Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2005/09/19 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA September 19, 2005 – 7:30 p.m. 6:00 p.m. David Day Memorial Service 7:00 p.m. Study Session – Westwood Room 1. Call to Order a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll Call 2. Presentations a. Junior Naturalist Recognition b. Judie Erickson Recognition 3. Approval of Minutes a. City Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 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 - None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing – Knollwood Place Apartment Project Private Activity Revenue Bond Public Hearing to consider issuance, sale, and delivery of variable rate demand Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds for the benefit of Knollwood Place Apartments Project. Recommended Action: Mayor to close Public Hearing. Resolution authorizing the issuance, sale, and delivery of variable rate demand multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds in the amounts of $12,300,000 and a Housing Revenue note in the amount not to exceed $1,700,000. 6b. Proposed Transfer of Cable Television System Public hearing to discuss issues regarding the proposed transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance and cable system from Time Warner Cable, Inc. to Comcast Cable Communications, LLC. Recommended Action: Motion to close the public hearing and refer this item to the October 10, 2005 Council meeting. 6c. Time Warner Cable TV Franchise Renewal Public hearing to discuss the status of the franchise renewal process with Time Warner Cable, Inc. Recommended Action: Motion to continue the public hearing and extend the term of the franchise agreement to October 10, 2005 or direct staff to proceed to the formal process for the cable TV franchise renewal (a specific recommendation will be made at the meeting). 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Canvass of City Primary Election Results Resolution declaring results of the Municipal Primary Election held September 13, 2005 Recommended Action: Motion to approve the resolution declaring results of the Municipal Primary Election held September 13, 2005 8b. 1st Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Local Tax on Lawful Gambling and Adoption of a Resolution Concerning its Collection This action will reduce the amount of tax paid to the city from charitable gambling organizations from .075% to .0010% and suspend collection for the remainder of calendar year 2005. Recommended Action: § Motion to approve first reading of an ordinance concerning local gambling tax and set second reading for October 10, 2005 § Motion to adopt the resolution suspending collection of the gambling tax effective immediately. 8c. Wireless Internet Service Feasibility Study Recommended Action: Motion to receive wireless study report and refer it to September 26 study session for further review, analysis, and discussion of issues and options. Direct staff to conduct any follow-up activities Council feels appropriate at this time. 8d. Request of Union Land II, LLC on behalf of Hoigaards, Inc, The Franz Family Partnership, David Turbenson Enterprise LLC, Larry H. Hjelle, and Avis K. Ahrndt for a Comprehensive Plan Map amendment for a Mixed-Use and Multi- Family Residential development for property located at 3550 State Hwy 100 S, 3547 Xenwood Avenue S, 3555 Xenwood Avenue S, 3501 Xenwood Avenue S, 5616 West 36th Street, 5626 West 36th Street. Case Nos. 05-36-CP Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use designation from Commercial and Industrial to Mixed-Use and Residential High Density Recommended Action: Motion to approve resolution and summary for publication for amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020 land use map from C – Commericial and I – Industrial to CMX – Commercial Mixed-Use and RH – Residential High Density with conditions as stated in the resolution. 8e. Cancelled 8f. Request of RKL Landholdings, LLC (Emad Abed) and ARCA for Preliminary and Final Plat approval for “MODA of St. Louis Park” and Preliminary and Final PUD approval for Meadowbrook Lofts for property located at 7000, 7002, 7050, 7052 Excelsior Boulevard and 3985 Meadowbrook Road. Case Nos. 05-44-PUD and 05-45-S Description: Plat property, construct a 6-story, 107 unit condominium project, mitigate existing floodplain and wetland Recommended Action: ü Motion to approve resolution for Preliminary and Final Plat for “MODA of St. Louis Park” ü Motion to approve resolution for Preliminary and Final PUD for Meadowbrook Lofts 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 at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 19, 2005 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 Traffic Study No. 591: Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing continuation of temporary permit parking in front of 3128 Idaho Avenue South. 4b City Engineer’s Report: Alley Paving – 2900 block between Ottawa and Princeton Avenues – Motion to adopt the attached resolution that accepts this report, establishes this Improvement Project and sets a Public Hearing and Assessment Hearing date of October 17, 2005. – Project No. 2005-1800. 4c Planning Commission Minutes of August 17, 2005 4d Human Rights Commission Minutes and Meeting Notes 4e Motion to accept vendor claims for filing (supplement) AGENDA SUPPLEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 19, 2005 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 City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 1 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA September 6, 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, Susan Sanger and Sue Santa Staff present: Associate Planner (Mr. Fulton), City Manager (Mr. Harmening), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Civic TV Coordinator (Mr. Dunlap), Community TV Coordinator (Mr. McHugh), Director of Technology and Support Services (Mr. Pires), Environmental Coordinator (Mr. Vaughan), Finance Director (Ms. McGann), Planning/Zoning Supervisor (Ms. McMonigal), Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin), Public Works Operations Superintendent (Mr. Hanson) and Recording Secretary (Ms. Stegora-Peterson). 2. Presentations a. Evergreen Awards Mr. Vaughan presented Evergreen awards to Kay Wolfe and Gary Opperman, Steven and Sandra Katkov and Wayne and Deborah Johnson. b. EVR Grant Award – Commissioner Dorfman Commissioner Dorfman presented a check for $4.75 million to the City of St. Louis Park for clean up of the Golden site. The Council thanked staff and Commissioner Dorfman for working to obtain the funds. Councilmember Basill indicated that the Elmwood neighborhood had already publicized how pleased they were about this and had watched this carefully. He thanked Commissioner Dorfman on behalf of the neighbors. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of August 15, 2005 The minutes were approved as presented. 3b. Study Session Minutes of August 15, 2005 The minutes were approved as presented. 3c. Study Session Minutes of July 25, 2005 Councilmember Santa indicated she should be shown as absent. The minutes were approved as corrected. 3c. Study Session Minutes of August 1, 2005 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 2 The minutes were 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. 4a Approve a contract with Three Rivers Park District to clear and remove snow from the LRT and Cedar Lake Extension Trails through the City of St. Louis Park for 2005-2006 winter season 4b Adopt Resolution No. 05-117 approving a Minor Amendment to Park Tavern’s Special Permit to allow a change in security requirements relating to an approved building addition 4c Bid Tabulation: Designate Cool Air Mechanical, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $85,200.00 for the 2005 Police Department HVAC Upgrade Project - Project No. 2005-1600. 4d Bid Tabulation: Designate Total Construction & Equipment, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $553,740.00 for the purchase and installation of standby natural gas generators at Water Treatment Plant No. 1 & 4 including ASD Alternate #4 - Project No. 2005-1500. 4e Adopt Resolution No. 05-118 approving the preliminary and final plat of Belt Line Industrial Park Third. Case Nos. 05-38-S. 5100 36th Street 4f Adopt Resolution No. 05-119 rescinding parking restrictions along the north side of Walker Street adjacent to Louisiana Oaks Park. 4g Removed from agenda 4h Approve plans and specifications for the reconstruction of the parking lot at Cedar Knoll Park and authorize solicitation of bids for the project 4i Approve plans and specifications for the purchase and installation of a generator for the Rec Center and authorize solicitation of bids for the project 4j Accept Housing Authority Minutes of June 8, 2005 for filing 4k Accept Planning Commission Minutes of August 3, 2005 for filing 4l Accept Vendor Claim Report for Filing (Supplement) Mr. Harmening indicated item 4g should be pulled from the agenda which may result in the project not getting built this year. A neighborhood meeting is scheduled with impacted residents to discuss the timing. Councilmember Sanger asked when a decision would be made if the project gets paved this year? Mr. Harmening responded staff will recommend it be built in 2006. If the Council chooses to do something differently, they will look into it. The concern was it was late in the year and they didn’t want a partially completed project in the winter. Councilmember Sanger indicated residents were eager to have this done. Mr. Harmening stated the applicant requested item 8c be removed from the agenda. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 3 It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and Commissions - None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Time Warner Cable TV Franchise Renewal Update Mr. Pires updated the Council. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. Mark Scott, 3236 Jersey Av. S, indicated community access was important in this community. If a change in cable providers occurs, what happens to Internet service? Mr. Pires replied if Comcast takes ownership of the system, they would have the option of providing Internet service or having partners. His understanding was they were the soul provider. Mr. Scott expressed concern of Email addresses changing and having to make people aware of the new address, especially affected businesses. Councilmember Brimeyer indicated he asked about that at the last meeting and didn’t get an answer. For a business with an Email address all over the country, it was a big issue. Mayor Jacobs stated that pertained to the sale and didn’t have to do with the franchise. Mr. Pires responded with other franchises, the domain names had to be transitioned. They had not heard what Comcast planned to handle the transition, but expected it would be similar to what was done when they acquired AT&T. Staff can find information on what customers should expect. Councilmember Brimeyer indicated they should keep the option open of a municipally operated cable company. Councilmember Finkelstein asked staff to provide a written idea of how Time Warner and Comcast planned to deal with this issue and how much notice they would provide users. Mayor Jacobs suggested they consider having messages forwarded to a new address. Mr. Pires believed that was possible and would research it. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if they could require a condition of the transfer that they have a “cooperation” requirement where they assist people? Mr. Pires replied they could ask. Mr. Scott suggested they get information about how many businesses would be affected by this and how much it would affect them monetarily. Councilmember Basill believed they should run in parallel for a time and be an automatic notification when people send messages to the old address. They need to manage expectations and make residents aware some issues were controlled by Federal law. They can ask for some things, but the companies are not required to do it all. Councilmember Sanger requested staff provide answers to the following questions at the next meeting: Why is Time Warner balking at passing through reasonable costs of local St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 4 origination to users? Is there any evidence that Comcast charging higher rates for local origination, has discouraged subscribership? It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to continue the public hearing and extend the term of the franchise agreement to September 19, 2005. The motion passed 7-0. 6b. Public Hearing to consider a wine and beer license for YUM!, Inc., operating at 4000 Minnetonka Blvd. Ms. Reichert presented the staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. Diane Pecoraro, 2900 Glennhurst Av, stated a neighborhood meeting was held and neighbors welcome a business and hope it does well. Concerns were registered at the meeting about traffic and parking. There are issues with traffic on the block and they have requested a traffic study for the area. Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. Councilmember Sanger stated the neighborhood meeting focus was on issues concerning traffic and parking. Some concerns were raised about the liquor license and others thought it was a fine. The City doesn’t have discretion once all of the requirements for granting a liquor license have been met. She supported the application. She would try to find ways to ameliorate the situation. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to approve the wine and beer license for YUM! Inc. Councilmember Basill indicated the last time a liquor license came up, they discussed the number of licenses in the City and wanted this to be put on a study session. He was in favor of this, but they needed to look citywide at how many they felt were appropriate. Councilmember Finkelstein noted when they asked staff to discuss this issue, they were only looking at off-sale, but he agreed on-sale should also be considered. Ms. Reichert responded she was planning to bring a report to the next study session regarding proximity of retail liquor stores and could provide more information. Councilmember Brimeyer recalled legislation a few years ago for more liquor licenses? Ms. Reichert replied that was correct, they got twelve more liquor licenses. Last year the ruling was abolished by Statute. They do not currently limit on-sale intoxicating liquor stores, per Statute. As long as they are restaurants, there are an unlimited number allowed. Councilmember Finkelstein indicated they were concerned about the number of off-sale liquor stores in one area and proximity to schools and other types of uses. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 5 The motion passed 7-0. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Approve preliminary property tax levy and budget for the 2006 fiscal year, revisions to the 2005 adopted budget, set Public Hearing date for proposed budget and property tax levy, and approve HRA levy for taxes payable in 2006 Resolution No.’s 05-114 and 05-115 Ms. McGann presented the staff report. Councilmember Brimeyer requested a summary of additional staff positions. Ms. McGann replied they were intending to bring that information back. Mr. Harmening clarified they will not have adopted a final budget. It sets a preliminary budget and the maximum levy. There will still be budget discussions relative to the CIP and operating budget in the coming weeks and months. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if 4% remaining amount, which included the pavement management system, also included retirement of general obligation debt? Ms. McGann replied yes. There are three general obligation bonds that the City has outstanding. Councilmember Finkelstein asked what other cities were doing for levy amounts? Mr. Harmening replied the average was around 7%, and they were in the middle. Of the 7%, 3% was for operations and inflationary costs. 4% was for reinvestment in the community and the infrastructure. The retirement of debt is related to borrowing they had done to pay for infrastructure improvements around the City. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to adopt Resolution No. 05-114 establishing the preliminary tax levy and budget for 2006, approves revisions to the 2005 adopted budget, sets public hearing date for proposed budget and property tax levy, and approve Resolution No. 05-115 preliminary HRA levy for taxes payable in 2006. 8b. First Reading of an Ordinance amending Section 24-342 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances relating to snow removal on public sidewalks revising effective accumulation depth to reflect current and past city practices. Mr. Hanson presented the staff report. Mr. Harmening added in the special service district, the policy for snow removal was that they were not required to remove snow until 2” had fallen. They were putting the practice into policy to make enforcement with the ordinance consistent. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 6 It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Finkelstein, to approve First Reading of proposed Ordinance Code text amendments related to Snow Removal on Public Sidewalks and set Second Reading for September 19, 2005. Councilmember Sanger thought this was a public safety matter. She was concerned this sent the wrong message and may encourage people to slack off. They need to encourage people to try to keep their sidewalks clean. She had gotten calls from people saying they didn’t do a good enough job keeping their sidewalks clean. With decreased bus service, people were walking further for stops. A resident volunteered to sit on a task force to come up with solutions to keep sidewalks cleaned, which was a constructive way to address the issues. She was not in favor of the motion. Mr. Harmening stated some people in neighborhoods are not clearing their sidewalks. There are city sidewalks that the City cleans or through special service districts and there are neighborhood sidewalks that residents clean. There were discussions in the past of the City clearing all sidewalks in the city. They chose not to do that. He committed to bring back to the Council discussion about revisiting the policy for snow removal of city sidewalks versus neighborhood sidewalks. Staff would maintain they need to have a minimum standard when sidewalks are cleaned, otherwise they would be creating an expectation when there is a dusting, the City would be cleaning the sidewalks or that residents have to do that, which would be hard to live up to. Councilmember Finkelstein agreed and thought otherwise they would have an ordinance the City wasn’t enforcing people weren’t following which could lead to liability for individual homeowners and the City. Until they discuss the issue further at study session, they need to revise the ordinance to reflect the practice. Councilmember Sanger thought there may be a need for a common standard, but it was the “cart before the horse” to do the standard first. They should look at the expectations in terms of how could they best assure sidewalks were cleaned to a standard that is safe. Once they do that, possibly with help of a resident task force, then they can get to a standard. Mayor Jacobs indicated he heard concerns from kids about the walk to the bus stop. If they have a 1” snowstorm and three days later there is another and yet another, you get an icy sidewalk, which was dangerous. Kids walk in the streets and he worried about safety. He wanted sidewalks clear and couldn’t support this. It needed more discussion. Councilmember Basill was also concerned and believed this needed more discussion. It was difficult to get ice off. It was reasonable to ask people to clear sidewalks for normal snowfall (1-1 ½”). There was merit in what staff did talking about the ice. Maybe it could be defined differently. The idea of the resident task force may be a good idea. Councilmember Santa agreed about the ice, as she had fallen and broken an ankle. Her sidewalk was bare the night before and things change quickly. When there are sidewalks, they want to keep them clean. She had concerns as well, but knew they needed to set a standard, which should be common practice. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 7 Mr. Harmening stated nothing mandated they did this now. They could hold off and tie this in with a larger conversation about sidewalk cleaning. They probably couldn’t make changes to their policy for this year. Councilmember Finkelstein wanted this brought to a study session before mid- November. Nobody wanted someone to slip and fall, but if they didn’t have a standard, City staff would be unsure what to enforce. Councilmember Brimeyer withdrew his motion. He thought that they could only manage this to a certain degree. Mayor Jacobs believed they needed to talk about the result they were looking for. They wanted people to clean their sidewalks. By the time there is a complaint and staff goes out, it was very dangerous. Councilmember Brimeyer felt there were unreal expectations. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Santa to defer the item to a study session. The motion passed 7-0. 8c. Removed from the agenda 8d. Request by Sam’s Club for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a retail store in excess of 20,000 square feet in the C-2 General Commercial Zoning District Case No. 05-46-CUP 7115 W. Lake St. and 3745 Louisiana Ave. S. Resolution No. 05-116 Mr. Fulton presented the staff report. Councilmember Finkelstein asked if the addition of the gas station and liquor store would add pressure to Louisiana Avenue? Mr. Fulton replied the traffic study in 2004 determined that the onl y intersection impacted to an unacceptable level of service was Wooddale and Hwy 7. Councilmember Finkelstein indicated at the time the study was conducted, there wasn’t a gas station and liquor store. Councilmember Santa clarified they had a liquor store in the past and the traffic study included the gas station. Mayor Jacobs added there was a sense that the gas station wouldn’t be a destination trip, people would get gas while shopping. Councilmember Finkelstein indicated a concern about the pressure on Louisiana and Hwy 7. Mr. Harmening stated the EAW for the Methodist Hospital expansion looked at an assortment of traffic issues and assumed development throughout the area. They discovered St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 8 Hwy 7 and Louisiana would break down in the future. Interim improvements were done by reconfiguring the intersection and putting in lights. Wooddale and Hwy 7 would get top priority. They made application for Federal funding to assist rebuilding that intersection. Councilmember Finkelstein stated there was also future development of the West side of Louisiana at Hwy 7 and the LRT stop. Councilmember Omodt asked with the new construction, were they requiring a new sidewalk from Lake Street to Oxford on the East side of Louisiana and what would be the width? Mr. Fulton replied it would be reconstructed. The minimum width is five feet, but he was not certain of the exact width. It met City requirements. Councilmember Basill indicated in condition number 12, the applicant agreed to participate in the payment of a portion of the cost of future infrastructure improvements at Hwy 7 and Wooddale. Would it be a percentage of how much they use? Mr. Fulton replied it was included in the development agreement and was 15% of the cost of the improvement. Councilmember Omodt indicated parking was always an issue. What did it mean when they said they couldn’t say where employees would park because of competitive reasons? Dave Sullergren responded they located five possible sites, but didn’t want to solidify until this was approved. Councilmember Sanger asked where customers would park during construction? Mr. Sullergren replied they were short of spaces and they may drive by if they cannot park. They were trying to address it by having associates park off-site. Construction will start after the end of the retail season, when parking might be more of an issue. They would be short 100-150 spaces based on the existing store. They didn’t think there would be an issue that often and didn’t see a feasible way to provide off-site parking for customers. Councilmember Sanger asked if they should anticipate difficulties with customers parking on Lake Street or in the area? Mr. Sullergren responded he didn’t believe it was likely that a Sam’s Club customer, who generally buys large articles, would park that distance, but he wouldn’t want to predict human behavior. Mayor Jacobs indicated concern that customers might park in the Knights of Columbus parking lot or the Methodist overflow lot. Mr. Sullergren suggested as part of their plan, they could add a policing element to assure they would not intrude on the neighbors. Mayor Jacobs added the other issue would be having carts all over. Mr. Sullergren indicated they had a normal pick up for carts and they would include that in their plan. Keeping the existing store open while the new one was being constructed was not the best of situations in terms of operations, however it made sense economically and they knew there would be substantial improvement when they get done. Councilmember Sanger indicated there would be 59 parking spaces more than necessary. Had they considered a proof of parking and not paving excess spaces to maintain more green space? Mr. Sullergren replied they added additional green space in parking islands. Their assessment of needs may be different than the code requirement. They thought St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 9 they needed the spaces and hadn’t discussed proof of parking. They were at 4.7 (per thousand sq. ft.) and they start with the premise that anything below 5 is not optimum. Councilmember Sanger indicated at other commercial developments a “sea” of parking and many empty spaces. If they needed the spaces they could pave them later. Mr. Sullergren stated when they discussed the rezoning, they talked about the benefit of having the building on the North to screen parking. No matter how much green space they have, it can’t totally break up a parking lot. They attempted to address it by relocating the building and adding retaining walls, with substantial landscaping on Louisiana and other areas. They thought they had gone as far as they could and needed the 4.7 per 1,000. Councilmember Sanger stated that bike and walking trails runs South of the site, but there is no access to this site. Had they considered creating a connection for customers to get there by foot or bike? Mr. Sullergren suspected someone else owned that right of way. They would look into it, although he didn’t see people using the trail picking up their products. There were a lot of complexities with it that could make it difficult to