resident investment w/o City loans 180 $6,000 $1,080,000 $1,080,000 Total Program Costs $172,088 $150,778 $1,550,400 $1,873,266 St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4i - Resolution MHFA Grant Application Page 5 RESOLUTION NO. 06-_______ RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK’S APPLICATION TO THE MINNESOTA HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY FOR ASSISTANCE FUNDING A CITYWIDE HOME INPSECTION-REHAB PROGRAM. WHEREAS, the City Council has established the following housing goals in 2005; ensure housing is safe and well maintained; preserve and enhance housing quality through proactive promotional and educations activities and housing programs related to home rehab, code, and design and safety issues: and WHEAREAS the proposed home improvement program is an implementation step to meet housing needs identified in the Vision St. Louis Park, the Housing Summit, City Comprehensive Plan, and Strategic Housing Plan; and WHEREAS, the City will leverage City Housing Rehabilitation Funds with other funds to ensure that low-income homeowners can implement deferred maintenance improvements; and WHEARES, the City’s total contribution to the program if fully funded by the MHFA is estimated to be $175,000; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the St. Louis Park City Council, Minnesota, supports the city wide home inspection rehab program application to the Minnesota Housing Finance Agency. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February, 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 1 4j. Motion to adopt Resolutions Imposing Civil Penalties for Liquor License Violations according to the recommendation of the City Manager. Background Liquor compliance operations were conducted by the St. Louis Park Police Department on November 25, November 26 and December 9th of 2005. Under the direction of Police officers, two underage buyers (18 and 19 yrs old) attempted to purchase alcoholic beverages at licensed establishments throughout the city. Ten of the city’s licensed establishments sold liquor to the minor. Citations were issued in each case and have been forwarded to Hennepin County District Court for consideration of criminal penalties. Administrative Process Pursuant to City policy and practice, administrative hearings were held to consider the violations. At those hearings the City Manager, City Clerk, and Lieutenant Chad Kraayenbrink reviewed each violation in detail and discussed preventive measures that could be taken to ensure that future violations do not occur. At the end of each hearing a fine was set. All license holders attending the hearings signed stipulations agreeing to the facts of their case and to accept the fine imposed. Eight were first time violations and fines were set at $1000 for each establishment. Two were second time violations and fines were set at $2000 for these establishments. The fines imposed and agreed to are per City policy. The establishments and fines set are as follows: Licensee Establishment Name Address Violation Date Fine Cub Foods Knollwood 3620 Texas Ave November 25, 2005 $1000 Fuddruckers, Inc 6445 Wayzata Blvd November 25, 2005 $2000 Grand City Buffet 8914 Excelsior Blvd December 9, 2005 $1000 Liquor Barrel Miracle Mile 5111 Excelsior Blvd November 26, 2005 $1000 McCoy’s Public House 3801 Grand Way November 26, 2005 $1000 St. Louis Park Liquors 6316 Minnetonka Blvd November 26, 2005 $2000 Taste of India 5617 Wayzata Blvd November 25, 2005 $1000 Timber Lodge Steakhouse 5500 Excelsior Blvd November 26, 2005 $1000 Winestyles 3840 Grand Way November 26, 2005 $1000 Yum, Inc. 4000 Minnetonka Blvd November 26, 2005 $1000 Council Approval If the City Council concurs with the City Manager’s recommendations, a motion to approve a resolution imposing the administrative penalty is required for each establishment. Payment of that penalty is due within 30 days of Council’s action. If the City Council disagrees with the Manager’s recommendation, a hearing will be scheduled for the Licensee to appear before the City Council for further consideration. Attached: Resolutions approving imposition of civil penalties Prepared by: Nancy Stroth Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 06-028 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION Fuddruckers, Inc. 6445 Wayzata Blvd WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at Fuddruckers located at 6445 Wayzata Blvd. in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $2000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. 06-029 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION Grand City Buffet Inc. 8914 Highway 7 WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at Grand City Buffet Inc. located at 8914 Highway 7 in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 06-030 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION Liquor Barrel, Inc. Miracle Mile Liquor Barrel 5111 Excelsior Blvd. WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at Liquor Barrel Inc. located at 5111 Excelsior Blvd. in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 5 RESOLUTION NO. 06-031 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION McCoy’s Public House McCoy’s of Minneapolis, Inc. 3801 Grand Way WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at McCoy’s Public house located at 3801 Grand Way in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 6 RESOLUTION NO. 06-032 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION St Louis Park Liquors Lau T.K. Nguyen 6316 Minneatonka Blvd WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at St. Louis Park Liquor located at 6316 Minnetonka Blvd. in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $2000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 7 RESOLUTION NO. 06-033 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION Cub Foods Knollwood Jerry’s Enterprises, Inc. 3620 Texas Ave. WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at Cub Foods Knollwood located at 3620 Texas Ave. in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 8 RESOLUTION NO. 06-034 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION Taste of India 5617 Wayzata Blvd. WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at Taste of India located at 5617 Wayzata Blvd. in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 9 RESOLUTION NO. 06-035 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION Timber Lodge Steakhouse Timber Lodge Steakhouse Inc. 5500 Excelsior Blvd. WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at Timber Lodge Steakhouse located at 5000 Excelsior Blvd. in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 10 RESOLUTION NO. 06-036 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION WineStyles Chateau Louis, Inc. 3840 Grand Way WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at WineStyles located at 3840 Grand Way in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4j - Resolutions Liquor Violations Page 11 RESOLUTION NO. 06-037 RESOLUTION IMPOSING CIVIL PENALTY FOR LIQUOR LICENSE VIOLATION Yum, Inc. 4000 Minnetonka Blvd WHEREAS, a liquor license violation, sale of liquor to a minor, occurred at Yum Inc. located at 4000 Minneatonka Blvd. in St. Louis Park; and WHEREAS, the license holder, has stipulated that the incident occurred and was a violation of the city liquor license ordinance Sections 3-73 through 3-75; and WHEREAS, The license holder was informed of the civil penalty process and has agreed to accept the administrative penalty as set by the City Manager and as approved by the City Council. NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, that a civil penalty of $1000 is hereby imposed on the license holder pursuant to City Code Section 3-75 payable to the City within 30 days of this action. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4k - Final Payment Cool Air Mechanical Page 1 RESOLUTION NO. 06-038 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON HVAC REPLACEMENT PD STATION – 3015 RALEIGH AVENUE SOUTH CITY PROJECT NO. 2005-1600 CONTRACT NO. 112-05 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated September 6, 2005, Cool Air Mechanical, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the replacement of the HVAC at the Police Station at 3015 Raleigh Avenue South, as per Contract No. 112-05. 2. The Director of Inspections has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the work. 3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. Original Contract Price $85,200.00 Change Order/Overrun .00 Previous Payments 80,940.00 Balance Due $ 4,260.00 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4l - Arbotect Elm Tree Injection 2006 Page 1 4l. Motion to designate Rainbow Tree Care, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and to authorize execution of a contract for the 2006 Arbotect 20-S Elm injection program at a cost of $12.15 per diameter inch. Background: Since its inception in 1990, the City has promoted public participation in this program designed to proactively treat healthy American Elms. A specialized chemical injection of Arbotect 20-S, a fungicide, is used in an effort to preserve the community’s urban forest. When this chemical is properly applied in an on-going three-year cycle, it effectively prevents the infection of Dutch elm disease in approximately 98% of the treated trees. Since 1990, the City has subsidized more than 6000 tree injections. As in previous years, the City is expecting more than 325 requests for tree injections. Last year the City subsidized 40% of the cost for all elm tree injections, regardless if the tree is located on private property or public boulevards. This year, the City will again subsidize 40% of the cost for trees on private or public property. The net cost of this program is expected to be approximately $45,000 (increased $5,000 from 2005) which is included in the 2006 Environmental Division budget. Bid Analysis: Bid packages for the 2006 Arbotect 20-S Elm Injection Program were mailed out in late December to three tree firms. Bids were opened January 26, 2006 at City Hall. Two firms submitted a responsive bid, with the amounts shown as follows: Rainbow Tree Care $12.15 per diameter inch S & S Tree and Horticultural Specialists Inc. $23.85 per diameter inch The $12.15 per diameter inch bid represents a $.30 per inch increase from the previous year’s contract. The price increase reflects an increase in the cost, to Rainbow Tree Care, of attaining the fungicide (chemical). If a private homeowner were to contract for Arbotect injections on their own, they would pay almost twice the rate the City receives. It appears that the City’s bid, based upon a volume price, is extremely competitive. Since the inception of the program, Rainbow Tree Care has conscientiously and successfully performed all the City’s Arbotect injection contracts. Recommendation: Staff recommends approving Rainbow Tree Care, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and authorizes staff to execute a contract for the 2006 Arbotect 20-S Elm Injection Program as a cost of $12.15 per diameter inch. Prepared by: Jim Vaughan, Environmental Coordinator Cindy S. Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4m - BOZA Minutes Sept. 22, 2005 Page 1 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 22, 2005 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals Committee conducted a regular meeting on Thursday, September 22, 2005, at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Members Present: Acting Chair Susan Bloyer Commissioner Paul Roberts Commissioner Henry Solmer Members Absent: Chair Ryan Burt Vice Chair James Gainsley Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Tara Olson, Community Development Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL Acting Chair Bloyer called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. APPROVE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMITTEE MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Roberts, seconded by Commissioner Solmer, to approve the following minutes: 1) Board of Zoning Appeals Committee public hearing and regular meeting minutes dated August 25, 2005. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Bloyer, Roberts and Solmer. Voting No: None. 3. CONSENT AGENDA None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMITTEE BUSINESS A. Case No. 05-54-VAR – The request by Jeff Royce and Nancy Tellet-Royce for a variance from the requirements of Sections 36-163(f)(5) of the ordinance code relating to zoning to allow a 21.93 foot front yard instead of the required 30 foot minimum for an attached garage for the property located at 2517 Huntington Avenue South. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4m - BOZA Minutes Sept. 22, 2005 Page 2 Staff believes that 3 of the 7 required criteria have not been satisfied for the proposed variance, and recommends approval of the enclosed Resolution denying the following requested variance: A variance to Section 36-163(f)(5) to allow a 21.93 foot front yard instead of the required 30 foot minimum for an attached garage for the property located at 2517 Huntington Avenue South. Commissioner Roberts asked if City Council has decided to review the ordinances in regards to corner lots setbacks. Mr. Morrison stated that presently staff is working on several code provisions and have met with City Council twice and received feed back to continue working on these provision which may take up to a year to fully revise. Acting Chair Bloyer stated the street layout of 25th Street is unique and would like to know if staff knows of similar layouts in the city with two houses per a block and having garages positioned directly in the front yard? Mr. Morrison stated this property is fairly unique because in most situations the house faces the side street. Also, it is common for a corner lot to have the narrow portion of the lot located on the side yard which would than be considered to be the front yard. This makes it difficult for building additions and fencing. With no questions, Acting Chair Bloyer opened the public hearing. Nancy Tellett-Royce, applicant of 2517 Huntington Avenue South, stated she has reviewed the staff report and disagrees with staff’s alternative recommendation of constructing a detached garage. She feels that constructing a detached garage instead of the proposed attached garage would impact her green space. Jeff Royce, applicant of 2517 Huntington Avenue South, submitted a letter (labeled Exhibit A) from neighboring residents agreeing and understanding their proposal of adding an attached garage. Mr. Royce stated that a detached garage would be the only detached garage in his neighborhood and he would likely not construct the garage if the proposal of an attached garage were denied. With no questions, Acting Chair Bloyer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Solmer stated he is in favor of granting the variance. He feels the visual impact is minor to the surrounding properties and is the most appropriate way to give the applicants proper use of their property and space. Commissioner Roberts stated the ordinance needs to be revised for such cases as this one. The ordinance doesn’t allow us to grant a variance for a situation like this when the legal alternative is going against the consistency of the neighborhood and the neighborhood character. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4m - BOZA Minutes Sept. 22, 2005 Page 3 Acting Chair Bloyer stated she feels corner lots tend to be unique depending on the house position and feels an attached garage will be in keeping of the neighborhood and is in favor of granting the variance. Motion by Acting Chair Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Solmer to approve Resolution 07-05 granting a variance to Sections 36-163(f)(5) of the ordinance code relating to zoning to allow a 21.93 foot front yard instead of the required 30 foot minimum for an attached garage for the property located at 2517 Huntington Avenue South. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Bloyer and Solmer. Voting No: Roberts. B. Case No. 05-56-VAR – The request by Elaine Mense for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-164(f)(5) to allow a 9 inch side yard instead of the required 3.3 foot minimum for an attached garage for the property located at 6712 Cedar Lake Road. Staff believes that 6 of the 7 required criteria have not been satisfied for the proposed variance, and recommends approval of the enclosed Resolution denying the following requested variance: A variance to Section 36-164(f)(5) to allow a 9 inch side yard instead of the required 3.3 foot minimum for an attached garage for the property located at 6712 Cedar Lake Road. Commissioner Solmer questioned if the 3.3 foot minimum is the existing clearance to the side yard because code requires 5 feet. Mr. Morrison stated that code does require 5 feet but there is an exception in the code that does allow add-on’s to a house at the existing setback. Acting Chair Bloyer asked staff the standard size of a single car garage? Mr. Morrison stated 12 feet is generally the width of a single and a double is generally 24 feet. With no questions, Acting Chair Bloyer opened the public hearing. Elaine Mense, applicant of 6712 Cedar Lake Road, stated she would like to replace her single car garage with a two-car attached garage. Presently, she is unable to gain access into her home through her present garage because a step will need to be constructed to allow her access into the house and the current single car garage will not accommodate a step along with a parked car. She stated that a constructing a two-car garage will allow convenience in the home during winter time and safety into her home during night time hours. Marlin Mense, applicants son of 6712 Cedar Lake Road, he stated he fears his mothers safety during the winter months of snow and ice build up and a possibility of her falling. Also, he fears during the night time she could become vulnerable. He would like his mother to be able to gain access into her home through a secure two car garage. