HomeMy WebLinkAbout19-156 - ADMIN Resolution - City Council - 2019/12/02Resolution No. 19-156
Approving record of decision and the negative declaration of need for an
environmental impact statement for the Parkway Residences redevelopment
West 31st Street near Glenhurst Avenue South
Whereas, Sela Investments (“Proposer”) proposes to redevelop 12 parcels in St. Louis
Park to create 224 new residential units and rehabilitate 24 apartment units for a total of 248
residential units to create Parkway Residences; and
Whereas, the Proposer requests an amendment to the city’s 2040 Comprehensive Plan to
re-guide a portion of the site from medium density residential to high density residential; and
Whereas, the project crosses the threshold of a mandatory environmental assessment
worksheet (“EAW”) by having a total of more than 150 attached units in a development that
also requires a change to the comprehensive plan per MN Rules 4410.4300, subpart 19 C.
Residential Development; and
Whereas, the project when combined with Parkway 25, falls within the mandatory EAW
per MN Rules 4410.4300, subpart 1, 3-year look-back requirement; and
Whereas, the EAW was prepared by Loucks Inc., on behalf of the Proposer, who
submitted completed data portions of the EAW to the City of St. Louis Park consistent with
Minn. Rules Part 4410.1400; and
Whereas, the EAW was prepared using the form approved by the Minnesota
Environmental Quality Board (EQB) for EAWs in accordance with Minn. Rules 4410.1300; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park submitted a copy of the EAW to all public agencies on
the EAW distribution list and published EAW availability in the EQB Monitor on October 21,
2019, in accordance with applicable State laws, rules, and regulations; and
Whereas, the EAW comment period lasted from October 21, 2019 to November 20, 2019
and four (4) regulatory agencies submitted written comments during the comment period; and
Whereas, the City of St. Louis Park acknowledges the comments received from the
Metropolitan Council, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, the Office of the State
Archeologist, and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources; and
Whereas, city staff reviewed the proposed record of decision and finds it to be consistent
with the evidence submitted to the city and the applicable statutes and regulations, to the best
of their knowledge, and recommends the city council approve the findings of fact and record of
decision dated December 2019 and determine that no environmental impact statement (“EIS”)
is necessary, reasonable or warranted with respect to the Project under the circumstances; and
Whereas, the city council desires to make findings of fact and a record of decision that no
EIS is required with respect to the Project (“Negative Declaration”).
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 2
Now therefore be it resolved that the city council does hereby:
1. Adopt and approve the findings of fact and record of decision on the Parkway
Residences environmental assessment worksheet in the form which is attached hereto
as Exhibit A and hereby makes the findings of fact and conclusions which are contained
therein; and
2. Find and determine that, based upon the findings of fact and record of decision, no
environmental impact statement is required for the Project pursuant to the Minnesota
Environmental Policy Act or Minnesota Rules Parts 4410.0200 to 4410.6500.
Reviewed for administration: Adopted by the City Council December 2, 2019
Thomas K. Harmening, city manager Jake Spano, mayor
Attest:
Melissa Kennedy, city clerk
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 3
EXHIBIT A
PARKWAY RESIDENCES, ST. LOUIS PARK
Findings of Fact and Record of Decision
City of St. Louis Park
December 2019
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 4
1. Administrative Background
At Parkway Residences, Sela Investments, Ltd. LLC, proposes to develop new multi-family
buildings and restore three existing apartment buildings in the vicinity of West 31st Street near
Glenhurst Avenue South. The project will consist of four new multi-family buildings creating 224
new units plus the restoration of three existing apartment buildings that contain 24 units for a
total of 248 residential units. The project removes twelve existing buildings, including single -
family homes and apartments.
The City of St. Louis Park is the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) for this project. An
Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) has been prepared in accordance with Minnesota
Rules Chapter 4410. The EAW was mandatory per Minnesota Rules 4410.4300, subp art 19 C.
Residential Development and 4410.4300, subpart 1, 3- year look-back.
The EAW was filed with the Minnesota Environmental Quality Board (EQB) and circulated for
review and commend to the required distribution list. A notice of availability w as published in
the EQB monitor on October 21, 2019. A notice was also published in the Sun Sailor newspaper.
This notice included a description of the project, information on where copies of the EAW were
available, and invited the public to provide commen ts.