accomplish. Councilmember Sanger noted she just wanted them to think about it. Councilmember Santa indicated a concern about construction parking. How that would that be addressed? Mr. Sullergren replied a staff condition required a parking plan for associates and mandated complete separation between the operations and the construction, including parking for construction employees. Councilmember Santa believed it made sense to have the building closer to Hwy 7 and the parking behind. She suggested there be signage during construction so people knew where to enter and that they were open. Mr. Sullergren responded they could provide directional signage as part of their plan. Councilmember Basill wanted to be sure that the sidewalk was planned. Mr. Sullergren replied it was a specific condition of staff approval. Councilmember Basill followed up on Councilmember Sanger’s comments, although it may be difficult, her point was well taken about the trail. They should check with the Hennepin County Regional Rail Authority. There is a very steep path now. From a community standpoint, he agreed it was unlikely for someone to go to Sam’s, but residents to the Southeast use the trail and could use a path there. It would be a safer way across Hwy 7. Mr. Sullergren replied that he hoped this would not be a condition of approval, but they would be happy to enter into a discussion with staff and those in charge for a public/private partnership to make that link work. Mayor Jacobs commented there was landscaping along the Louisiana side and sight lines are difficult to exit the site now. He would be careful about the vegetation there because it was difficult to see. Mr. Sullergren replied Councilmember Santa brought up the sight line issues and SRF looked at that closely. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No. 05-116 approval for a Conditional Use Permit to allow a retail store in St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 3a - Council Minutes of September 6, 2005 Page 10 excess of 20,000 square feet in the C-2 General Commercial Zoning District, subject to conditions recommended by staff. The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Mayor Jacobs stated that recent events had demonstrated the importance of City, public safety and fire workers, and the entire community who had invested in infrastructure, and those who make the utilities function. People can walk around safely. He was proud of that. Councilmember Omodt added as they watch the aftermath of Katrina, it was a great community when kids stepped forward and assisted by collecting money and neighbors were willing to respond. Councilmember Finkelstein encouraged people to donate and his prayers went out to everyone. 10. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:12 p.m. ______________________________________ ______________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4a - TS 591 Permit Parking at 3128 Idaho Ave S Page 1 4a. Traffic Study No. 591: Motion to adopt the attached resolution authorizing continuation of temporary permit parking in front of 3128 Idaho Avenue South. Background: The City received a request in 2004 from Ms. Laurel Mickelson of 3128 Idaho Avenue South to restrict on-street parking in front of her house. Ms. Mickelson was to undergo surgery and have a caregiver stay with her for several months. Ms. Mickelson’s caregiver has limited mobility, has been issued a disabled persons parking permit, and needs accessible parking. Due to other on street parking which occurs on her street, Ms. Mickelson had requested the City install permit parking in front of her home for a period of six months. This request came before the City Council on March 15, 2004, and a resolution was passed to allow for temporary permit parking for a period of six months. Ms. Mickelson required additional surgery, and on September 15, 2004, and March 21, 2005, the temporary permit parking was extended for additional periods of 6 months. Ms. Mickelson contacted the City again in early September. The temporary permit parking in front of her house ends on September 15, 2005. Ms. Mickelson will be having one more surgery on October 31, 2005, and needs to maintain the temporary permit parking in front of her house for another six months. Staff considers the resident’s request to be valid and supports the continuation of permit parking for handicap access at 3128 Idaho Avenue South. This recommendation is based on the following: 1. The resident of the household will require a caregiver due to additional upcoming surgery. 2. The caregiver has limited mobility and has been issued a disabled persons parking permit. 3. Conflicting parking tendencies with neighbors will be eliminated. Recommendation: Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution authorizing installation of temporary permit parking restrictions as described. Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Laura Adler, Engineering Program Coordinator Reviewed by: Scott A. Brink, City Engineer Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4a - TS 591 Permit Parking at 3128 Idaho Ave S Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 05- RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING INSTALLATION OF TEMPORARY PERMIT PARKING IN FRONT OF 3128 IDAHO AVENUE SOUTH TRAFFIC STUDY NO. 591 BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota that it is in the best interest of the City to establish a parking restriction based upon permit issuance in front of 3128 Idaho Avenue South. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that parking shall not be permitted at any time unless the vehicle prominently displays a City-issued parking permit on the left rear windshield. Emergency vehicles, governmental vehicles and commercial vehicles parked at curbside while work is conducted are exempt from these restrictions. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the parking restriction enacted herein shall remain in effect for a period of six months from the date of this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to install the following controls: 1. Permit parking at 3128 Idaho Avenue South Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 19, 2005 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4b - CER 2900 Ottawa-Princeton Alley Paving Page 1 4b. City Engineer’s Report: Alley Paving – 2900 block between Ottawa and Princeton Avenues – Motion to adopt the attached resolution that accepts this report, establishes this Improvement Project and sets a Public Hearing and Assessment Hearing date of October 17, 2005. – Project No. 2005-1800. Background: On April 8, 2005, the residents in the 2900 block of Ottawa and Princeton Avenues submitted a petition to the City requesting that the alley adjacent to their properties be paved in accordance with the City’s standard for alleys. The petition was signed by enough property owners (74%) to advance the project. The City’s policy states that at least 51% of the properties must sign the initial petition. The alley is an “L” shaped alley that runs south from W. 29th Street to the rear property line of 4800 Minnetonka, then west to Princeton Avenue. Twenty-one (21) properties abut the alley of which all would be assessed under our policy. City Alley Paving Special Assessment Policy: The City’s Alley Paving Special Assessment Policy is as follows: A. The cost of alley improvements for residential properties shall be assessed when at least 51 percent (alley front feet) of the property owners petition for the improvement: 1. Thirty (30) percent of the cost of the improvement shall be assessed against all properties abutting the alley. (INDIRECT BENEFIT) 2. Seventy (70) percent of the cost of the improvement shall be assessed against directly benefited properties as defined in paragraph 5(B). (DIRECT BENEFIT) B. A property is directly benefited if it has an existing garage with direct access to the alley, if an access to the alley could be constructed from an existing garage, or if no garage exists, there is sufficient area on the lot to build a garage with access to the alley. C. Commercial and multi-family property owners shall be assessed 100 percent of the cost of the improvement. D. Alleys shall be constructed of concrete and shall be assessed for a period of 20 years. Analysis: The City’s standard design for alley paving specifies a six (6)-inch thick concrete pavement, 10 feet in width, with driveway apron connections between the paved alley and abutting paved driveways. In accordance with City practice, the driveway connections will match existing materials and grades. Pavement grades will be established to provide positive drainage without requiring additional storm sewer construction, whenever possible. Staff has recently completed plans and a detailed estimate of the proposed alley. Public Involvement Process: Staff held an informational meeting for area residents on September 7, 2005 to inform residents of the assessment process and to review the preliminary plans. Nine (9) residents attended the meeting representing seven (7) properties. Staff provided an overview of the project and answered the resident’s questions. At the meeting staff posed a question about construction timing and what schedule might be favored. Two schedules were presented, a fast track schedule for construction yet this Fall and a Spring 2006 schedule. Staff explained that with fast track schedule, bid prices may be higher because of the limited time left St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4b - CER 2900 Ottawa-Princeton Alley Paving Page 2 in this year’s construction season. Upon discussing the pros and cons of each schedule, all of the residents attending the meeting agreed that construction in Spring 2006 would be best. Staff plans to provide a follow-up letter to the all of the abutting residents of the proposed alley project. The letter will included a review of the information provided at the neighborhood meeting along with an estimated assessment for each for the abutting parcels. The letter will also offer those residents unable to attend the meeting an opportunity to contact staff with any questions or arrange a meeting to view the plans at City Hall. Once the project is awarded, staff will schedule another meeting with the affected property owners to discuss the construction schedule. Financial Considerations: The City’s Policy for funding alley improvements requires the abutting property owners to pay 100% of the improvement costs. The Policy also provides for the assessments to be levied as direct and indirect benefits based upon abutting frontage. To assist the petition sponsor, City staff provides the petition forms and a rough estimate of the alley construction cost before the sponsor begins to gather signatures. Our initial rough estimate which considers only concrete paving with a limited amount of grading work was $48,530. Now that preliminary plans are complete, staff has prepared a detailed estimate that puts the cost at $69,000. The increased cost is a result of additional grading work which is required to provide positive drainage throughout the length of the alley. An estimate of the assessment amount for each property is attached. A summary of the estimated costs and revenue sources is as follows: Estimated Costs: Construction Costs $50,350 Engineering & Administrative (12%) $ 6,050 Contingencies $12,600 TOTAL $69,000 Revenue Sources: Special Assessments $69,000 Alley Improvement Project Timetable: Should the City Council approve the City Engineer’s Report, it is anticipated that the following schedule could be met: • City Engineer’s Report to City Council September 19, 2005 • City Council holds Public Hearing & Assessment Hearing October 17, 2005 • End of 30 Day Appeal on Assessments November 16, 2005 • Advertise for bids February 2006 • Bid Opening February/March 2006 • Bid Tab Report to Council March 2006 • Preconstruction meeting with residents Spring 2006 • Construction Spring 2006 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4b - CER 2900 Ottawa-Princeton Alley Paving Page 3 Feasibility: The project, as proposed herein, is cost-effective and feasible under the conditions noted and at the costs estimated. Attachments: Resolution Property owner list with estimated assessments Prepared by: Jim Olson, Engineering Project Manager Reviewed by: Scott Brink, City Engineer Michael P. Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4b - CER 2900 Ottawa-Princeton Alley Paving Page 4 RESOLUTION NO. __________ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE CITY ENGINEER’S REPORT, ESTABLISHING AN ALLEY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT, PROJECT NO. 05-18 AND SETTING A PUBLIC HEARING AND ASSESSMENT HEARING DATE OF OCTOBER 17, 2005 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park has received a report from the City Engineer related to the alley paving in the 2900 block of Ottawa and Princeton Avenues NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1. The City Engineer’s Report regarding the alley paving in the 2900 block of Ottawa and Princeton Avenues is hereby accepted. 2. This proposed alley paving improvement project is hereby established. 3. A public hearing shall be held on such proposed improvements on the 17th day of October, 2005, in Council Chambers of the City Hall at 7:30 p.m. and the Clerk shall give mailed and published notice of such hearing and improvements as required by law. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 19, 2005 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4b - CER 2900 Ottawa-Princeton Alley Paving Page 5 Estimated Cost: $69,000 March 2005 Revised Aug. 19,2005 70% Direct Benefit (garage or access) 30% Indirect Benefit (dust, noise, and mud) (A) Direct Benefit: 721 total footage and $66.99 per front foot (B) Indirect Benefit:1074 total footage and $19.27 per front foot. total $69,000.00 direct $48,300.00 indirect $20,700.00 ********* Indirect ************ ******** Direct ********** Total Indirect Direct Direct & Address Ind feet % Indirect Allocation Dir feet % Direct Allocation Indirect 2901 Princeton Ave. S 40 3.72 $771 0 0.00 $0 $771 2905 Princeton Ave. S. 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2909 Princeton Ave S 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2913 Princeton Ave S 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2917 Princeton Ave S 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2921 Princeton Ave S 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2925 Princeton Ave S 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2929 Princeton Ave S 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2933 Princeton Ave S 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2939 Princeton Ave S 86 8.01 $1,658 86 11.93 $5,761 $7,419 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4b - CER 2900 Ottawa-Princeton Alley Paving Page 6 ********* Indirect ************ ******** Direct ********** Total Indirect Direct Direct & Address Ind feet % Indirect Allocation Dir feet % Direct Allocation Indirect 2900 Ottawa Ave. S 70 6.52 $1,349 0 0.00 $0 $1,349 2908 Ottawa Ave. S. 45 4.19 $867 45 6.24 $3,015 $3,882 2912 Ottawa Ave. S. 45 4.19 $867 45 6.24 $3,015 $3,882 2916 Ottawa Ave. S. 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2920 Ottawa Ave. S. 40 3.72 $771 0 0.00 $0 $771 2924 Ottawa Ave. S. 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 2928 Ottawa Ave. S. 80 7.45 $1,542 0 0.00 $0 $1,542 2936 Ottawa Ave. S. 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 4800 Minnetonka Blvd 40 3.72 $771 40 5.55 $2,680 $3,451 4806 Minnetonka Blvd 65 6.05 $1,253 65 9.02 $4,354 $5,607 4820 Minnetonka Blvd 123 11.45 $2,371 0 0.00 $0 $2,371 Total 1074 $20,700 721 $48,300 $69,000 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4c - Plan Comm minutes 8-17-05 Page 1 of 10 OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA August 17, 2005--6:00 p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynne Carper, Claudia Johnston-Madison, Robert Kramer, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Bissonnette STAFF PRESENT: Judie Erickson, Adam Fulton, Meg McMonigal, Nancy Sells 1. Call to Order – Roll Call 2. Approval of Minutes of August 3, 2005 Commissioner Kramer moved approval of the minutes. Commissioner Morris seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0-1 (Robertson abstained). Commissioner Timian arrived at 6:05 p.m. 3. Hearings A. Meadowbrook Lofts – Preliminary and Final Plat and Planned Unit Development to Construct 6-story, 107 unit Residential Condominium Building Location: 7200, 7202, 7250, 7252 Excelsior Boulevard and 3985 Meadowbrook Road Applicant: RKL Landholdings, LLC Case Nos.: 05-44-PUD and 05-45-S Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator, presented the staff report. Dean Dovalis, project architect, provided details regarding the sculpture by Nick Legeros which is proposed for the public art/gateway part of the project. Mr. Dovalis said that units have been enlarged since the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal in connection with the Comp Plan and rezoning applications. Larger units have resulted in fewer units than were originally proposed. Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 2 Mr. Dovalis commented on the wetlands and the incorporation of a boardwalk to re- establish the creek as a central piece of the project. Commissioner Morris asked about the conservation easement. He asked what in the condominium covenants will give access rights to the residents, or would it just be open to the public. Mr. Dovalis responded that the easement would be open to the public. Commissioner Timian asked how the public would exit. Mr. Dovalis said at this point the trail is a one-way walk. Commissioner Morris asked about vegetation management. Mr. Dovalis said the developer does not want to adapt or modify the area. It is a wild and natural space. Commissioner Morris said he asked the question because the 12% open space requirements are for recreational use of residents. If the area is open to the public, is not accessible to residents, and is not maintained, he asked how the 12% open space requirement is met. Mr. Dovalis said the boardwalk and path provide the recreation. Some maintenance would occur along the edges of the boardwalk and the pathway. It isn’t an active area, it is a passive recreational area for observation of wildlife and the creek. It would be the first phase of opening up the creek area. Ms. Erickson stated that the Park and Recreation Dept. discussed the proposal. The City Attorney will draft the easement document. Commissioner Morris said he was concerned about the intent of the zoning requirement for 12% recreational open space and a new view of how that requirement is being utilized. Ms. Erickson said the staff report suggests further development of passive areas like a picnic area, tables, or gazebos that make the walk more desirable. She added that there is land available for an informal trail along the creek on the southside to Meadowbrook Lane. The DNR owns the property right next to the creek so that eventually the trail could be connected. Chair Carper asked if buckthorn removal included both lots. Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 3 Ms. Erickson responded that it mostly included the outlot. Commissioner Robertson asked if the area along the trail measures out to 12% open space. Ms. Erickson said it is difficult to measure along the trail but it does seem to meet the 12% open space requirement. Ms. Erickson said prior to City Council consideration of the request, she will make the calculation of the area along the trail. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked why Ms. Erickson equated the area to Excelsior & Grand in terms of parking. She also asked about parking for public access. Ms. Erickson said what seems to have worked at Excelsior & Grand, and other developments as well, is parking based on one car per bedroom. The 30% reduction for this project would have been a little high, but staff was comfortable with the parking because the project exceeds the one car per bedroom measurement. She went on to say that the City Council expressed a concern that there should be some parking available for public use of the trail. The developer has stated that they will make some of the spaces available for the public. She said there is a sidewalk all along Excelsior Blvd. so there is pedestrian access for people at adjacent properties wanting to use the trail. Ms. McMonigal added that when looking at parking reductions related to bedroom size, just as another standard, staff asks if the development has 1 parking space per bedroom. Often that equates to the number of cars. Staff has used that informally as a check on how much of a reduction should be given. Chair Carper asked about overflow parking. Ms. Erickson said given the number of spaces provided, staff did not think there would be a problem with overflow parking. Commissioner Timian said the project has the same issue as the existing project to the east, in that it has no green space. He went on to say that when that developer made his presentation he said there would be no need for any green space because no children would be living in the building. Commissioner Timian said that building does have many children living in it with no recreational area. He said he assumes Meadowbrook Lofts is being marketed for 55+. He said that many of these developments do end up having children and they end up playing in the parking lot. He concluded by saying that once again a development is proposed with no green space for children or adults. Chair Carper opened the public hearing. Barry Berg, marketing representative for the development team, said that he has represented a number of condominium projects in Minneapolis and the western suburbs. Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 4 It has been his observation that there are very few young children living in the projects. He gave the example that often a couple with an infant or toddler will move before the child would be old enough to be playing outdoors. Commissioner Timian said his concern didn’t regard the next 5-10 years of the project, but the next 40 years. He said the developer of the adjacent property had made the same remarks as Mr. Berg and there are many children living there. He said the reality of this project is that the building is totally isolated with no connecting point to a park or other amenities. Daniel Le, attorney for the development team, said the lack of green space is an issue they have considered, but the majority of the property is wetland. They are constantly exploring ways to create more of a recreational area. He said they aren’t short sighted and haven’t stopped thinking of how to improve the project. They are trying to satisfy all the criteria of the PUD process. He said there is potential in the future to address Commissioner Timian’s concerns. Commissioner Timian acknowledged that the developer cares about the future and has a very difficult piece of property. But the development is not meeting the needs of the City in what has been proposed so far. Mr. Le said that the team will meet the needs of the City in working with the landscape architects as long as the development can do something on the wetland area that is in compliance with Watershed District regulations. Commissioner Morris asked about future plans and his understanding that the land would be encumbered as a conservation easement. He asked where expansion would occur. Mr. Le said the project absolutely would not go into the wetland area that has been set aside. There are adjacent properties that may one day open up for development. Scott Nelson, project architect, said they were asked by the Council at a study session how the project helped family housing in St. Louis Park. Mr. Nelson said they explained at that session that the project isn’t about providing family housing. It is providing opportunities for empty nesters and freeing up approximately 107 homes in St. Louis Park for families. Commissioner Timian said he had no disagreement with that, but wondered who is going to end up living in the building. He said at this point very few amenities are provided. Ms. McMonigal said that it is mentioned in the report that staff recommends passive seating and picnic areas around the immediate building. Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 5 Mr. Nelson illustrated where a picnic area or gazebo could be added. He mentioned that along the back of the building a very large deck for picnics and observation has been provided. He said the proposed gateway/public art area at the west could be screened off and used as a recreation area, but originally the development team felt it wouldn’t get that much use. Mr. Nelson and Commissioner Timian talked about possibilities for recreational space near the wetland edge at the northwest side of the building. Mr. Nelson commented that the property presents itself as a natural area of views and walkways and the developer is trying to maximize that. Laura Ricker, building owner, 3965 Meadowbrook Rd., asked for details regarding floodplain mitigation on the property located at 3985 Meadowbrook Rd. She also asked about average estimated cost per unit. Barry Berg, marketing consultant, said pricing has not yet been finalized. Ms. Ricker asked if the project would receive any tax deferment or perks from the City. Ms. Erickson said the project would not receive any tax deferment or perks from the City. Ms. Ricker was given a copy of the staff report. Ms. Ricker said that the path along the creek runs parallel to her building’s driveway. She said she wanted the Commission and Council to know what the driveway was like. Large industrial trucks use the driveway hourly so the idea that this area be used for public recreation is questionable to her. She mentioned that when she bought the property there was a history of contamination in the area. Her property has several wells which have been capped. She believes that many of those wells lie in the area planned for floodplain mitigation. Chair Carper asked what kind of business is located in her building. Ms. Ricker said the building, located just north of Appliance Mart, houses a manufacturing company called Electric Wire Products. It is 75,000 sq. ft. with 200 employees and two manufacturing shifts. As no one else was present wishing to speak, Chair Carper closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said the property is difficult. She suggested that one of the reasons an office building hasn’t been built on the site is because it is a difficult property, especially as regards parking for office. She said she believes the amount of traffic that will be generated by this project will not be as great as that produced by an Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 6 office building, but right now this particular project will have a big impact on Excelsior Blvd. She