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4m - BOZA Minutes Sept. 22, 2005 Page 4 Commissioner Roberts asked Mr. Mense if he thought about constructing the garage forward which would allow you to still park a car in the single car garage and construct a step to allow access into the home. Mr. Mense stated he thought he wasn’t allowed to construct anything past the front of the home. Mr. Morrison stated that 28 feet is an average, the existing setbacks of all the homes within 150 feet to the west and east of the applicant’s property. Commissioner Roberts asked Mr. Morrison if an option would be to reconstruct the single car garage forward a few feet. Mr. Morrison stated they are allowed to build as far forward as the average will allow and at this time he doesn’t have the average of the neighboring properties and at this time he is estimating. Also, he stated that if someone is interested in constructing in the front yard he does require a survey measurement of the neighboring front yards for him to get the averaging number for the neighboring front yards. Acting Chair Bloyer asked the applicants if they are able to remove the steps in the garage plans and create a different entrance into the home through the garage. Mr. Mense stated no unless he is able to lower the home several feet. Commissioner Roberts asked Mr. Mense if he is able to relocate the entrance to a different wall in the garage. Mr. Mense stated he is unable to relocate the stairs to a different wall because of the kitchen cabinets which are positioned along the interior walls and would cost more money to rearrange the kitchen cabinetry and appliances. Commissioner Roberts stated he wondered if there was a combination of relocating the stairway area to the rear of the house and constructing the garage several feet in the front yard. Mr. Mense would like to find alternative ways but is limited on what he can do. Jack Reay, 6716 Cedar Lake Road, neighboring property of applicant, stated that a 9 inch clearance between two properties is very small and fears the inability of being able to maintain the houses without trespassing. Also, he fears the height of the garage will block sunlight from his east living room window. He would prefer the variance to be denied. Faith McGowan, granddaughter of Jack Reay (6716 Cedar Lake Road) and Real Estate Agent, she feels that if the variance were approved her grandfathers property will decrease in value. With no questions, Acting Chair Bloyer closed the public hearing. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4m - BOZA Minutes Sept. 22, 2005 Page 5 Commissioner Solmer stated he feels that the garage will be positioned to close to the neighboring lot and agrees with staff’s recommendation to deny the variance. He suggested that the applicants could construct a covered walkway to assist on winter weather protection. Acting Chair Bloyer agrees with Commissioner Solmer to deny the variance. Motion by Commissioner Roberts, seconded by Commissioner Solmer to approve Resolution 08- 05 denying the variance to Section 36-163(F)(5) of the zoning ordinance to allow a 9 inch side yard instead of the required 3.3 foot minimum for an attached garage. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Bloyer, Roberts and Solmer. Voting No: None. C. Case No. 05-57-VAR – The request by Alan and Janice Silver for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-163(f)(8) to allow a 3 foot side yard instead of the required 6.5 feet for the construction of a screen porch for the property located at 4320 25th Street West. Staff believes that all 7 of the required criteria have been satisfied for the requested variance to allow a porch to be 3 feet from the side property line, and recommends approval of the enclosed Resolution approving the following requested variance: A variance to Section 36-163(f)(8) to allow a porch addition to be 3 feet from the side property line instead of the required 6.5 feet for the property located at 4320 25th Street West. Commissioner Roberts pointed out that staff findings #7 “The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty” was not completed, is staff in favor of the findings. Mr. Morrison stated that staff feels #7 findings has been met. With no questions, Acting Chair Bloyer opened the public hearing. Alan Silver, applicant of 4320 25th Street West, stated he agrees with staff’s recommendation to approve the variance due to his irregular shaped lot and would like to submit a letter of recommendation from his neighbor (labeled as Exhibit A) for the Board of Zoning Appeals to review. In addition, Mr. Silver would like to point out that in the future he would like to convert his screen porch to a family room/four-season room and hopes tonight’s decision will allow him to make these future changes. Commissioner Solmer asked Mr. Silver if he’s considered using a trapezoidal shape to the construction of the porch and if you needed more square footage add on to the length of the porch. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4m - BOZA Minutes Sept. 22, 2005 Page 6 Mr. Silver has considered other shapes to accommodate the property setback but would prefer to have a standard square porch. Also, he pointed that in order to meet the 6 ½ feet setback the angle of the porch would be extreme and odd looking. Mr. Solmer asked Mr. Silver if he knows how high the porch will be from the ground level or the amount of area space located underneath the porch. Mr. Silver stated the height of the porch will be about 9 feet in height. Mr. Morrison stated that the plans are approximating 9 feet in height. With no questions, Acting Chair Bloyer closed the public hearing. Commissioner Solmer stated he’s concerned that the application be specifically written for a screen porch and would like staff’s opinion if additional requirements are needed to accommodate a future family room/four-season room. Mr. Morrison stated that a screen porch is treated just like a regular addition but we can reword the resolution as an addition instead of a screen porch or keep with the original resolution and add a condition to allow the re-construction of a family room/four-season room. Commissioner Roberts stated he doesn’t agree with staff’s findings #3 “The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant”. Staff’s findings: As noted above, if the lot were a typical rectangular shaped lot, then a variance would not be necessary. While it may be difficult to say that a screen porch is a substantial property right, it is fair to say that the applicant is asking for a variance to allow a type of addition that is commonly done in the city, and typically does not require a variance because the typical lot in the city is rectangular in shape, not pie shaped. The applicant states that the fact that the property backs up to Twin Lake makes the ability to enjoy the lake a substantial property right. The home is a walk-out basement, and the applicant believes that hinders the ability to enjoy the views of, and interaction with, the lake from the main level. The applicant believes that the granting of the variance would preserve a substantial property right of this property by protecting the ability to enjoy the resource that gives this property its value. Staff believes this criterion has been satisfied. Acting Chair Bloyer feels this property is irregular-pied shaped and is in favor of granting the variance. Motion by Acting Chair Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Roberts to approve Resolution 09- 05 approving the variance to Section 36-163(f)(8) of the zoning ordinance to allow a 3 foot side yard instead of the required 6.5 feet for the construction of a screen porch with the condition that it may be converted to a four season space and that the area below the porch cannot be enclosed. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4m - BOZA Minutes Sept. 22, 2005 Page 7 Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Bloyer and Solmer. Voting No: Roberts. 5. Old Business None 6. New Business Commissioner Roberts would like staff to add an item of discussion about boundaries within a variance on the special meeting session with the City Attorney. 7. Communications None 8. Miscellaneous None 9. Adjournment Commissioner Roberts moved and Commissioner Solmer seconded the motion for adjournment. The regular meeting of the Board of Zoning appeals adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Tara Olson Community Development Secretary St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4n - BOZA Minutes Oct. 27, 2005 Page 1 MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2005 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals Committee conducted a regular meeting on Thursday, October 27, 2005, at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Members Present: Chair Ryan Burt Vice Chair James Gainsley Commissioner Susan Bloyer Commissioner Paul Roberts Commissioner Henry Solmer Members Absent: None Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Tara Olson, Community Development Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL Chair Burt called the regular meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. 2. APPROVE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMITTEE MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Solmer to make changes to the following minutes and resubmitted at the next meeting. 1) Board of Zoning Appeals Committee public hearing and regular meeting minutes dated September 22, 2005. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Burt, Bloyer, Gainsley, Roberts and Solmer. Voting No: None. 3. CONSENT AGENDA None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMITTEE BUSINESS A. Case No. 05-66-VAR – The request by Jody Hilleshiem for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-164(f)(12) of the ordinance code relating to zoning to allow a less than required 20 foot by 20 foot open lot area to be located in the backyard for the construction of a detached garage for property located at 4816 40th Lane West. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4n - BOZA Minutes Oct. 27, 2005 Page 2 Staff believes that all 7 criterions have been satisfied. Staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution #10-05 approving a 300 square foot open lot area instead of the required 400 square feet for the construction of a 20 foot by 20 foot two car detached garage based on the findings in the attached Resolution for the property located at 4816 40th Lane West. With no questions, Chair Burt opened the public hearing. Jody Hilleshiem, applicant of 4816 40th Lane West, stated she is in need of storage and would like to be able to park a vehicle inside during the winter months. She would greatly appreciate the board’s approval for her variance request. With no questions, Chair Burt closed the public hearing. Commissioner Bloyer stated she feels the grade change is a hardship and feels the applicant doesn’t have any other reasonable options. She is in favor of granting the variance. Commissioner Solmer stated the property is undersized for today’s current zoning requirements and the property does lack space. He is in favor of granting the variance. Commissioner Roberts agrees with Commissioner Bloyer and Commissioner Solmer. Motion by Chair Burt, seconded by Commissioner Roberts to approve Resolution #10-05 granting a variance from Section 36-164(f)(12) of the zoning ordinance to allow a 300 square foot open lot area instead of the required 400 square feet for the construction of a 20 foot by 20 foot two car detached garage for property located at 4816 40th Lane West. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Burt, Bloyer, Gainsley, Roberts and Solmer. Voting No: None. 5. Old Business None 6. New Business None 7. Communications None 8. Miscellaneous None St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4n - BOZA Minutes Oct. 27, 2005 Page 3 9. Adjournment Commissioner Bloyer moved and Commissioner Solmer seconded the motion for adjournment. The regular meeting of the Board of Zoning appeals adjourned at 7:17 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Tara Olson Community Development Secretary St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4o - BOZA Minutes Jan. 5, 2006 Page 1 MINUTES OF JANUARY 5, 2006 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals Committee conducted a regular meeting on Thursday, January 5, 2006, at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Members Present: Chair Ryan Burt Commissioner Susan Bloyer Commissioner Paul Roberts Commissioner Henry Solmer Members Absent: Vice Chair James Gainsley Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Tara Olson, Community Development Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL Chair Burt called the regular meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 2. APPROVE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMITTEE MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Solmer to approve the following minutes: 1) Board of Zoning Appeals Committee public hearing and regular meeting minutes dated September 22, 2005. 2) Board of Zoning Appeals Committee public hearing and regular meeting minutes dated October 27, 2005. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Burt, Bloyer, Roberts and Solmer. Voting No: None. 3. CONSENT AGENDA None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMITTEE BUSINESS A. Case No. 05-68-VAR – The request by Johnny White for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-163(f)(8) of the zoning ordinance to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches for property located at 2537 Inglewood Avenue South. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4o - BOZA Minutes Jan. 5, 2006 Page 2 Staff believes that 3 of the 7 criterion have been satisfied. staff recommends adoption of the attached Resolution #01-06 denying a 2 foot, 8 inch variance to the required 9 foot, 10 inch side yard for the proposed 22 foot by 13 foot one story addition based on the findings in the attached Resolution for the property located at 2537 Inglewood Avenue South. Chair Burt asked staff if the R-1 District standard of 75 feet for a minimum lot width is written incorrectly in the staff report. Mr. Morrison stated that Chair Burt is correct; the minimum lot width of this property should be 85 feet instead of the written 75 feet because it is a corner lot and an additional 10 feet is added to the minimum lot width. With no questions, Chair Burt opened the public hearing. John White, applicant of 2537 Inglewood Avenue South, stated he has lived at his current address since 1996. He and his wife, Betty, enjoy the community and take pride in the appearance of their property and have received compliments from others in the neighborhood. Mr. White stated he feels he has satisfied all of the 7 criterion required for a variance and would like to explain to the Board why. Criterion #1: Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of the lot, or where by reason of exceptional topographic or water conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional conditions of such lot, the strict applications of the terms of this ordinance would result in a peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in developing or using such lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the zoning district in which said lot is located. Mr. White disagrees with staff’s findings on criterion #1 and feels that his lot is narrow and being that his lot is a corner lot does limit the options he has to remodel the property. He points out that his lot is 5 feet narrower which does not meet the 85 foot minimum. He asks, if being below the width dimension standards isn’t a factor than why is there a code minimum? He also states, that a required 15 foot setback is required on the south side of the property which is a corner lot. He feels these two realities limit the options he has to remodel and if the lot met the 85 foot minimum than he would not being have a problem because the lot would be large enough to accommodate the submitted remodeling plans. Mr. White also disagrees with staff’s findings that the properties north of 26th Street West are typically the same or greater in width (75 – 115 feet), while those properties south of 26th Street West are typically smaller in width (40 – 60 feet). He feels the homes constructed south of 26th were constructed during a different era and time than those constructed north of 26th Street, and therefore his property shouldn’t be compared to those south of 26th Street. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4o - BOZA Minutes Jan. 5, 2006 Page 3 Criterion #3: The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. Mr. White feels that the granting of the request is necessary for the preservation and the enjoyment of a substantial property right. He asks, isn’t it important to be able to maximize the value of his property as long as it doesn’t hamper, impede or distract from any of the surrounding properties. He doesn’t feel his remodeling design will impose any of the above listed factors. He stated he feels the biggest property right is the enjoyment and the freedom of getting the full benefit of a well planed out remodel design. He feels that requiring property owners to blindly comply with the zoning ordinance that can’t possibly take into consideration that every lot dimension and remodel design is impractical. Criterion #7: The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty. Mr. White feels that there is a demonstrable hardship because he would be forced to cancel the remodeling plans. He feels this remodel is a very good design, is functional, has good real estate value and good logic. He feels that selecting the right plan isn’t so much as personal preference but good judgment. He explained that he and his wife have owned five homes two of which they built and feels the experiences he has developed from these homes has given him a skill of assessing good design. He feels the overall outcome of a good design or a bad design really becomes the responsibility of the property owner and he very much values his property and that is why they have hired an architect to assist with the design. Mr. White would like to point out that he has received three letters of support from his neighbors and he sat down with each of the neighbors and reviewed his proposed remodeling plans with them along with talking to the neighbors behind him and showing them where the remodel will extend out into the property. Mr. and Mrs. White would prefer not to move the addition over as suggested by staff because it will create a jog in the middle of the bedroom and encroaches on the living room window which is a focal point in the living room. Also, they would like to have southern light coming into the home and the only way they can have that is by having a door or window. Commissioner Solmer asked Mr. White if he has had his architect sketch alternative plans that do comply with the ordinance. Mr. White stated his architect has sketched staff’s recommended alternative plans but the undesired jog in the bedroom exists which makes it difficult for furniture placement and the resale of home. Also, an existing living room window would be lost by the encroachment of a wall and that would reduce sunlight and a view into the courtyard. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4o - BOZA Minutes Jan. 5, 2006 Page 4 Commissioner Solmer asked Mr. White if he has considered making the addition narrower. Mr. White stated he could make it narrower but he’s not sure it will look right let alone and the resale ability is very important to him. Commissioner Solmer stated he understands Mr. White’s concern but he is concerned about the impact on the neighbor. Mr. White stated he understands the impact on the neighbor but the neighbor stated he does not object to the addition. Mr. Solmer stated that even though this neighbor doesn’t mind a subsequent neighbor may have a different point of view. This addition will block views from their windows. Chair Burt asked Mr. White if he has the width of the proposed master bedroom on the north/south side. Mr. White replied that the north/south side wall is 13 feet. Chair Burt stated that he could construct a master bedroom at 11 feet wide and still have a window in the living room with a view to the courtyard. Chair Burt asked Mr. White the distance of the window to the proposed addition wall. Mr. White responded that it was 1.5 feet. Mr. White stated that the living room window is a 12 foot picture window with two large windows beside. Chair Burt asked Mr. White if he were to move the south wall 2 feet, would you be able to replace that window with a smaller one. Mr. White stated that was correct. Chair Burt stated that the applicant could move the south wall 2 feet and replace the window and maintain view of the courtyard but the jog in the master bedroom would still be on the north wall. Commissioner Solmer asked staff how much further could the applicant’s continue the wall on the existing alignment before they have to make the jog under current ordinance. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4o - BOZA Minutes Jan. 5, 2006 Page 5 Mr. Morrison stated the required setback is 6 feet and we are adding 2 inches to the setback for every foot that they are over 40 feet. The existing side yard is 7 feet 2 inches so the sidewall could be as long as 48 feet before we would require additional setback beyond the 7 feet 2 inches. The existing sidewall is 41 feet and they are allowed a total of 48 feet before they hit the 7 foot 2 inch setback requirements. This means they are allowed to build on an additional 7 feet before we would require a setback greater than 7 feet 2 inches. Perry Bowlin, architect of the applicants, stated he has worked in St. Louis Park on a few projects such as the Hamilton House senior apartment building, 15 single family homes for the Housing and Redevelopment Authority, served as the construction manager for the Project of Pride and Living and remodeled the Louisiana Courts apartment complexes. Mr. Bowlin wanted to point out that only a block away there are several million dollar homes under construction and he is looking forward to working with John and Betty White on a project with simplicity. Also, he would like the board to recognize that their home was designed at a different time with different standards for bathrooms and master bedroom suites and he has designed a current market standard addition. He feels that this addition will maximize the value of Mr. and Mrs. White and will also add value to the neighboring properties. Also, it is important to have an addition look like part of the home rather than a tacked on addition. They are not interested in a second class addition they are interested in a addition that adds to their livability, logic and value. Mr. Bolin feels the narrowness of the lot represents a hardship. The original plat had the lot at 75 feet wide and probably during the platting process a additional 5 feet was added to this property whereas most of the lots on this block are 85 feet or wider. Because you are using up 15 feet as the corner lot than the rest of the side yard on the other side is smaller than would be normal and this is why he feels this property does have a hardship. Commissioner Burt want to point out that this is a very attractive floor plan. With no questions, Chair Burt closed the public hearing. Commissioner Solmer commends the applicants for wishing to continue the addition similar to the style of their house but he feels the applicants can continue to build a beautiful addition within the setback requirements. He feels that a notch will soften the profile of the addition and will be more pleasing for the neighboring property. Also, he fears the adjacent neighbor will lose sunlight due to the addition. Commissioner Bloyer stated she agrees with Commissioner Solmer to require the addition to be conforming and create a notch. The lot is narrow but not enough to grant the variance. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4o - BOZA Minutes Jan. 5, 2006 Page 6 Commissioner Roberts feels that the narrowness of the lot does have an impact. The property is narrower than the neighboring properties and if he had the additional 5 feet like the neighbors then they wouldn’t have difficulty building this addition. Also, he would like to consider the city’s goal of move-up housing since this addition would bring the home to market standards and the neighbors have approved the applicant’s plans. Mr. Morrison stated that a provision could be placed on the variance restricting the addition to one-story which that would prevent a second story addition that would increase shading on the neighboring property. Chair Burt feels that is a good suggestion. Chair Burt stated the applicants have presented a very articulate and strong argument for the variance. He feels the floor plan is very nice and would like to note that we want our residents to continue living in St. Louis Park, and enjoy residents making improvements to their property. Chair Burt does feel the applicant’s corner lot is narrow but feels there are other options available to the applicant. Commissioner Robert feels if the lot were wider criterion #3 would not be an issue. Commissioner Bloyer stated that in order to grant this variance the property needs to be different or unique not extraordinary. She feels that applicants do have other alternatives but she is also taking into consideration the narrowness of the lot compared to neighboring properties and the cities goals on move-up housing. Commissioner Solmer feels the applicants can still create a functional and attractive addition without the granting of the variance, other alternatives are available. Commissioner Solmer feels the applicants can reduce the proposed square footage, although resale value may be affected but the addition with still be functional and attractive. Commissioner Roberts stated he would like to grant the variance due to the findings of the narrowness of the lot and attach a restriction on the approval that the applicants are only allowed to construct a one story addition. Motion by Commissioner Roberts, seconded by Commissioner Bloyer to approve Resolution #01-06 granting a variance from Section 36-163(f)(8) of the zoning ordinance to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches with the condition that only a one story addition is allowed for the property located in the R-1 Single Family Residential District, at 2537 Inglewood Avenue South. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4o - BOZA Minutes Jan. 5, 2006 Page 7 Motion Failed. Voting Yes: Bloyer and Roberts. Voting No: Burt and Solmer. Chair Burt announced that a split vote means that the application stands as denied, however the applicants are allowed to appeal the Boards decision to the City Council. 5. Old Business None 6. New Business None 7. Communications Commissioner Roberts would like to congratulate the Board members that were appointed new terms. 8. Miscellaneous None 9. Adjournment Commissioner Bloyer moved and Commissioner Solmer seconded the motion for adjournment. The regular meeting of the Board of Zoning appeals adjourned at 7:46 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Tara Olson Community Development Secretary St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4p - Human Rights Comm Minutes Nov. 16, 2005 Page 1 City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Notes – November 16, 2005 Westwood Room, City Hall I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. Present Commissioners: Karmit Bulman, Kristin Siegesmund and Shelley Taylor Staff: Lynn Schwartz, Communications Guest: Michael Roan II. Commissioner Report - None III. Old Business A. Report from commissioners attending League of MN Human Rights Commission annual conference, Sept. 24, 2005 (Karmit, Matt, Jason, Shelley, Kristi, Mike) Commissioners agreed it was a good conference. B. Report on the Sept. 6 meeting regarding immigrant rights with Matt A., Captain Mark Ortner, Gail Dorfman and representatives from Jewish Community Action. No report. C. Review DVDs, “This is My Home”, produced by TPT and “Immigrant Rights: A Community Roundtable”, produced by Louisa Hext and Rita Fox. Immigrant Rights: A Community Roundtable, was viewed by Commissioners present at the end of the meeting. D. Continue discussion for creating a new Commission work plan for 05-06 Ms. Siegesmund discussed a history of the Commission and that they needed to have “realistic” expectations when thinking about the work plan and not overwhelm people. Ms. Bulman recommended they adopt a doable project, and recommended the Human Rights Ordinance. There is a push from the Jewish Community action Council to get this passed and she believed it was something they could work on. Ms. Siegesmund didn’t believe there was resistance from the Police. She also believed something needed to be done with the audit (survey). Council had St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4p - Human Rights Comm Minutes Nov. 16, 2005 Page 2 invested money in that. She noted the last work plan was done for a three year period. The Commissioners reviewed the ordinance. Ms. Schwartz indicated Ms. McDonell met with the City Manager who agreed to have one Commissioner meet with Department Directors to update them and share concerns about the ordinance. Ms. Siegesmund suggested Ms. Bulman meet with the Department Directors. They needed to be clear this was not intended to interfere or prohibit city officers from reporting. They wanted people to report crimes and wanted to have laws enforced and not be afraid to report crimes. Ms. Taylor stated some of the things she brought to the previous meeting was “doable” and she could do the groundwork. Ms. Siegesmund believed they could present the ordinance and lay the groundwork and take care of any concerns before it went to City Council. Ms. Bulman asked staff to retype the resolution and revise it for the City of St. Louis Park. Ms. Siegesmund suggested adaptation should come from the meeting. Ms. Schwartz believed Police, Fire and Inspections would probably be the Departments involved. Ms. Bulman suggested the steps be: 1) To adapt the documents to say St. Louis Park, and 2) Ms. McDonell set up a meeting with key City staff. She volunteered to attend the meeting. After they have met, they will work with Ms. McDonell to determine when to bring it to City Council. Ms. Siegesmund thought they should get it done in two to three weeks and try to go before City Council in December or January at a study session. Ms. Schwartz would inform Ms. McDonell. Ms. Siegesmund stated they could take a vote at the next meeting on a final document. Commissioners expressed unanimous support to move forward. Ms. Taylor stated that they should send individualized letters to all victims of hate crimes. They also needed to build relationships with groups in St. Louis Park. She contacted various organizations to work with and drafted letters to them. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4p - Human Rights Comm Minutes Nov. 16, 2005 Page 3 Ms. Bulman indicated that the Director of the JCC was interested in immigrant rights. Ms. Taylor suggested sending letters and was wiling to do the drafts. Ms. Bulman indicated they need to be realistic about what they set out to do. Ms. Taylor believed the letters were easy to do. They can refer to the survey which suggested they needed to do more work and explore other areas. IV. New Business A. Commissioner recruiting and reappointments Ms. Siegesmund indicated she was unsure at this time if she would seek reappointment. Ms. Bulman asked Ms. McDonell to send a new roster reflecting recent resignations and also requested a copy of the By Laws. She suggested an ad be run in the Sun Sailor recruiting new Commissioners. Ms. Schwartz stated they were working on that. Ms. Bulman noted she would get the word out at the High School and would also contact Karen Atkinson at Children First about a youth member. B. October bias crime report “Gay” keyed into vehicle in the Northwest club parking lot Ms. Taylor indicated she would send a letter. Ms. Siegesmund discussed the issue (addressed in Emails) regarding the person with a complaint. The Police liaison Emailed how they handled suicide calls. She didn’t believe they should become involved. C. Annual Human Rights Award preparations – Set plans for advertising Ms. Schwartz requested they approve the draft and set a deadline. Ms. Siegesmund discussed how it was done in the past. They can approve it and have Ms. McDonell send it out. Commissioners expressed unanimous support to move forward with the award advertising. Set Agenda for Next Meeting Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy L. Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4q - Human Rights Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 1 City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Minutes – December 21, 2005 Westwood Room, City Hall I. Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. Present Commissioners: Karmit Bulman, Michael Cohn, Annie Gaffney, Ahmed Maaraba and Kristi Rudelius-Palmer Staff: Martha McDonell, Commission Liaison and Amy Stegora-Peterson, Recording Secretary A. Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as presented. B. Approval of Minutes The notes of November 16, 2005 were approved as presented. Mr. Maaraba asked how many commissioners were needed for quorum? Ms. McDonell replied 50% of the Commission. Ms. Bulman indicated she had spoken with Karen Atkinson of Children’s First about getting a youth member. Her daughter was interested, but could not attend if meetings were held on Wednesday’s. C. Acknowledgement of Commissioners Completing Terms Ms. McDonell indicated Ms. Siegesmund and Ms. Gaffney’s terms expired at the end of this month. She presented a gift to Ms. Gaffney and thanked her for volunteering on the Commission. II. Commissioner Reports Ms. McDonell stated she had been working on the Vision Project for the City. The survey had questions including if people felt valued. A phone survey was being completed this month. They added demographic information as a part of the survey and could use this to compare to the survey done by the Human Rights Commission. She asked Commissioners to assist by doing the Vision interview and described the process. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4q - Human Rights Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 2 Ms. Rudelius-Palmer discussed This is My Home. The tool kit was being distributed to 3000 schools and is available at www.thisismyhome.org. She met with the Superintendent of Schools and proposed getting the program into the St. Louis Park Schools. She would do more follow up. Ms. Bulman suggested she also contact Karen Atkinson of Children’s First or the Gifted and Talented Kids program. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer indicated she had also worked with a social worker in the school. They were also going to integrate it with “Taking Your Temperature.” Ms. McDonell indicated she could have the DVD run on cable programming. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer stated she was also working with the Spanish Emersion School and doing training with other Human Rights commissions around the state. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer noted she had completed a term on the League for Human Rights Commissions. Another person had been selected to represent this district. III. Old Business A. Human Rights Award Nominations Ms. Gaffney believed John Anderson and Tom and Maureen Marolt sounded like good recipients. There hadn’t been enough information provided about the fireman. Ms. McDonell stated usually applicants had done something over and above. He had been doing his job. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer suggested they add recognition for the Fire Department, Police Department or City Staff to be recognized and receive a certificate of appreciation. Ms. Bulman believed Tom and Maureen Marolt had shown a lifelong passion, were role models and very active. Ms. Gaffney stated they could give the award to all three nominees. Mr. Maaraba thought maybe the award should only be given to one person. The others could receive recognition. Ms. McDonell asked Mr. Cohn about John Anderson and if he helped in the campaign to assist people getting over the bias of people with disabilities? Mr. Cohn replied he helped to change people’s views and had volunteered to help with his campaign. The Commission motioned to present the Human Rights Award to John Anderson for voting outreach, Tom and Maureen Marolt for their work in the community and a certificate of recognition to Bob Hampton, the St. Louis Park Firefighter. The motion was approved. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4q - Human Rights Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 3 B. Council Dates for Human Rights Award Presentation Ms. McDonell would contact the nominees about the Council dates in January. Tentatively they would plan on January 17th. Some Commissioners should attend. The Commission agreed to hold the meeting scheduled for January 18th on January 17th, after the Council meeting. C. Report on December 14th Immigrant Rights meeting Ms. Bulman stated she, Ms. McDonell and Louisa Hext met with Brian Hoffman (Inspections), Michelle Schnitker (Housing), Kevin Locke (Community Development) and Manny Camilon (Inspections) regarding the possibility of passing a Human Rights ordinance regarding separation of duties. This would acknowledge that City officials do not have authority in immigration matters. Mr. Camilon talked about doing restaurant inspections and the possibility of finding undocumented immigrants and including that information in his report. The ordinance will inform them it was not necessary to include immigration status. All directors seemed supportive of the ordinance, which has passed in Minneapolis and St. Paul. They believed the Commission should move forward. Ms. McDonell indicated the Housing Department would be exempt because of Federal rules. Prior to this they met with the Police who didn’t have any issues with the ordinance and Mr. Harmening, the City Manager to inform them. Next steps will be to meet with Park and Recreation because of programs for families and youth and the Fire Department and discussion at the City Directors Meeting going to the City Council. The Commission should vote to make a recommendation and then present at a City Council Study session. They should also present a work plan to the City Council. Ms. Hext would work with non-profits to get information and possibly have those people as supporting partners because the Council may ask why they need to do this. They need to have answers prepared. Ms. Gaffney believed they should do this before there were any problems. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer believed another piece was the report that recently came out from the Governor, Impact on Illegal Immigrants on Minnesota. She was concerned about the fear it brought. Ms. Bulman indicated Ms. Hext was working with a Professor at the University of Minnesota for a counter document to the Governor’s report. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer indicated the focus was money being used for youth. They might want to consider adding language to address that. Ms. McDonell indicated the ordinance they were proposing only covered City employees, not school officials. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4q - Human Rights Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 4 Ms. Bulman believed the ordinance was an education tool. They should have a time line on the work plan and determine a date for the study session. Ms. McDonell indicated they should meet with Park and Recreation and the Fire Department in the first two weeks of January. Commissioner should be present if possible. She would check on the Director meetings in the last two weeks of January and Council in the beginning of February. She would Email the ordinance to Commissioners. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer suggested they do their work plan before then. Ms. Gaffney suggested that be the only item of discussion at the January meeting. Ms. Bulman stated at the November meeting they discussed only taking on two projects, including this ordinance. Ms. McDonell would tentatively schedule a study session. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer suggested a second project be the This is My Home initiative. She would meet with the school superintendent. Ms. Bulman discussed the work plan ideas and who expressed interest in various topics. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer suggested they include a community education piece in the work plan as a part of the ordinance. IV. New Business A. Vision St. Louis Park Interview Process The Commission adjourned to do Vision interviews. B. Meeting Nights Ms. Bulman suggested meetings be held on Tuesday’s. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer and Mr. Cohn believed the change would work. The Commission agreed to discuss this with other commissioners not present. Ms. McDonell would send an Email regarding the meeting change in January. Set Agenda for Next Meeting Work Plan Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:36 p.m. and the commission participated in Vision interviews until 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy L. Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4r - Planning Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 1 OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA December 21, 2005--6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson MEMBERS ABSENT: Jerry Timian STAFF PRESENT: Adam Fulton, Meg McMonigal, Nancy Sells 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of December 7, 2005 Commissioner Morris moved approval of the minutes of December 7, 2005. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. 3. Hearings: None 4. Unfinished Business: None 5. New Business A. Hoigaards Village Final Plat and PUD Location: 5616 36th Street West, 3550 State Highway No. 100 South, 3501 Xenwood Ave. South, 5626 36th Street West Applicant: Union Land II, LLC Case Nos.: 05-61-S, 05-62-PUD Adam Fulton, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Chair Carper asked if this approval includes review of such items as trash storage and removal. Mr. Fulton said that staff has reviewed the trash removal process in detail with the applicant and has determined that trash removal capacity is appropriate for the project. Chair Carper commented that as a member of the Railroad Task Force, he is aware of issues with rail operations adjacent to residential areas. He asked if there have been any complaints about railroad operation and noise from the apartment building which is across the proposed development site. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4r - Planning Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 2 Mr. Fulton responded that he is not aware of such complaints. He went on to say that the track which is adjacent to the site is seldom used, approximately twice per day, and does not pose an issue to the development. Chair Carper asked about that rail line and LRT development. Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said there may be heavy rail and light rail on the corridor, or there may be just light rail. It has not yet been determined. Chair Carper said he asked the question in case soundproofing needs to be considered at this time or in the future. Mr. Fulton said for safety purposes, the applicant has proposed to include a fence between the corridor and the development. He said be understands that light rail is substantially quieter than heavy rail and it is unlikely that a substantial amount of heavy rail will be taking place in the future. Chair Carper asked how plant materials are chosen or recommended in a development. Mr. Fulton said that the zoning code speaks extensively to the type of plant materials which can be used. The code addresses bufferyard requirements which require certain number of plant units, and a certain number of total units. Commissioner Morris asked about the phasing of the PUD. Mr. Fulton responded that the current approval is for the entire PUD, however plat approval is for the first two buildings. Commissioner Morris asked about snow storage capacity. Mr. Fulton said discussions have been held informally about the possibility of using some of the large stormwater pond area for snow storage, which would be within the engineering calculations. He said the developer could discuss that in further detail. Commissioner Morris had questions about snow storage on the private streets and parking lots draining untreated into the pond area without any filtration system to collect debris. Mr. Fulton said the stormwater pond will function as a filtration device. Snow storage would be considered similar to rain in how it is treated going into the pond. Commissioner Morris remarked on material such as salt, sand, and debris scraped off the streets which rain doesn’t contain. Commissioner Morris asked if maintenance responsibilities for the pond will be included in a development agreement. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4r - Planning Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 3 Mr. Fulton said at this time it is expected that the developer will continue to own the pond and that the City will only be responsible for periodic dredging of the pond. An agreement has not been negotiated at this time. Commissioner Morris asked if streetscape elements would also be maintained by the developer. Mr. Fulton said a Special Service District may be created for the West 36th Street corridor, but discussions on this are preliminary only. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she was also concerned about snow storage. Commissioner Kramer asked if there was any provision for making the site more accessible to the bike trail and light rail without going all the way up to Wooddale Ave. Ms. McMonigal said at this time there are no provisions as it is very difficult to get approval from the railroad to cross at that point. Staff has been looking at a way to install sidewalk from 36th St. to the trail along Wooddale. Commissioner Robertson had questions about rowhouse terminology. He said in Housing Summit discussions, rowhouse was defined as contiguous, but with individual lots. He remarked that the development’s “rowhousing” is really townhouses. Mr. Fulton responded that the proposed rowhouses are attached dwellings, on one common lot. Commissioner Robertson said that they aren’t truly rowhouses. He acknowledged that the terminology is a good marketing tool, but not a good planning tool. Ms. McMonigal suggested that the proposed units were a rowhouse style of condominium. Chair Carper asked if the first phase provided all green space requirements of the development. Ms. McMonigal said green space would be calculated from the entire development. She added that roof top open space on the first building counts toward DORA. Noah Bly, Project Manager, Urban Works Architecture, showed how the building has been pushed back a little bit in order to accommodate parking on 36th St., a comfortable sidewalk area, green area, and patio area. He discussed plans for trash removal and design measures to address sound issues. Mr. Bly commented on storm drainage to the pond. He said the plans have been reviewed by City Engineering staff. He said the developer’s standard operating procedure is to remove the snow if necessary. He said there are catch basins in the St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4r - Planning Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 4 parking lot, but it is unlikely snow would be stored there. Mr. Bly said that the pond is designed for rate control and for water quality. Mr. Bly reviewed the construction schedule. If approvals are granted, environmental work on the first building could begin in March, demolition could begin in April, and construction could begin in May. Work on the second building would follow by approximately three months. David Stahl, Project Architect, showed the locations of bicycle parking. Commissioner Morris asked about bicycle parking capacity in relation to the parking reduction which the development has received. Mr. Stahl said that each bank of indoor bicycle parking is 25 feet long and double sided. Commissioner Morris asked that designated bicycle parking stalls be shown on the plan as a condition of approval. Commissioner Morris asked where the snow will be stored. Frank Dunbar, developer, Union Land II, LLC, said removal of all snow has been programmed in operation costs. Snow kept on site would be minimal. Mr. Dunbar said he would accept that arrangement as a mandatory part of the PUD. Commissioner Robertson asked about access for retail trash storage. He referenced sidewalk and parking spaces between the trash area and the parking lot. Mr. Dunbar said the keycard system will be used. The tenant and hauler have a keycard for access. The hauler removes the trash in one hour with professional management staff on site. Pick-up is based on a timeframe complementary to the user and respectful to residents above. He said he doubts there would be any pick-ups prior to 10 a.m. or after 4 p.m. The east and west side may have different pick-up times. It would be highly coordinated. Chair Carper asked if there will be any restaurants in the development. Mr. Dunbar said he hopes there will be a coffee shop or a sandwich shop. They do not have a defined profile of retail users. Service related retailers would be the preferred commercial use. In response to a question from Commissioner Johnston-Madison about pond construction and demolition of the Hoigaard building, Mr. Dunbar discussed staging. Commissioner Morris proposed adding the following two conditions to the staff recommendation: 1) Designated bicycle parking stalls will be shown on the plan; and 2) No on-site snow storage will be allowed without review and approval of the City. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4r - Planning Comm Minutes Dec. 21, 2005 Page 5 Mr. Dunbar said he would want an amount of snowfall indicated. Commissioner Morris said he just intended that the condition provides review and approval. Commissioner Morris moved to recommend approval of the Final PUD and Final Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 2, Hoigaard Village 1st Addition, subject to conditions as recommended by staff with the addition of the following conditions: 1) Designated bicycle parking stalls will be shown on the plan; and 2) No on-site snow storage will be allowed without review and approval of the City. Carl Robertson seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-0. 6. Communications A. Recent City Council Action – Dec. 19, 2005 B. Upcoming Zoning Ordinance Revisions Ms. McMonigal discussed the schedule for upcoming zoning ordinance revisions. Proposed revisions include those items which came out of the Housing Summit process; reorganization of portions of the ordinance; changes to PUD to make it a zoning district; combining applications; and changes to parking, landscaping, and sign sections. She said revisions will be brought to the Planning Commission in pieces over the next 6-8 months. Ms. McMonigal proposed that the revisions be discussed at study sessions prior to setting public hearings. 7. Miscellaneous 8. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Administrative Secretary St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4s - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 4, 2006 Page 1 OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA January 4, 2006--6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Meg McMonigal, Gary Morrison, Nancy Sells 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes: None 3. Hearings A. Zoning Text Amendments for residential setbacks, detached garages, accessory buildings, lot divisions, and to allow studios in the Industrial Park (IP) zoning district. Case No: 05-69-ZA Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator, explained that proposed changes relate to the following: addressing and simplifying residential setback issues, changes to placement of accessory structures, allowing lot divisions under specific circumstances, deleting Land Use Table 115a., and adding “studio” as a use in the IP district. Commissioners and staff discussed the proposed change to the restricted area required when a back yard is adjacent to a front yard. Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor, said the change probably wouldn’t affect that many lots, but when it does it is a problem for the adjacent resident. Mr. Morrison discussed proposed changes to the front yard and the averaging formula. Commissioner Kramer asked if the proposal meant a group of houses could keep moving towards the street. Mr. Morrison responded that in theory they could, but it would be in two foot increments. Ms. McMonigal added that it is a moving average all the time, but the proposed change should eliminate quite a bit of that because you could only move to the closest one and then there is a set point where everyone has to stop. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4s - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 4, 2006 Page 2 Commissioner Robertson commented that during the study session, discussion was held on this item about how the formula can chase itself. He thought the discussion resulted in a recommendation of using a minimum setback. He asked what moved the proposal back to an averaging which chases itself. Mr. Morrison said in staff discussions and City Council discussions there seemed to be some interest in an averaging formula. There are advantages to a straight setback. The disadvantage which has been brought to staff’s attention is that if homes are 40 or 50 feet back with a 30 ft. setback, someone can build a 20 ft. addition off the front so they are 30 ft. off, but everyone else is 50 ft. off. Commissioner Robertson said he didn’t like the proposal. He commented on the need to survey neighbor’s yards, which would not be legal, if he wanted to do an addition. Mr. Morrison responded that there are some disadvantages but the proposed change isn’t as broad as the existing language. Mr. Morrison discussed proposed changes to detached garage regulations. In summary, those changes are to create one standard garage setback for side and rear, 5 ft. setback for detached garages when garage door faces the alley to allow for turning movements, for all accessory buildings eliminate open lot area requirement, allow a 24 x 24 ft. garage for single family homes as an exception to the 25% maximum back yard coverage requirement, allow an increase in height if it is to match the roof pitch of the existing house, and to limit size of garage to maximum of 800 sq. ft. In response to Commissioner Timian’s question about living space in garages, Mr. Morrison said no part of the garage or accessory building may be used for habitable, livable space. Regarding matching the roof pitch, Commissioner Robertson recommended changing the word “match” as it could be restrictive. He suggested using the word “complement”. Mr. Morrison discussed the proposed amendment which would allow a lot split when two platted lots exist as one parcel, or have been combined for tax purposes. He explained that the amendment would allow lots to be split if the lots are the same size and width as the existing surrounding neighborhood and are compatible with the neighborhood. Ms. McMonigal said that some of the proposal is related to the desires of the Housing Summit to allow two homes in the situation where they are considered move-up homes. She mentioned that the proposal also includes language regarding exterior materials, specifically prohibiting the use of vinyl siding, which staff intended on removing from the proposed amendment. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4s - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 4, 2006 Page 3 Commissioner Robertson discussed the proposed requirement in the lot split amendment of the garage being placed behind the front of the house. He said he understood getting away from the prominent appearance of many garage doors on the street. He suggested that pushing the garage back from the front of house just lengthens the driveway. He said sometimes there are good reasons to have the garage moved forward in front of the face of the house and he questions regulating this. He mentioned that in the case of split lots, the lots could often be utilized better by bringing the garage forward. Ms. McMonigal said that deserves a lot of discussion city-wide. She said in the case of split lots, which won’t be that common, perhaps the language could say placement of the garage should be compatible with the neighborhood rather than being so specific about placement. Commissioner Robertson suggested another alternative would be to restrict how far in front the garage could be placed. He suggested 6 feet in front of the house. Mr. Morrison said staff is proposing to delete the land use table (Table 115a) from the Zoning Ordinance because the table is complicated, inconsistent with listed uses in the districts, and it is redundant. Staff proposes to maintain the table as a hand-out document, correcting issues as they come along without having to amend the ordinance. Mr. Morrison discussed adding “studio” as a use in the IP district. Commissioner Robertson remarked that the zoning ordinance definition of studio was quite broad. Ms. McMonigal read the definition. She said if a proposed studio use is not listed in the definition, staff looks at the characteristics of the use to determine whether or not it is similar. Chair Carper, Ms. McMonigal, and Mr. Morrison talked about the schedule for the amendments, and whether or not revisions should be brought back to the Planning Commission prior to City Council. Mr. Morrison pointed out that there are residents waiting for decisions on amendment changes as they plan for spring construction. Chair Carper listed the following items for correction or clarification: • Page 6, (f) Dimensional standards/densities (3) the word not should be deleted. • Page 7, (9) the last sentence needs clarification. Ms. McMonigal commented that much of the ordinance language needs editing. Staff will continue working on the language in this update and in future updates. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4s - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 4, 2006 Page 4 • Page 8, paragraph (6) appears twice. Ms. McMonigal said the first paragraph should be deleted. • Page 9, (9) the last sentence is convoluted similar to the item on Page 7. • Page 9, the table is divided by a page break. • Page 16, b.references to (c)(9) and (c)(10) need to be confirmed. Commissioner Morris, Commissioner Kramer, and Mr. Morrison talked about use of the phrases “enclosed structure” and “non-passenger vehicle” in the zoning ordinance. Chair Carper said he has always been uncomfortable with discussions about the proposed lot divisions. He said he is very concerned about unintended consequences. He said he would like to see a map of the areas where these kinds of lot divisions could occur. He said he wouldn’t be able to approve this amendment until he could see this kind of information. He would like to remove this amendment from consideration at this time. Ms. McMonigal said that staff had struggled with the ability to create a map of lots where this could happen. She said staff could go back and look at it a little further to see what they can provide. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she could approve the amendment because the language provides protection by specifying compatibility with the existing surrounding neighborhood. Commissioner Robertson said he agreed that the wording provides conditions and restrictions to provide protection. Commissioner Morris said the way he interpreted the unbundling of parcels was that a replat of the parcels would not be required. But if someone wants to reconfigure parcel shapes, then the replat process is necessary. This amendment would only be relevant to bring the parcel lines back to the original lines. Commissioner Morris said he believes the restrictions cover the City for all contingencies. Ms. McMonigal said staff intended to eliminate (b)(1)c(iv.) Exterior Materials from this proposed amendment. Chair Carper opened the public hearing. As there was no one present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Robertson said he would like to pull No. 4 (front yard setbacks determined by neighbor’s front yard setback) from Amendment A: Residential Standards from consideration at this time. He said it feels too loose and that there may be other ways to address this. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4s - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 4, 2006 Page 5 Chair Carper said he agreed there may be other ways to address this. He said he felt the proposed amendment was an improvement and approval now would accommodate spring construction schedules. He stated that it isn’t ideal and will require more refinement in the future. Commissioner Robertson said he felt the amendment needs more work which should be done now rather than approved and revisited at a much later date. Commissioner Johnston-Madison suggested providing the City Council with a couple of alternatives on this issue. She also noted that less than 10 areas would be affected by these regulations. Mr. Morrison suggested the use of an “if/or” clause which would specify regulations depending on the measurements. Commissioner Robertson discussed using approximate distances. Mr. Morrison thought it could be done with a clause which wouldn’t be averaging. He said, for example, if all the homes within a certain distance of the subject property are greater than x feet from the front property line, then regulation y would apply. If that doesn’t apply then the setback is z. Commissioners Johnston-Madison and Robertson said they could go along with that. Ms. McMonigal said staff would do more research and bring back proposed language for this item. Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of proposed ordinance changes, with the exception of Amendment A. 4 and revisions as discussed. Commissioner Johnston-Madison seconded the motion. The motion passed 5-1 (Carper opposed). Chair Carper said he still was not comfortable with the lot division amendment and was also concerned about delaying Amendment A. 4. 4. Other Business A. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair Commissioner Morris made a motion nominating Lynne Carper for Chair. Commissioner Carper made a motion nominating Dennis Morris for Vice- Chair. The motions nominating Lynne Carper for Chair and Dennis Morris for Vice-Chair were approved 6-0. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 4s - Planning Comm Minutes Jan. 4, 2006 Page 6 5. Communications A. Recent City Council Action – January 3, 2006 B. Commissioner Morris mentioned the January 12th Open House regarding the Hwy. 100 Temporary Lane Addition Project. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Administrative Secretary St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 5a - Appointments To Commissions Page 1 5a. Appointment of Citizen Representatives to Boards and Commissions Recommended Action: Motion to appoint citizen representatives to each of the following Boards and Commissions: Community Education Advisory Council, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission, Planning Commission and Police Advisory Commission. Background: The City Council interviewed Steve Fillbrandt, Richard Person, Joe Tatalovich, Dee Schutte, Richard Markgraf and Patrick Skinner in December 2005. In addition, Nick Magrino submitted his application to serve as a youth member on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission in December. At the January 23, 2006 meeting, Council discussed the candidates at length and agreed to appoint three citizen representatives and one youth member to serve on Boards and Commissions at the February 6, 2006 meeting. Planning Commission and Police Advisory Commission The Planning Commission and the Police Advisory Commission each have a mid-term opening. Planning Commissioner Michelle Bisonnette and Police Advisory Commissioner Jasper Jonson resigned in 2005 and their commissions expire on December 31, 2006. When a vacancy occurs in the middle of the term, the Council may appoint a citizen representative to complete the remainder of the term. If appointed, the new commissioner would serve until December 31, 2006. Community Education Advisory Council There is one at-large vacancy on the Community Education Advisory Council to be appointed by the City Council. The term started July 1, 2005 and it is a three-year term that will expire on June 30, 2008. Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee Finally, there is an opening for a youth member on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee. The opening was created by the resignation of Youth Member Sarah Lindenberg, whose term expires on December 31, 2007. The youth appointee would serve the remainder of this term. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 5a - Appointments To Commissions Page 2 Recommendation: It is recommended that Council make a motion to: • Appoint a citizen representative to serve on the Police Advisory Commission until December 31, 2006; • Appoint a citizen representative to serve on the Planning Commission until December 31, 2006; • Appoint a citizen representative to serve on the Community Education Advisory Council until June 30, 2008; • Appoint a youth member to serve on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee until December 31, 2007. Prepared By: Marcia Honold, Management Assistant Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 6a - Appeal BOZA 2537 Englewood Variance Page 1 6a. Public Hearing to consider an appeal of the Board of Zoning Appeals denial (2-2 vote) of a variance from the Zoning Ordinance to allow an addition. Case No. 05-68-VAR: Variance Appeal to the home located on the property at 2537 Inglewood Ave S. - John White applicant Recommended Action: • Mayor to close the public hearing. • Motion to adopt resolution denying the application for a variance to section 36-163(f)(8) of the Zoning Ordinance to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches at 2537 Inglewood Ave S. Background: The property is located at 2537 Inglewood Ave S. (See site map). Mr. White submitted an application for a 2 foot 8 inch variance to allow the construction of an addition to the back of the home that would be 7 feet, 2 inches from the side property line instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches required by code. The existing home is 7 feet 2 inches from the property line and the existing side wall is 41 feet in length. The code requires an additional 2 inches be added to the side yard requirement for every one foot the side wall exceeds 40 feet in length. The purpose of this requirement is to discourage the construction of long flat walls, especially if they are taller than a single story. The applicant is proposing a side wall that is 63 feet long, which would require a 9 foot, 10 inch side yard. As part of the appeal, the applicant submitted a revised site plan that shows how landscaping could be used to break up the appearance of the 63 foot long side wall. The revised site plan is attached for your review. Board of Zoning Appeals Action (BOZA): BOZA heard the application on January 5, 2006. The applicant was the only person in the audience that spoke about the application, and three letters supporting the application were submitted. Attached are the minutes of the meeting, the staff report, and letters from the applicant and neighbors. The applicant owns a rambler, and is proposing a one-story addition off the back that would result in a 63 foot long side wall. During the BOZA discussion, staff suggested to the Board that approval of the variance may be appropriate if the addition were limited to one story. This would limit the potential negative impact of the long flat wall upon the neighbor. This condition would prevent any existing or future property owner from constructing a second story on that portion of the addition. By preventing a second story addition, the city would be preventing a 63 foot long, two-story wall, thereby preserving the character of the neighborhood and south exposure for the adjacent property to the north. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 6a - Appeal BOZA 2537 Englewood Variance Page 2 While this suggestion was thought to have merit, the Board was unable to identify a hardship justifying the setback variance; they also felt there were other alternatives available to the applicant to construct an addition that accomplished the applicant’s desires. After hearing testimony, a motion was made to approve the application. The motion failed on a 2-2 vote. Since a motion could not be made to approve the variance, the application stands as denied. Recommendation: Staff’s original recommendation was for denial based on a lack of hardship. The lot is larger than most and staff believes an attractive addition can be built and still meet the city’s side yard setback requirements. Staff continues to recommend denial of this variance request. If the Council desires to consider approval of the variance, staff should be directed to prepare a resolution of approval for consideration by the Council at its February 20 meeting. Attachments: Letter from Applicant - dated January 18, 2006 Revised site plan Proposed Resolution of Denial BOZA Minutes Excerpts BOZA Staff Report - Case No. 05-68-VAR with attachments. (letter from applicant, letters from neighbors, aerial photo, site plan, proposed building elevations.) Prepared By: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 6a - Appeal BOZA 2537 Englewood Variance Page 3 VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 06-______ RESOLUTION OF FINDING REGARDING THE APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE UNDER SECTION 36-163(F)(8) TO ALLOW AN ADDITION TO THE HOUSE WITH A 7 FOOT 2 INCH SIDE YARD INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 9 FEET 10 INCHES FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, AT 2537 INGLEWOOD AVENUE SOUTH. BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota FINDINGS 1. On November 22, 2005, John White filed an application seeking a variance from Section 36-163(f)(8) to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches for property located in the R-1 Single Family Residential District for the following legal description, to wit: Lot 6 and South 5 feet of Lot 7, Block 7, Basswood, Hennepin County, Minnesota. 2. On January 5, 2006, the Board of Zoning Appeals held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, and discussed the application for Variance Case No. 05-68- VAR. 3. The Board failed to pass a motion granting or denying the variance due to a 2-2 vote. The variance therefore stands as denied. 4. On January 18, 2006 Mr. John White requested an appeal of Board of Zoning Appeals action. 5. On February 6, 2006 the City Council considered the appeal and the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on values of property in the surrounding area, and the effect of the proposed variance upon the Comprehensive Plan. 6. Based on the testimony, evidence presented, and files and records, the City Council makes the following findings: a. The requested variance does not meet the requirements of Section 36-33(d)(5) of the Zoning Ordinance necessary to be met for the Board of Zoning Appeals to grant variances. There are no factors related to the shape, size or other extraordinary conditions of the lot which prevent a reasonable use. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 6a - Appeal BOZA 2537 Englewood Variance Page 4 b. Granting of the requested variance is not necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right. An addition similar in size and function can be built without a variance. c. There are no demonstrable or undue hardships under the terms of the Zoning Ordinance or Minnesota Statue, and therefore, conditions necessary for granting the requested variance do not exist. 7. The contents of Board of Zoning Appeals Case File 05-68-VAR are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. CONCLUSION The applicant’s request for a variance from 36-163(f)(8) to allow an addition to the house with a 7 foot 2 inch side yard instead of the required 9 feet 10 inches for property located in the R-1 Single Family Residential District is hereby denied based on the findings set forth above. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 1 8a. Hoigaard Village - Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Final Plat Case No. 05-61-S and 05-62-PUD Union Land, LLC. SW Quadrant of Highway 100 and Highway 7 Recommended Action: • Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Final Planned Unit Development, subject to conditions as recommended by Staff. • Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Final Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Hoigaard Village 1st Addition, subject to conditions as recommended by Staff. Site Area: 9.6 Acres Zoning: M-X Mixed Use R-C Multi-Family Residential Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Mixed-Use High Density Residential Description of Request: The applicant is requesting approval of a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the entire Hoigaard Village site and a Final Plat for the mixed-use and condominium buildings only. Development Proposal: The developer is proposing to redevelop a 4 block area located in the northwest corner of 36th Street and Highway 100. The intent is to remove the buildings currently on the site and construct the following in two phases (see attached site plan): • A 5-story mixed-use building on West 36th Street (74 units); • A 4-story condominium building on the block facing West 35 ½ Street (58 units) • Row houses (22 units) • Apartments (220 units) The concept for Hoigaard’s Village includes creating a “Main Street” along 36th Street with retail on the first floor. The development maintains the historic grid pattern, with existing streets remaining in their existing location. The mix of owner and renter-occupied housing, retail land use, and the density of development create opportunities for future transportation alternatives for residents, possibly reducing automobile dependence. The central green area provides green space to the entire development and future space for public art. The pond accommodates water quality and quantity requirements for a large portion of the central Elmwood Area and will enable future redevelopment of other parcels in the area. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 2 Zoning Analysis: The proposal meets the requirements of the Zoning Code, with the exception of setbacks and parking; modifications for those items are requested through the PUD process. Factor Required Proposed Met? Use Mixed-use/Residential Mixed-use/Residential Yes Lot Area 2.0 acre site minimum 9.6 acre site Yes Density 50 units per acre maximum 37 units per acre Yes Height MX - None/ RC - 75 feet 66 feet/67 feet Yes Building Materials 60% Class I materials 60% Class I materials, including brick, glass, and hardiboard Yes Off-Street Parking Retail 148 Retail 118 Yes Residential 748 Residential 599 Subtotal 896 Reductions ( 20% - 180 ) Excess 32 Total Required 716 Total Provided 749 Setbacks – Front/Rear PUD Requested for Setbacks – See analysis below. Yes Setbacks – Side/Side Yes Floor Area Ratio 1.3 1.2 Yes Ground Floor Area Ratio 0.25 0.21 Yes Open Area/DORA 46,965 sq. ft. (12%) 68,384 sq. ft. (17%) Yes Bufferyards Bufferyard B: § Total Units: 285 § Plant Units: 150 § Total Units: 770 § Plant Units: 570 Yes Trees 70 trees removed 176 major trees proposed 198 minor trees proposed Yes Mechanical Equipment Full screening required. Provided. Yes Sidewalks Required along all streets and building frontages. Provided along all streets and building frontages. Yes Refuse handling Full screening required. Provided underground. Yes Transit service None required. Existing along 36th Street; Routes 17F and 615. Yes Bicycle Parking Required. Provided underground and at building entrances. Yes Stormwater Required for site. Regional stormwater provided. Yes St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 3 Architectural Style and Materials The buildings included in the development are to be constructed in varying architectural styles. Along West 36th Street, the architects have designed a building that will be urban in nature, evoking the historical influence of industry in the Elmwood Area. The second and subsequent buildings are all more residential in nature, but will maintain similar materials and colors to ensure that the site is cohesive. The developer has proposed the use of three primary materials on the buildings in the development. Brick and glass are the most common elements throughout the development. The developer will also utilize Hardiboard through portions of the development. The Hardiboard enables creativity within the development and, as a long-lasting, low maintenance product, ensures that no serious maintenance problems will occur at the development. The architectural style and materials to be used in the buildings at the Hoigaard’s Village development were reviewed at the December 12, 2005 City Council study session. At the present time, the developer has included color renderings of the first two buildings (attached) and has indicated the colors to be used for each building on the elevation drawings. Streetscape A city consultant is preparing a streetscape plan for the West 36th Street corridor from Highway 100 to Alabama Ave. S. The streetscape design, which has not been completed, will address pavement materials, furnishings, plantings and lighting. The plan will create a pedestrian environmental similar to Excelsior Blvd., but will be distinct to the West 36th Street area. The developer has agreed to construct the streetscape along its 36th Street West frontage consistent with the City’s streetscape plan. Landscaping A landscaping plan was submitted and shows extensive landscaping throughout the site. Existing trees that require removal will be replaced at ratio greater than 5:1. All streets and common areas, as shown on the site plan, are well landscaped. The pond features a formal landscaping pattern to balance its rectangular shape. The pond, designed to hold the maximum capacity of stormwater possible, features a fountain (to be maintained by the developer). The formal central green area will complement the formal pond. Both the central green area and pond may require minor modifications, depending on Mn/DOT’s final design for Highway 100 (discussed below). If modifications are required, it is likely that a pedestrian walkway will be included around the pond and central green area. Building Height The mixed-use building along West 36th Street will vary in height from 15’ to 68’. The site is zoned MX and has no maximum building height. Immediately adjacent to West 36th Street, the building will be 15’ high. The second through fifth floors are setback an additional 16’ from the street. The second through fifth floors will reach a typical height of 59’, which will vary based on architectural details and reach a maximum of 68’ at the eastern corner of the building. The effect of setting the second through fifth floors back 16’ will be to make the building appear shorter for pedestrians and people driving along West 36th Street. The mixed-use building will have a flat roof. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 4 The remaining buildings on the site feature a traditional gable roof design. Each building meets the height regulations of the RC section of the zoning code. Potential Site Changes Prior to the final plat and construction for future development phases including the pond, row houses, and apartments, some site changes may be necessary due to the reconstruction of Highway 100. Mn/DOT and Staff have discussed the potential impacts of the highway’s reconstruction on the Hoigaard Village development. Mn/DOT is unable to purchase additional right-of-way at this time. It appears in a worst case scenario the highway construction could affect the design for the apartment building’s parking ramp, and required changes to the pond and central green. The pond and central green would be reduced in size, but the reductions would be minimal. Revisions to the PUD would require Council action through a PUD amendment. PUD Modifications: The developer is requesting the following modifications to zoning requirements through the PUD process: Parking: The developer is requesting a 20% reduction of required parking; 15% of this reduction is through the PUD modification and 5% is for providing bicycle parking. The developer is providing 665 parking stalls. Of those parking stalls, 501 spaces are provided below-grade or are enclosed, meeting PUD requirements for a “creative and efficient use of land,” “higher standards of site and building design,” and “more efficient and effective use of streets, utilities, and public facilities to support high-quality development at a lower cost” (Sec. 36-367 (a)). Staff has determined that the Hoigaards Village development qualifies for the PUD modifications for parking, in addition to those reductions available for off-street parking. Overall, the amount of parking provided is appropriate. Staff believes the developer is providing sufficient parking for the residential buildings, meeting or exceeding a ratio of one parking space per bedroom. The parking for retail is also sufficient, as it includes two large surface parking lots. In addition to the substantial off-street parking provided, the development is able to utilize on- street parking that will serve residents, visitors, and the retail spaces. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 5 Setbacks: In a PUD, building setbacks may be reduced to zero, thereby allowing the buildings to be set at the property line. However, the developer is providing some setbacks to maintain the character of the neighborhood as outlined in the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study. Final Plat: The Hoigaard Village 1st Addition plat consists of 6 newly formed lots: Block 1: Lot 1 – Mixed Use – 25,000 s.f. retail and 74 loft condominiums Lot 2 – Condominiums – 58 units Block 2: Lot 1 - Parking lot Lot 2 - Pond area Lot 3 - Apartments – 220 units Lot 4 - Row houses – 22 units (condominium ownership) Required Yards Required by Zoning Code Provided Mixed Use Building, Lot 1 Front 0’ (PUD Required) 14’9”-26’ West 0’ (PUD Required) 14’-16’ East 0’ (PUD Required) 9’-14’ Rear 0’ (PUD Required) 94’ Condominium Building, Lot 2 Front 65’ 24’ West 45’ 13’ East 40’ 8’ Rear 25’ 16’ Row Houses, Lot 3 Front 30’ 17’ West 18’ 14’ East 15’ 6’ Rear 25’ 10’ Apartments, Lot 4 Front 67’ 76’ West 42’ 92’ East 47’ 42’ Rear 25’ 16’ St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 6 At this time, the developer is requesting Final Plat approval for Lots 1 and 2 of Block 1 only. The developer plans to apply for approval of the Final Plat for Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 of Block 2 within the next several months. Drainage and utility easements, as required by City Code, are provided at all property boundaries. The developer has agreed to pay all required park and trail dedication fees for the development. Those fees must be paid prior to filing the Final Plat. Park and Trail dedication will be paid incrementally as the development is completed and final plat drawings are filed; for this reason, the entire amount will not be received until the entire development is completed. Park and trail dedication is as follows: Fee Type Fee Number of Units Total Fee Park Dedication – residential $1,500 per residential unit 374 $561,000.00 Park Dedication – commercial 5% of current market value of unimproved land as determined by City Assessor 21% of $66,190.00 $13,899.90 Trail Dedication $225 per residential unit 374 $84,150.00 Total Fees $659,049.90 Tree replacement has also been considered; though the developer is replacing trees at a greater than 5:1 ratio, it is impossible to replace sufficient caliper inches on-site. For this reason, the developer will be required to pay the fee for replacement of 124 caliper inches, resulting in a required payment of $11,600. The proposed plat meets all other requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. Construction of public sidewalks within and around new subdivisions is required. Along W. 36th Street, the sidewalk ranges from a minimum of 18’ wide to a maximum of 39’ wide. Sidewalks provided through the remainder of the development meet the design standards for multifamily residential sidewalks at six feet in width. Public Process and Contributions: Public Process: Urban Land II, LLC., (Frank Dunbar) presented the development proposal at two neighborhood meetings to obtain the community’s input. The developer applied for amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map. For each of those amendments, a public hearing was held at the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission recommended approval of both amendments. The City Council granted final approval to the required amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Official Zoning Map in 2005. The Council has discussed the development at several Study Sessions; including discussions regarding the application for Tax-Increment Financing (TIF). St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 7 The Council approved the Preliminary Planned Unit Development, Preliminary Plat with Subdivision Variance, and Vacation of an alley previously (Fall 2005). The Planning Commission held a public hearing on December 21, 2005, and recommended approval of the Final PUD and the Final Plat for the first portion of the development. As part of the Planning Commission review, two conditions for approval were added and accepted by the developer; first, that bicycle parking must be shown on the official plans, and second, that snow shall be removed to an off-site location during all major snow events. Minutes from the Planning Commission meeting are included. Other Public Contributions: As part of the Hoigaard’s Village development, several contributions to the public are being made by the developer. Included is land area and payment for a portion of the stormwater pond, which will provide stormwater ponding for the development and 31 acres outside the development area. The developer has agreed to contribute $85,000 for public art at the development; a display of public art in the central green area adjacent to the pond and a display along the West 36th Street streetscape will be included. Other public improvements include the removal of contaminated soils from the site, replacement of the aging streetscape along West 36th Street, and the placement of public sidewalks throughout the site. At the current time, Staff does not believe it is feasible to create a Special Service District along West 36th Street. To ensure that a similar level of environmental quality is maintained along West 36th Street, one requirement of the developer is the completion of a maintenance agreement for that portion of the development. Aside from specific physical contributions to the public, the development also includes an easily navigable street grid that benefits the City. The use of the traditional street grid ensures that the City retains its pre-existing development character. Finally, the developer has provided structures that will feature a high degree of aesthetics, using high-quality architectural materials and precise architectural details that will improve the value of the Elmwood neighborhood. Recommendation: Staff recommends adoption of resolutions approving the Final Planned Unit Development and Final Plat for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Hoigaard Village 1st Addition, subject to conditions contained in the resolutions. Attachments: Resolution approving the Final PUD for Hoigaard’s Village Resolution approving the Final Plat for the first two buildings at Hoigaard’s Village Site Plan and related documents Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Associate Planner Meg McMonigal, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Reviewed by: Kevin Locke, Community Development Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 8 RESOLUTION NO. 06-019 RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR FINAL PLAT OF HOIGAARD VILLAGE 1st ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Union Land II, LLC, owner and subdivider of the land proposed to be platted as Hoigaard Village 1st Addition has submitted an application for approval of final plat of said subdivision in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder. 2. The proposed final plat has been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park. 3. The proposed plat is situated upon the following described lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit: Parcel A: 3501 Xenwood Avenue South Lots 11 to 23 inclusive, Block 27, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park” Torrens Parcel B: 5616 36th Street West Lots 7 and 10 except the South 18 feet of said lots, Block 27, “St. Louis Park” Abstract Lots 24 and 25, except the South 18 feet of said lots, Block 27, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park” and Lot 9, except the South 18 feet thereof, Block 27, “St. Louis Park” Torrens Parcel D: 5626 36th Street West Lots 6, Block 27, “St. Louis Park Addition” Abstract St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 9 Conclusion 1. The proposed final plat of Hoigaard Village 1st Addition is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: a. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the conditions of this resolution, the approved Official Exhibits which shall be revised prior to signing to meet the recommended conditions, and City Code. b. Before a final plat is signed by the City, the developer shall comply with the following requirements: 1) A development agreement, as approved by the City Attorney, shall be signed to address sidewalk construction, landscaping, tree replacement, parking expansion on 36th St. West, street repair and repaving, streetscape construction, and public art contributions. 2) Submit a financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the costs of the required improvements. 3) Submit a financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of $1,000 to ensure that a Mylar and electronic copy of the final plat is provided. 4) A maintenance agreement for the stormwater pond must be executed between the City and the Developer. 5) Condominium association papers must be approved by the City Attorney. 6) Park Dedication, Trail Dedication, and Tree Replacement fees must be received by the City. 7) Contributions for public art must be received by the City. c. Developer shall reimburse City attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents as required in the Final Plat approval. provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein. 3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth in Paragraph No. 1 above and the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code have been fulfilled. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 10 4. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section 26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 11 RESOLUTION NO.06-020 RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED M-X MIXED USE AND R-C MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 5616 36TH STREET WEST 3550 STATE HIGHWAY NO. 100 SOUTH 3501 XENWOOD AVENUE SOUTH 5626 36TH STREET WEST WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Preliminary PUD on November 21, 2005, Resolution No. 05-162; and WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received on December 7, 2005 from the applicant, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD at the meeting of December 21, 2005, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD on a 5-0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments in the record of decision. BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Union Land II, LLC, has made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the M-X Mixed Use and R-C Multi-Family Residential districts located at 5616 36th Street West, 3550 State Highway No. 100 South, 3501 Xenwood Avenue South, and 5626 36th Street West for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Parcel A: 3501 Xenwood Avenue South Lots 11 to 23 inclusive, Block 27, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park” Torrens Parcel B: 5616 36th Street West Lots 7 and 10 except the South 18 feet of said lots, Block 27, “St. Louis Park” Abstract St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 12 Lots 24 and 25, except the South 18 feet of said lots, Block 27, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park” and Lot 9, except the South 18 feet thereof, Block 27, “St. Louis Park” Torrens Parcel C: 3550 Highway 100 South A tract of land comprising Lots 10 to 34, inclusive, Block 26, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park” and the vacated alleys in said Block 26; Lots 3 to 13 inclusive, Block 75, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park” and the vacated alley in said Block 75; all the vacated Webster Avenue, Former First St., adjoining the Easterly line of said Block 26; Lots 1 to 7, inclusive, and a part of Lots 8, 9 and 10, Block 14, “Collins’ Addition to St. Louis Park”; and a part of the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter, Section 6, Township 28, Range 24; all described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of Block 26, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park”; thence East along the South line of said Block 26 and its extension to the Southeast corner of Lot 13, Block 75, “Rearrangement of St. Louis Park” ; thence South along the West line of the Southwest Quarter of Section 6, Township 28, Range 24, to the Westerly right-of-way line of State Trunk Highway No. 100; thence Easterly and Northeasterly along said Westerly right-of-way line to the Northwesterly line of said Block 14, “Collins’ Addition to St. Louis Park”; thence Southwesterly along the Northwesterly line of said Block 14 and its extension to the Northwesterly corner of Lot 34, in said Block 26, thence South along the West line of said Block 26 to the point of beginning: EXCEPT that part thereof shown as Parcel 7 on Minnesota Dept. of Transportation Right of Way Plat Numbered 27-41. Torrens Parcel D: 5626 36th Street West Lots 6, Block 27, “St. Louis Park Addition” Abstract 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 05-62-PUD) and the effect of the proposed PUD on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that the PUD will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also determined that the proposed PUD is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 36-367(b)(5). 4. The contents of Planning Case File 05-62-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 13 Conclusion The Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) at the location described is approved based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in conformance with the Final PUD official exhibits. 2. The following maximum and minimum requirements, as indicated in the official exhibits, shall apply to the PUD: a. The mixed-use building along West 36th Street shall have: i. A maximum of 74 residential units. ii. A minimum of 105 enclosed parking spaces. iii. A minimum of 25,000 square feet of retail space. iv. A minimum of 584 square feet of underground bicycle storage space. v. Second floor balconies shall remain open. No accessory structures, whether permanent of temporary in nature, shall be allowed. b. The condominium building south of West 35th-1/2 Street shall have: i. A maximum of 58 residential units. ii. A minimum of 103 enclosed parking spaces. c. The row houses shall have: i. A maximum of 22 residential units. ii. A minimum of 44 enclosed parking spaces. d. The apartment building shall have: i. A maximum of 220 residential units. ii. A minimum of 180 enclosed parking spaces. 3. Modifications to the Zoning Code are approved as follows: a. Setback modifications as shown on the official site plan, allowing deductions in setback requirements outlined in the staff report. b. A 15% reduction from the required off-street parking spaces. 4. Conditions for the approval of the Planned Unit Development, to be included in the Development Agreement between the City and the Developer, are as follows: a. Developer agrees to provide the site for the regional stormwater pond and pay 25% of the cost of its construction. b. Developer agrees to contribute $85,000 for public art in the central green area and along 36th Street West. c. Developer agrees to provide at least 17% of the development for Designed Outdoor Recreation Area. d. Developer agrees to hold harmless the City and remediate any environmental contamination found on any part of the redevelopment site. e. Developer agrees to place any on-site utilities underground. f. Developer agrees to enter into a maintenance agreement for the continued maintenance of the streetscape along 36th Street West. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 14 g. Developer agrees to provide a snow-removal agreement with the City to ensure all snow is removed to an off-site location during major snow events. 5. Prior to starting any site work, the following conditions shall be met: a. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant and owner. b. A preconstruction conference shall be held with the appropriate development, construction and city representatives. c. A staging plan for demolition and construction shall be filed with the City. d. All necessary permits must be obtained. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the Mixed-Use Building along 36th St. W. and the Condominium Building south of 35-1/2 St. W., the developer shall: a. Sign a Development Contract b. Financial guarantees shall be in place. c. Building and architectural screening materials samples and colors must be submitted to an approved by the Zoning Administrator. 7. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for the rowhouses or apartment building, the developer shall: a. Obtain all necessary approvals, including approval of the final plat for this phase of the redevelopment. b. Remove the smokestack and any related contamination. c. Complete any necessary environmental remediation. d. Remove the billboard located on the site. e. Building and architectural screening materials samples and colors must be submitted to an approved by the Zoning Administrator. 8. Prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy, as-built drawings of the relocated public utilities shall be submitted to and approved by the Director of Public Works. 9. Fire lanes shall be in accordance with the official exhibits. 10. Any modifications to the site plan resulting from the construction of Highway 100 shall require a Minor Amendment to the PUD. 11. Prior to the installation of any signs, including temporary signs or new sign faces, a sign plan must be approved by the Zoning Administrator and sign permits must be obtained. 12. All roof-top equipment shall be screened from off-site views per Ordinance requirements. 13. The following façade design guidelines shall be applicable to all ground floor, non- residential facades located in the Mixed-Use building facing West 36th Street: a. Façade Transparency. Windows and doors shall meet the following requirements: St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 15 i. For street-facing facades, no more than 10% of total window and door area shall be glass block, mirrored, spandrel, frosted or other opaque glass, finishes or material including window painting and signage. The remaining 90% of window and door area shall be clear or slightly tinted glass, allowing views into and out of the interior. ii. Visibility into the space shall be maintained for a minimum of 3 feet. This requirement shall not prohibit the display of merchandise. Display windows may be used to meet the transparency requirement. b. Awnings. i. Awnings must be constructed of heavy canvas fabric, metal and/or glass. Plastic and vinyl awnings are prohibited. ii. Backlit awnings are prohibited. c. Use of Sidewalk. A business may use that portion of a sidewalk extending a maximum of 5 feet from the building wall for the following purposes, provided an 8 foot minimum horizontal clearance along West 36th Street is maintained between obstructions on the sidewalk: i. Display of merchandise. ii. Benches, planters, ornaments and art. iii. Signage, as permitted in the zoning ordinance. iv. Dining areas may extend beyond the 5 foot maximum, provided a 12 foot minimum horizontal clearance along West 36th Street is maintained between the obstructions on the sidewalk. 14. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction: a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. b. Loud equipment shall be kept as far as possible from residences at all times. c. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. d. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. e. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in order to mitigate the impact of construction on surrounding properties. In addition to any other remedies, the developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. Pursuant to Section 36-367(e)(6) of the Zoning Ordinance, the City will require execution of a development agreement as a condition of approval of the Final P.U.D. The development agreement shall address those issues which the City Council deems appropriate and necessary. The Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute the development agreement. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8a - Hoigaards Village Final Plat PUD Page 16 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 1 8b. Comprehensive Plan Amendments for three Excess Land Parcels Case No.: 05-71-CP; 05-72-CP; 05-73-CP Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan for 7701 Edgebrook Drive from P – Park to RL – Low Density Residential and approve publication of the summary resolution. Motion to adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan for a portion of 9019 Cedar Lake Road from P – Parks and Open Space to RL – Low Density Residential as shown on the attached map and approve publication of the summary resolution. Motion to adopt a resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan for 2715 Monterey Avenue South from P – Park to RL – Low Density Residential and approve publication of the summary resolution. Comprehensive Plan Designation: P - Parks and Open Space Request: RL - Low Density Residential Current Zoning: 7701 Edgebrook Dr. - R-2 – Single Family 9019 Cedar Lake Rd. - R-1 – Single Family 2715 Monterey Ave. S. - R-1 – Single Family Current Land Use: Vacant Proposed Land Use: Single-family dwelling(s) Request: Staff recommends an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for 7701 Edgebrook Dr., 9019 Cedar Lake Rd., and 2715 Monterey Ave. S. These amendments will change the lots’ designation on the Comprehensive Plan from Parks and Open Space to Low Density Residential; and will make the land use designation for these sites consistent with the existing zoning. The sites are zoned for single family residential use. Each parcel’s physical location and surroundings are indicated on the attached location maps. Background: At the December 5, 2005 City Council meeting, the Council approved a resolution in support of the sale of several parcels that were classified as excess publicly-owned land. This approval by the Council was preceded by a public process that began in January of 2005 with the appointment of the Excess Land Task Force. The Task Force found nine parcels city-wide that could be used for the construction of up to 17 single family homes. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 2 The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan are the next step in preparing the approved excess parcels for sale to the public. The sale of these parcels, which will provide move-up housing within St. Louis Park, includes guidelines to ensure that the future construction is compatible with the existing neighborhood and will give preference to current residents of St. Louis Park. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Land Use Plan designates densities of up to seven units per acre in the RL – Low Density Residential District. In this case, the maximum density is unlikely to be met on any of the proposed parcels. The proposal to amend the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map for these parcels is addressed in the Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, where it is stated that “the greatest deficit and need is for the creation and maintenance of detached, owner-occupied single family housing which are large enough to accommodate families. City housing efforts and resources should primarily address this need.” The proposal also meets the planning goals for land use, which call for infill development opportunities to help meet housing goals. Despite the Comprehensive Plan’s land use designation, these three parcels are not part of existing or proposed parks. The Parks Department has determined that these parcels are not necessary for park purposes. The existing Comprehensive Plan designation of Parks and Open Space reflects that these parcels are vacant and city-owned, rather than their suitability for parks. Like these parcels, most parks within St. Louis Park are currently zoned residentially, so no rezoning is required at this time. The land use Parks and Open Space is permitted by right in these districts. 7701 Edgebrook Dr.: The parcel at 7701 Edgebrook Dr. was determined by the Excess Land Task Force to be excess land that could be suitable for the construction of a single-family home. Staff has determined that the site at 7701 Edgebrook Dr. is an appropriate location for the development of one single family dwelling. The site is located mid-block and is currently used for occasional access to Edgebrook Park, which is located to the south of the parcel. Community Development and Parks Staff have determined that sufficient park frontage exists at either end of Edgebrook Park (via Pennsylvania or Rhode Island Avenues) to maintain easy access to the park. The existing lot has 105 feet of frontage; the minimum frontage required in the R-2 Zoning District is 60 feet. For this reason, two homes could not be placed on this lot. The most common frontage along Edgebrook Dr., however, is 50 feet. The proposed lot shares the same depth (130 feet) as all other lots on the street. The parcel meets or exceeds all the minimum site requirements for a single family home lot. 9019 Cedar Lake Rd.: The parcel at 9019 Cedar Lake Rd. was determined by the Excess Land Task Force to be excess land that could be suitable for the construction of up to four single-family homes. The site is located south of Cedar Lake Rd. and just north of Hannon Lake, providing adjacency to a significant natural amenity. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 3 The attached survey shows the buildable area above the 100-year floodplain. The maximum density that could be achieved on this parcel, based on a buildable area of 1.16 acres, would be just under four units per acre. The lot has just over 460 feet of frontage along Cedar Lake Rd. The R-1 Zoning Code requires a minimum of 75 feet of frontage per lot. Construction on the parcel is limited by a large stormwater outlet that empties into a wetland area on the eastern side of the lot. The topography of the parcel does not easily lend itself to residential development. The site is roughly flat and at-grade with Cedar Lake Rd. for only approximately 15 feet; at the 15-foot mark, the parcel drops off until it reaches Hannon Lake. Despite the drop in elevation and a 45- foot setback required from Cedar Lake Rd., it remains possible to build on the lot. As indicated on the attached survey, at least a 50’ x 50’ area is available to accommodate the construction of a relatively large house on each lot. The City Council’s action on December 5, 2005 directed Staff to seek development proposals for this site. This was required because of the unique characteristics and challenges presented at this site. A developer will be responsible for subdividing the parcel and completing any required environmental analysis. The process for the sale of the parcel at 9019 Cedar Lake Rd. has not yet been determined. 2715 Monterey Ave. S.: The parcel at 2715 Monterey Ave. S. was determined by the Excess Land Task Force to be excess land that could be suitable for the construction of a single-family home. The site is located just north of a cul-de-sac along Monterey Ave. S. The existing lot has 105 feet of frontage along Monterey Ave. S.; the minimum frontage required in the R-1 Zoning District is 75 feet. For this reason, two homes could not be placed on this lot. Most parcels along this portion of Monterey Ave. S. are irregularly shaped, as is this parcel. The lot shares the same depth as most other lots on the street. The lot, 10,920 square feet in size, would be considered a large lot in comparison to most surrounding parcels. A survey has not been completed for this parcel at the current time. Staff has hired WSB and Associates to complete a survey of the parcel, which will be completed prior to the sale of this lot. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan for the parcels at 7701 Edgebrook Drive, 9019 Cedar Lake Road, and 2715 Monterey Ave. S. Attachments: Location Maps Comprehensive Plan Amendment Maps Prepared by: Adam Fulton, Associate Planner Reviewed by: Meg McMonigal, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. 06-021 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364 7701 Edgebrook Drive WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 was adopted by the City Council on May 17, 1999 (effective September 1, 1999) and provides the following: 1. An official statement serving as the basic guide in making land use, transportation and community facilities and service decisions affecting the City. 2. A framework for policies and actions leading to the improvement of the physical, financial, and social environment of the City, thereby providing a good place to live and work and a setting conducive for new development. 