The EAW was made available electronically on the City of St. Louis Park’s website at
https://www.stlouispark.org/government/departments-divisions/community-
development/development-projects/parkway-residences and in hard copy at the following
locations:
St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, MN 55416
St. Louis Park Library, 3240 Library Lane, St. Louis Park, MN 55426
The EAW comment period extended from October 21 to November 20, 2019. Written
comments were received from four agencies. No written comments were received from the
public. All comments received were considered in determining the potential for significant
environmental impacts.
Based on the information in the record, which is composed of the EAW for the proposed
project, the comments submitted during the public comment period, the responses to
comments, and other supporting documents, the City of St. Louis Park makes the following
Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 5
2. Findings of Fact
2.1 Project Description
Sela Investments, Ltd. LLC, proposes to develop new multi-family buildings and restore three
existing apartment buildings in the vicinity of West 31st Street near Glenhurst Avenue South.
The project will consist of four new multi-family buildings creating 224 new units plus the
restoration of three existing apartment buildings that contain 24 units for a total of 248
residential units.
The Parkway Residences project is a collection of 15 properties consisting of single-family
homes and an assortment of smaller apartment buildings along both sides of West 31st Street
between Inglewood Avenue South and Glenhurst Avenue South. The development properties
are not all contiguous, thus the project will be built amongst other, existing buildings. The
project will remove twelve of the existing buildings and will reinvest in the restoration of three
apartment buildings. The development plan segments the project into the following four
campuses to be built in phases:
The west campus includes an existing strip center at the southeast corner of Inglewood
Avenue South and County Road 25 that will be replaced with an 11 -story apartment
building. The apartment will consist of eight-floors of residential units (84 units) with
parking and lobby space in the first two floors and the 11th floor dedicated to amenity
space. There is one-level of underground parking.
The north campus is toward the center of the site and includes six existing residential
buildings north of West 31st Street. The homes will be replaced with a 4 -story, 95-unit
apartment building with two-levels of underground parking. This apartment building is
expected to be the first phase of the project.
The southwest campus is at the corner of Inglewood Avenue South and West 31st
Street. It includes the removal of three existing single-family homes for the construction
of a 4-story, 39-unit apartment building with one level of underground parking. The
southwest campus is proposed to be a later phase of the project.
The southeast campus consists of two single-family homes that will be developed as a 6-
unit townhome. The townhome will be developed with affordable units as part of the
city’s inclusionary housing policy requirement to provide replacement housing for the
naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) existing in the project area.
The existing housing includes the three apartment buildings south of West 31st Street
that will remain and be renovated. The apartments include a total of 24 units, of which
22 are considered naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH), and are proposed to
remain as affordable housing units.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 6
2.2 Corrections to the EAW or Changes to the Project since the EAW was Published
There have been no changes to the proposed project design since the EAW was published.
2.3 Agency and Public Comments on the EAW
During the comment period, the City of St. Louis Park received no written comments from the
public and written comments from the following four agencies:
Minnesota Department of Administration –State Archaeologist
Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA)
Metropolitan Council
Consistent with state environmental rules, responses have been prepared below for all
substantive comments received during the comment period. Original comments in their
entirety are included in Appendix A.
1) Minnesota Department of Administration – State Archaeologist, November 1, 2019
Comment: “A review of our files indicates that the project area is situated at or adjacent
to the site of the former Minneapolis Quarantine Hospital and its associated cemetery.
According to a local newspaper article published on November 7, 1988 (Minnesota
Suburban Newspapers V.5 No. 32), human remains likely associated with the
Minneapolis Quarantine Hospital cemetery were recovered during construction
activities at the Diamond Hill Center, and it was reported that remains were recovered
in the area during the construction of Highway 7…Although no archaeological site is
current recorded in the project, given the location of the former hospital our office
recommends a qualified archaeologist conduct a Phase 1a literature review and
archaeological assessment, including historical archaeology. The literature search and
archaeological assessment should include recommendations concerning the necessity of
further archaeological field work for this project.”
Response: The city has requested the developer engage a qualified archaeologist
to conduct the literature review and archaeological assessment. Outreach with
the Office of the State Archaeologist will occur if there are any questions.
2) Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, November 18, 2019
Comment: “As a reminder, a DNR Water Appropriation Permit is required if there would
be dewatering of ground, stream, lake, or pond water in volumes that exceed 10,000
gallons per day, or one million gallons per year. This applies to both permanent and
temporary dewatering.”
Response: The city acknowledges the responsibility of the city and developer
regarding required permits. The DNR Water Appropriation Permit is identified as
one of the permits that must be obtained if determined it is needed.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 7
Comment: DNR information indicates that the project site is located within the City of
Edina drinking water supply management area. Potential pollutants of ground water
should be handled with care to protect the City of Saint Louis Park’s water supply (page
10).