said this fits into some of the previous discussions the Commission has had regarding the continuation of projects for medium to high density in the area and areas east of this location. She said the City can’t continue to put additional cars on the road. She believes this project will be spectacular but she has concerns about the site, parking, and public access to the trail Commissioner Robertson said the project was well designed. Buildable space is maximized but much open space remains available. It may not provide the amenities found in a single family home, but hopefully other things are being done in the City which address that. He said it would be a choice to live here and people with children wouldn’t necessarily be stuck living there. Commissioner Timian said we don’t know how the building will operate in 30 years. He added that sometimes people don’t have choices. Commissioner Morris asked about the compensatory storage area being provided outside the boundary lines of the developed property. Ms. Erickson stated that the compensating storage is on the Appliance Smart property. Appliance Smart is a co-signer of the application for the PUD and they will have to provide a legal framework for the storage to happen. It is a condition of approval in the resolution. Commissioner Morris said he envisions problems in the future between residents and the public walking right adjacent to the property. There may be conflicts over the use of the parking lot, crowding boardwalks, and activities or behavior that the residents don’t enjoy or encourage. He said he is concerned about residents having no control over an area in which they want to do recreation. He has always envisioned the 12% open space as space on one’s property that is exclusive to the use of the residents and owners. Ms. Erickson said in a PUD the open space often isn’t on the same lot. The condominium association will not be giving up ownership. The City will not take ownership of the conservation easement. The willingness of the development team to make the area open and accessible to the public was a request of the City Council. Commissioner Morris said he understood. He said his concern was that the buyers may not like that idea when conflicts start arising. He said he isn’t opposed to the concept but he is uncomfortable with its workability. He recommended that a provision be brought forward that public access is not permanent but has a trial period. Commissioner Robertson agreed that the City shouldn’t force that issue on the condo association, but that they should have the right to change the provision. Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 7 Chair Carper said some of the concessions he is willing to give the developer for height and setbacks are contingent upon the public access being provided. Commissioner Kramer said he is worried about a path that goes nowhere. He thinks the idea of a shared common space is a great idea. As space becomes more and more precious residents should be open to new ideas about sharing some space. He said he isn’t worried about parking. He said it is an attractive project and people will want to buy there. It will free up other houses in the City. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if there was any discussion about a smaller footprint and higher building. Mr. Nelson said at various times they studied building up to 10 stories. The proposed size is a compromise between the available land, the amount of units, and cost of construction. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she would support a recommendation for a provision regarding a trial period for the public access. Ms. Erickson pointed out possible future trial connections. She showed the park on the other side of the creek which has a canoe landing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the recommendation for a trial period isn’t made, is there another way to recommend that the Council take another look at the idea of public access. Ms. McMonigal said the conservation easement would be dedicated to the City so the City is the party that could lift it, not the developer. Ms. Erickson added that the conservation easement isn’t an easement for public access. It is an easement for protection of the wetland. There would have to be a separate easement for a trail on the property to be accessible to the public. That easement would also be dedicated to the City. Ms. Erickson explained that the conservation easement needs to cover certain things such as the ability to restore the meanders in the creek. There are a lot of reasons to have the legal mechanism of the conservation easement. It is separate from public access. Commissioner Morris asked if Ms. Erickson’s explanation was covered by Condition No. 3c, with the correction that the easement shall be dedicated to the City. Ms. Erickson replied that was correct. Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 8 Commissioner Morris said that gives any future property owner the right to make an application to vacate an easement. He said that satisfies the citizen input as to whether that is a functional easement or not. He said he is agreeable to that condition. Jim Benshoof, traffic consultant, showed an illustration of peak hour trip generation projections, which shows the effects of traffic on Excelsior Blvd. to be minor in nature. Commissioner Johnston-Madison thanked Mr. Benshoof for his comments. Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat for MODA of St. Louis Park and Preliminary and Final PUD for Meadowbrook Lofts subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-1 (Timian opposed). Commissioner Morris left the meeting at 7:30 p.m. B. Sam’s Club - Conditional Use Permit for Reconstruction of Retail Store Location: 7115 West Lake Street and 3745 Louisiana Avenue South Applicant: Sam’s Real Estate Business Trust Case No: 05-46-CUP Adam Fulton, Associate Planner, presented the staff report. Susan Steinwall, Fredrikson & Byron, attorney for applicant, spoke about screening and said that the presentation of the building to Lake Street is greatly improved. Ms. Steinwall asked that the applicant be permitted to apply for the utility vacation concurrent with Council consideration of the Conditional Use Permit. Greg Altman, architect, showed drawings of the proposed building. He discussed screening and asked about staff’s recommendation for an additional screen wall coming up Lake Street from the dock area. Mr. Fulton said the purpose of that recommendation was to have the screen wall come around from Lake Street to Monitor to the south, perhaps not at the same height, but to have a little continuation of the wall. Mr. Altman said they could do some sight line studies of what that would look like. Chair Carper asked if any landscaping could be added to soften the expanse of the long brick wall. Mr. Altman said that would be possible if the site plan allows for it. Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 9 Commissioner Kramer remarked that the location of the gas station seems odd. Chet Harrison, TranSystems Corp., civil engineer, said the location was picked because the other possible site on the west side has 8 ft. thick calcium hydroxide tailings. Commissioner Kramer said he was concerned about safety with traffic weaving through the lot when all some customers wanted to do was purchase gas. Mr. Harrison replied that if the only reason to go there was to purchase gasoline, customers would probably go down Monitor. He said the traffic is pretty spread out for the gas station. He said that the orientation of the gas station is the same direction as the traffic aisles. Commissioner Timian left the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Chair Carper opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing. Chair Carper suggested that the applicant complete a parking lot capacity study prior to City Council consideration. Commissioner Robertson said Sam’s Club will suffer the most if parking isn’t adequate because customers will go elsewhere. For the City it is a short term problem. Commissioner Robertson made a motion to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit to allow a retail store in excess of 20,000 square feet in the C-2 General Commercial Zoning District, subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0. C. Post Office Elmwood Branch - Preliminary and Final Plat of Beltline Industrial Park Third Location: Beltline Industrial Park Applicant: Jane M. Mooty Family Limited Partnership Case No.: 05-38-S Ms. McMonigal presented the staff report. She explained that the post office was sited on two lots and received administrative approval in order that construction could proceed and the post office could open as quickly as possible. The replat was submitted and contains all necessary dedications. It has been reviewed by all appropriate parties. without comment. The replat finalizes the land issues related to the new post office. Official Minutes Planning Commission August 17, 2005 Page 10 Chair Carper opened the public hearing. As no one was present wishing to speak, the Chair closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison moved approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat of Belt Line Industrial Park Third. Commissioner Kramer seconded the motion, and the motion passed on a vote of 4-0. 