3. A promotion of the public interest in establishing a more functional, healthful, interesting, and efficient community by serving the interests of the community at large rather than the interests of individual or special groups within the community if their interests are at variance with the public interest. 4. An effective framework for direction and coordination of activities affecting the development and preservation of the community. 5. Treatment of the entire community as one ecosystem and to inject long range considerations into determinations affecting short-range action, and WHEREAS, the use of such Comprehensive Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change, thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified according to procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan, and St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 5 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended adoption of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 on January 18, 2006, based on statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, extensive research and analyses involving the interests of citizens and public agencies; WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 05-71-CP); WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case File 05-71-CP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that the Comprehensive Plan, as previously adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council, is hereby amended as follows: Change the land use designation for 7701 Edgebrook Drive, as shown on the attached map, from Parks and Open Space to Low Density Residential. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 6 SUMMARY RESOLUTION NO. 06-021 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364 7701 Edgebrook Drive This resolution states that the land use designation of 7701 Edgebrook Drive will be changed from Park to Low Density Residential Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this resolution is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: February 16, 2006 St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 7 RESOLUTION NO. 06-022 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364 9019 Cedar Lake Road WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 was adopted by the City Council on May 17, 1999 (effective September 1, 1999) and provides the following: 1. An official statement serving as the basic guide in making land use, transportation and community facilities and service decisions affecting the City. 2. A framework for policies and actions leading to the improvement of the physical, financial, and social environment of the City, thereby providing a good place to live and work and a setting conducive for new development. 3. A promotion of the public interest in establishing a more functional, healthful, interesting, and efficient community by serving the interests of the community at large rather than the interests of individual or special groups within the community if their interests are at variance with the public interest. 4. An effective framework for direction and coordination of activities affecting the development and preservation of the community. 5. Treatment of the entire community as one ecosystem and to inject long range considerations into determinations affecting short-range action, and WHEREAS, the use of such Comprehensive Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change, thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified according to procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan, and St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 8 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended adoption of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 on January 18, 2006, based on statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, extensive research and analyses involving the interests of citizens and public agencies; WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 05-72-CP); WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case File 05-72-CP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that the Comprehensive Plan, as previously adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council, is hereby amended as follows: Change the land use designation as shown on the attached map from Parks and Open Space to Low Density Residential. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 9 SUMMARY RESOLUTION NO. 06-022 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364 9019 Cedar Lake Road This resolution states that the land use designation of 9019 Cedar Lake Road will be changed from Park to Low Density Residential Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this resolution is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: February 16, 2006 St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 10 RESOLUTION NO. 06-023 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364 2715 Monterey Avenue South WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 was adopted by the City Council on May 17, 1999 (effective September 1, 1999) and provides the following: 1. An official statement serving as the basic guide in making land use, transportation and community facilities and service decisions affecting the City. 2. A framework for policies and actions leading to the improvement of the physical, financial, and social environment of the City, thereby providing a good place to live and work and a setting conducive for new development. 3. A promotion of the public interest in establishing a more functional, healthful, interesting, and efficient community by serving the interests of the community at large rather than the interests of individual or special groups within the community if their interests are at variance with the public interest. 4. An effective framework for direction and coordination of activities affecting the development and preservation of the community. 5. Treatment of the entire community as one ecosystem and to inject long range considerations into determinations affecting short-range action, and WHEREAS, the use of such Comprehensive Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change, thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified according to procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan, and St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 11 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended adoption of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 on January 18, 2006, based on statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, extensive research and analyses involving the interests of citizens and public agencies; WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 05-73-CP); WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case File 05-73-CP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that the Comprehensive Plan, as previously adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council, is hereby amended as follows: Change the land use designation as shown on the attached map from Parks and Open Space to Low Density Residential. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8b - Comp. Plan Amend For Three Excess Land Parcels Page 12 SUMMARY RESOLUTION NO. 06-023 RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364 2715 Monterey Avenue South This resolution states that the land use designation of 2715 Monterey Avenue South will be changed from Park to Low Density Residential Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this resolution is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: February 16, 2006 St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8c - Torah Academy Agreement Page 1 8c. Agreement Between the City of St. Louis Park and Torah Academy Relating to Joint Use of Facilities. This agreement is for the joint use and cost sharing of three areas of the School and Fern Hill Park: the playground area, parking area, and southeast ball field. Recommended Action: Motion to approve theThe agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and Torah Academy will be on the City council agenda for joint use of facilities. § BackgroundOutline process PURPOSE OF REPORT: Approve Joint Use Agreement with Torah Academy. Background Staff has been attempting to clean up and formalize some of the long standing “hand shake” agreements. One of these is the informal agreement that the City has with Torah Academy. Staff has been working with the leaders of Torah Academy to initiate a joint facility use and cost sharing agreement. Joint Use Areas There are three areas of the school and Fern Hill Park that are used jointly by both parties: the playground, the parking area, and the southeast ball field. Torah Academy School has used the playground at Fern Hill Park and the picnic area for their school program without contributing money towards maintenance or replacement. The City has been using a portion of Torah Academy’s property as part of Fern Hill Park and mowing and maintaining the area. The blacktop area located south of the school has been used by both parties and has not been maintained very well. The blacktop area is owned by Torah Academy and is used as a parking lot for the park. Proposed Agreement Staff has worked with City Attorney, Tom Scott, to draft a joint use and cost sharing agreement with Torah Academy. Torah Academy has verbally agreed to this and will formally approve and sign it after approval by the City Council. The agreement outlines the following cost sharing proposals: • All improvements will be agreed upon prior to any work being performed. • All improvements will be listed in the City’s CIP. • The parking lot located near the ball field will be used jointly. • The City will pay 75% of the maintenance and repair costs of the parking lot and Torah Academy will pay 25% of such costs. • The cost of repair, maintenance and replacement of the playground equipment will be shared equally between the City and Torah Academy. • The City will continue to provide the necessary inspections of the equipment with trained staff. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8c - Torah Academy Agreement Page 2 • The City will continue to use the field area belonging to Torah Academy at no cost. The City will provide general maintenance of this area. • Each party will insure the improvements located on its respective property for casualty losses. • Each party will also maintain comprehensive general liability insurance covering its activities conducted on these shared recreational facilities. Next steps Staff recommends a motion to approve theThe agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and Torah Academy will be on the City council agenda for joint use of facilities outlined. Torah Academy will then sign the agreement. Before improvements are made, both parties will agree on the improvements, timing, and funding for each project.February 6 for your approval. Please contact me with any questions or concerns you may have. Attachments: Agreement Prepared By: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8c - Torah Academy Agreement Page 3 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK AND TORAH ACADEMY OF MINNEAPOLIS RELATING TO JOINT USE OF FACILITIES AGREEMENT, made as of February 6, 2006 between the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") 3700 Monterey Drive, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416 and TORAH ACADEMY OF MINNEAPOLIS, a Minnesota non-profit corporation (“Academy”), 2800 Joppa Avenue South, St. Louis Park, Minnesota 55416. RECITALS • The Academy is a school for children in grades _____ through _______ located at 2800 Joppa Avenue South in St. Louis Park. • The City owns and operates a park adjacent to the Academy property. • The City and Academy currently on an informal basis share the use of their respective recreational facilities. • The City and Academy desire to formalize their relationship in this Agreement. • NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. Facilities Map. Attached hereto is Exhibit “A” is an aerial photograph showing the boundaries of the City and Academy property, the parking lot, playground equipment, ball fields, and excluded hard surface area referred to in this Agreement. 2. Parking Lot. The parking lot located near the ball field will be used jointly by the Academy and members of the public using the joint facilities. City will pay 75% of the maintenance and repair costs, and the Academy shall pay 25% of such costs. The parties will agree on any work before it is performed. 3. City Playground Equipment. The playground equipment located on the City property will be jointly used by the Academy and the general public. The Academy will have the use of the playground on school days from 8 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Academy staff are responsible for supervising Academy children who are using the playground during school hours. The City does not provide on-site supervision at any time. The cost of repair, maintenance and necessary replacement of the playground equipment will be shared equally by the City and the Academy. The City will at its cost perform the necessary periodic inspections of the equipment required by any governmental safety regulations. The parties will agree on any work before it is performed. 4. Fields. The City will mow the grass and generally maintain the ball fields and general field area at its expense. St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8c - Torah Academy Agreement Page 4 5. Excluded Hard Surface Area. The hard surface area located behind the Academy is not part of this Agreement. The Academy shall control its use and be responsible for its maintenance and repair. 6. Insurance. Each party will insure the improvements located on its respective property for casualty losses. Each party will also maintain comprehensive general liability insurance covering its activities conducted on these shared recreational facilities. 7. Term. This Agreement will be for an initial term of _____ years, commencing January 1, 2006 and ending December 31, _______. Thereafter, the Agreement shall be automatically renewed on January 1 of each year, unless either party gives written notice to the other by the preceding September 1 of its intent to cancel the Agreement. This standard agreement has been reviewed by the City Attorney. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have signed this Agreement this ____ day of ____________, 200__. FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK: Attest: Nancy Stroth, City Clerk Jeff Jacobs, Mayor (seal) Thomas K. Harmening, City Manager TORAH ACADEMY OF MINNEAPOLIS Cynthia Walsh, Director of Parks & Recreation By Its St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8d - 1st Reading Amending Sec 12-2 Page 1 8d. First Reading: Proposed Ordinance Amending Chapter 12, Section II – Private Residential Pools Proposed ordinance amendment adding a requirement to enclose pool circulating pumps and motors within a building or other structure designed for sound attenuation. Recommended Action: Motion to approve first reading of the amendment to the Environmental Code – Private Residential Pools section of the Ordinance Code. Set 2nd reading for February 21, 2006. Purpose: The proposed ordinance is intended to reduce the sound level emitted by swimming pool circulating pumps and motors and reducing the level of mechanical noise experienced by neighboring properties. Many pool installations may be close enough to existing neighboring homes to create a 24 hour a day noise problem. Background: The Code currently requires a permit be issued for the installation of residential pools which have a water depth greater than 24 inches, surface area exceeding 250 square feet or potential water volume over 3250 gallons. This includes most above-ground and in-ground swimming pool installations. A number of performance requirements are currently in place for pool installations, including fencing, decking, sanitary and safe operation. Swimming pools equipment is designed to run continuous circulation and filtration, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The circulating pump and motor will generate some sound from this normal operation. In some cases, in-ground swimming pools have the equipment is placed within a pool building or garage. The City has received occasional complaints in the past regarding the noise generated. In one case the noise was increased greatly due to failing bearings within the circulating pump. City staff help resolve this by working with the property owner as the noise was loud enough to be considered a nuisance issue. In other cases the normal background sound of the pump is not sufficient to cause decibel readings to be loud enough to be considered a nuisance. The City Council discussed this issue at a recent study session and asked staff to prepare an ordinance for consideration. Analysis: The proposed ordinance would apply only to new pool installations. The City issues an average of five (5) pool permits a year. The pump and circulating equipment would need to be located within a building or have a noise attenuating structure built over it. These enclosures would be designed to reduce the sound level and should not be expected to totally eliminate any noise or hum emitting from the equipment. They would not be completely sealed since ventilation is required to keep the equipment from overheating. Attachments: Proposed Ordinance Prepared by: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park Council Meeting Item: 020606 - 8d - 1st Reading Amending Sec 12-2 Page 2 ORDINANCE NO. ________-06 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE CHAPTER 12: ARTICLE II – PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL POOLS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ORDAINS: Section 1. Section 12-2 (d) of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended by adding: (8) Circulating pumps and motors must be enclosed within a building or other structure designed for sound attenuation. Section 2. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. ADOPTED this ____ day of ______________, 2006, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council February 6, 2006 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Attorney City Clerk