Response: The city and developer acknowledge the site’s location relative to the
City of Edina’s drinking water supply management area. Implementation of best
management practices pertaining to stormwater management, erosion control,
and hazardous materials is intended to protect the area.
3) Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA), November 19, 2019
Comment: “Minnesota Pollution Agency (MPCA) staff has reviewed the EAW and has no
comments at this time…Please be aware that this letter does not constitute approv al by
the MPCA of any or all elements of the Project for the purpose of pending or future
permit action(s) by the MPCA. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Project proposer
to secure any required permits and to comply with any requisite permit cond itions.”
Response: The city acknowledges the responsibility of the city and developer
regarding required permits.
4) Metropolitan Council, November 20, 2019
Comment: “The Council’s Engineering Service Engineering program staff will need to
review, comment, and issue a non-objection decision relative to the issuance of the
construction permit by the MPCA before connection can be made to the City’s
wastewater disposal system.”
Response: The city acknowledges the need to coordinate with the Metropolitan
Council regarding the proposed local sanitary sewer for the site. The need for
plan submittal has been added to Section 2.4.3 below and Table 8.1 in the EAW.
Comment: “Council staff suggest the City consider alternative courses of action with
respect to reguiding…”
Response: The city has considered the suggested alternative approach to land
use and determined that the plan for reguiding to high density residential is the
most appropriate.
Comment: “The EAW describes a proposed project that may have an impact on multiple
Metropolitan Council Interceptors in multiple locations…To assess the potential impacts
to our interceptor system; prior to initiating this project, p reliminary plans should be
sent…”
Response: The city acknowledges the need to coordinate with the Metropolitan
Council regarding the wastewater system. The need for plan submittal has been
added to Section 2.4.3 below and Table 8.1 in the EAW.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 8
Comment: For item 11.b.ii - “The EAW should be corrected by referring to the National
Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Weather Service Atlas 14
precipitation frequency estimates. These superseded the 1961 TP -40 estimates in
2013.”
Response: The EAW has been amended in Item 11.b.ii to reference to the
National Weather Service Atlas 14.
2.4 Decision Regarding Need for an Environmental Impact Statement
The City of St. Louis Park finds that the analysis completed for the EAW and the additional
information considered in this document of findings of fact and conclusions are adequate to
determine whether the project has the potential for significant environmental effects based on
consideration of the four criteria identified in Minnesota Rules, par t 4410, subpart 7.
2.4.1 Type, Extent and Reversibility of Impacts
The City of St. Louis Park finds that the analysis completed for the EAW is adequate to
determine whether the project has the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW
described the type and extent of impacts to the natural and built environment anticipated to
result from the proposed project. Based on the EAW analysis and mitigation commitments, the
proposed project is not anticipated to result in substantial impacts. B elow is a summary of the
findings regarding the potential environmental impacts of the project are as follows:
Land Use – The project will be compatible with nearby land uses and land uses planned
in anticipation of the opening of the Southwest Light Rail Transit. A portion of the
project is already guided for transit-oriented development (TOD). The remaining portion
would need to be re-guided from medium-density to high-density residential. This
change would be supportive of the designated TOD area and ne arby station area
development objectives.
Geology – No susceptible features were identified through the EAW.
Soils and Topography – Soil borings indicate the site is suitable for development. Gentle
slopes will result in relatively low erosion potential during construction.
Water Resources – The project area does not include any surface waters and no
wetlands are indicated in mapping. The proposed project activities and planned land
uses are believed to pose a low threat to bedrock aquifers that supply the city’s drinking
water wells.
Wastewater - The city’s and regional wastewater system have the capacity to accept
and treat the proposed wastewater from the project.
Water - The city’s water system can adequately serve the project.
Stormwater management - Stormwater management will be designed to meet the city
and Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requirements. Stormwater discharges from
the project will be cleaner than current water discharges and rates will be at or below
existing discharge rates.
Wildlife and habitat - The site contains no fish or wildlife resources or habitats, nor any
threatened or endangered species. It is not anticipated that rare features will be
impacted. Greenspace, trees, and assorted shrubs and plants will be added to the
project to improve the habitat for urban wildlife.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 9
Historic resources - There are no historic resources known on site. However, in the
nearby area, a historic site and cemetery have been noted. The city and developer will
work with a qualified archaeologist to conduct a literature review and archeological
assessment.
Visual – The project will complement existing uses in the area.
Air – Emissions will be typical of residential development.
Noise – Noise levels will be typical of residential development.
Transportation – The traffic and parking study concluded that there is expected to be
minimal impact from the proposed project on the local and regional transportation
system. Additional sidewalk connections will improve non -motorized transportation.
Eruv – The site is noted to be within an Eruv, a boundary used by Orthodox Jews to
expand the area where observants can carry objects on the Sabbath. The city and
developer will coordinate with the Jewish community to discuss if any protocols are
necessary during the construction of the project.
2.4.2 Cumulative Potential Effects of Related or Anticipated Future Projects
Cumulative effects result from the incremental impact of the proposed project when added to
other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency or
person undertakes such other actions. No cumulative potential effects are anticipated for this
project. Overall, the project fits within the existing neighborhood. Given that the site is already
developed, and there are no wetlands, lakes, habitat, or wildlife, impacts are limited. The
project can be served by existing utilities and transportation infrastructure.
2.4.3 Extent to which the Environmental Effects are Subject to Mitigation by the
Ongoing Public Regulatory Authority
The mitigation of environmental impacts will be designed and implemented in coordination
with regulatory agencies and will be subject to the plan approval and permitting process.
Permits and approvals that have been obtained or may be required prior to project
construction are shown below:
Unit of Government Type of application Status
Minnehaha Creek Watershed
District
Stormwater management permit
Erosion Control permit
Application not submitted
Under a Memo of Understanding
giving the city permitting authority
City of St. Louis Park Preliminary Plat
Final Plat
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment
Rezoning to PUD
Preliminary and Final PUD
CUP for import/export of soils
over 400 cubic yards
Demolition permits
Public right-of-way permit
Sewer and Water permit
Building permits (including
building, electrical, mechanical,
Application submitted Nov 4, 2019
Application submitted Nov 4, 2019
Application submitted Nov 4, 2019
Application submitted Nov 4, 2019
Application submitted Nov 4, 2019
Application submitted Nov 4, 2019
Application not submitted
Application not submitted
Application not submitted
Application not submitted
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 10
plumbing)
Sign permits
Erosion Control permit (MOU
with watershed)
TIF, Tax Increment Financing
Alley Vacation, only if alternative
access to the lift station is
provided
Dewatering Permit
Application not submitted
Application not submitted
Application not submitted
Application submitted Nov 4, 2019
Application not submitted
MPCA Notification of intent to perform
a demolition
Construction site stormwater
permit
Sewer connection permit
Application not submitted
Application not submitted
Application not submitted
Metropolitan Council Plans for on-site local sanitary
sewer submitted to
Environmental Service
Engineering Staff
Project plans (methods and
means of providing wastewater
services) submitted to Interceptor
Engineering
Plans not submitted
Plans not submitted
MDH Water extension permit
Asbestos Removal
Application not submitted
Application not submitted
DNR Water appropriation permit Obtain if needed
MnDOT Driveway access permits and
utility permits
Drainage permit
Permit for use of or work on
Highway 7
Obtain if needed
Obtain if needed
Obtain if needed
2.4.4 Extent to which Environmental Effects can be Anticipated and Controlled as a
Result of Other Environmental Studies
The City of St. Louis Park has previous multi-use development experience, and similar projects
have been designed and constructed throughout the county. Design and construction staff are
familiar with the project area. No problems are anticipated that city staff has not encountered
or successfully solved previously in similar projects in or near the project area. The city finds
that the environmental effects of the project can be ant icipated and controlled as a result of
environmental review and experience on similar projects.
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1
Resolution No. 19-156 11
3. Conclusions
1. All requirements for environmental review of the proposed project have been met.
2. The EAW and the permit development processes related to the project have generated
information that is adequate to determine whether the project has the potential for
significant environmental effects.
3. Areas where potential environmental effects have been identified will be addressed
during the final design of the project. Mitigation will be provided where impacts are
expected to result from project construction, operation, or maintenance. Mitigation
measures are incorporated into project design and have been or will be coordinate with
state and federal agencies during the permit process.
4. Based on the criteria in Minnesota Rules, part 4410,1700, the project does not have the
potential for significant environmental effects.
5. An environmental impact statement is not required for the proposed project.
For the City of St. Louis Park
_____________________________________________ ___________________________________________
Jake Spano, mayor Thomas K. Harmening, city manager
DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CF7F7BD-7188-48FB-9671-0C7B514E39D1