4. Unfinished Business A. The request for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for the Holiday Station located at 5430 Minnetonka Boulevard will be continued to September 7, 2005. 5. New Business A. Ms. McMonigal said there will be another joint study session on zoning code changes tentatively scheduled for September 26th. Ms. McMonigal asked Commissioners if they would be available for a development tour on Wed., September 21st, from 6:00 to approximately 7:30. The regular meeting of the Planning Commission would follow the tour. Commissioners agreed to the proposed tour schedule. 6. Communications A. Recent City Council Action – Aug. 15, 2005 B. Chair Carper thanked Commissioners Robertson, Johnston-Madison, and Morris for their participation at the recent City Council study session. Chair Carper also attended the meeting. 7. Miscellaneous 8. Adjournment Commissioner Robertson moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:30 p.m. The motion passed 4-0. Respectfully submitted, Nancy Sells Administrative Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 1 City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Minutes – May 18, 2005 Westwood Room, City Hall Call to Order Chair Armbrecht called the meeting to order at 7:10 p.m. Present Commissioners: Matthew Armbrecht, Karmit Bulman, Michael Cohn, Jason Hutchison, Ahmed Maaraba, Kristi Rudelius-Palmer, Kristin Siegesmund and Shelly Taylor Staff: Martha McDonell, Commission Liaison Guests: Michael Roan, Louisa Hext, Jewish Community Action and Mpls Human Rights Commissioner, and Minneapolis Councilmember Gary Schiff. Commissioner Reports Ms. McDonell stated Council was having a special study session for the Commission at 6:30 on June 6th to discuss the survey results. Ms. McDonell reported on the Commission budget. Commissioners can get reimbursement for workshops and conferences. The Annual Human Rights Day conference is held in the fall. There is a League of State Human Rights Commissions conference on September 24th. She noted a recent Pioneer Press article, Where is Somalia?, referenced a kit used by St. Paul teachers to teach elementary students about Somali culture, which helps welcome Somali children. Mr. Cohn reported he did an article for the Sun Sailor on humor and disability. Mr. Armbrecht indicated he was continuing to meet with Mr. Roan about The Tandem Project. Old Business A. Community events: Report on Children First Ice Cream Social Sunday May 15th and discuss any new ideas for how to participate in the Parktacular Parade Saturday June 18th. Mr. Hutchison believed the social went very well. He talked with a number of people, most interested in the brochures about getting involved in the community. Mr. Armbrecht reported on an incident with the Cub Scout group his son is in, where it was believed that another scout was pulled because an African American boy joined. Ms. Taylor reported on the impact of different cultures that she encounters with immigrant communities in the medical profession. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 2 Approval of Agenda The agenda was approved as presented. Approval of Minutes The minutes of April 20, 2005 were approved as presented. Old Business B. Human Right’s Survey Results, discuss focus on the presentation at the City Council Study Session on Monday June 6, at 6:30 p.m Ms. Siegesmund drafted a letter for the Council that could be attached to the summary information. They needed to determine where to go next. One out of ten people felt negative about diversity. In mid income groups ($25-30,000) it rose to one out of five. The fact that they had that undercurrent was very significant. They needed some ideas to present to City Council. Ms. Taylor thought of this as a “scout” survey and that they needed to do more research. This report gave them a good idea of which direction to explore more. They could get representatives from different communities to reflect on some of the things that they had seen. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer suggested having focus groups and further dialogue. The MN Department of Human Rights and Twin Cities Public television just produced a video looking at schools tracking the day in the life of middle school students, new immigrant and native-born youth. It was a great discussion piece on the issues. Mr. Armbrecht agreed it was not enough to report on what they had discovered, but thought it was something that wasn’t there before and a step forward. They could propose that they continue to identify the different constituencies and who was having problems. Mr. Cohn suggested asking schools where they were having troubles with diversity. Ms. Siegesmund stated that the high school conducted a survey a few years ago. Ms. McDonell believed it would be more effective to talk to the students. There is a student group for African American students. She referred to the information sheet of write in answers from the survey. How do they influence the attitudes of people? They could also go to those in 90% of the population and ask them what they thought. Mr. Hutchison believed that the word “diversity” carried a lot of baggage for some people and wanted to be sure they were using the same “language”. Ms. McDonell indicated that the Mayor might not be able to attend their meeting. He sent her an Email about a discussion he had with Somali parents who did not feel connected. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 3 The Mayor suggested that the Human Rights Commission co-sponsor a welcome picnic and invite groups that felt disconnected to meet one another and do community building. She also talked with someone at Out Front Minnesota who was interested in this as well and would provide a mailing list. Suggestions for Discussion at Council Study Session: ü More contact or outreach with groups which showed negative perceptions or bias, they may have more data ü Identify groups and contacts and develop connections with diverse groups in the city ü Picnic/House Party/Welcome day (Mayor’s idea) ü Publish the hot line phone number more ü Develop neighborhood groups focused on renters/Improve neighborhood programs in multi family areas ü Promote community discussions ü Diversity Fair Ms. Siegesmund liked the “Time to Talk” forums to generate discussion. She thought that smaller groups would be better and more of the disenfranchised people would attend. Ms. McDonell noted that ideally they wouldn’t be the people coordinating and would assist to coordinate the functions. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer liked the idea of a community picnic and also suggested a “Walk to the Park.” The video “This is My Home” will be launched in all Minnesota schools in August. Human Rights Commissions were being asked to facilitate dialogues in schools and community groups. There were also teaching tools for K-12 to create a human rights literate community. Ms. Siegesmund suggested playing “This is My Home” on the St. Louis Park cable channels. She requested other Commissioner provide input on the draft letter to her. Ms. McDonell stated that the report to the City Council would include the letter, a summary, the survey distribution and written comments from the surveys. They could begin discussing that they wanted bring forward a new work plan. C. Discuss timeline and methods for making the results public after meeting with the City Council No discussion St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 4 New Business A. City Separation Ordinance – Guests for discussion tonight may include, Louisa Hext, Jewish Community Action and Mpls Human Rights Commissioner, Kristin Keller, Minneapolis civil rights department multicultural affairs and Isaac Kaufman, lobbyist for immigrant rights, and, perhaps Gary Schiff. Ms. Hext introduced Minneapolis Councilmember Schiff, the chief author of the separation ordinance that passed in July 2003 in the City of Minneapolis. She updated the Commission on a forum held in Richfield. Mr. Maaraba thought the forum in Richfield was done well. Many questions were presented to the Police Chief. People should know about the ordinances and their rights. Many people come from countries where the Police aren’t a good thing. They wanted to know how to get the awareness out. Ms. Hext noted as a member of the Minneapolis Civil Rights Commission, they have started an evaluation of their ordinance. Discussions were done with the City Council and City staff aware of what was going on within the context of City personnel. There was at least one situation with a Minneapolis Police Officer who asked someone what their status was. There is a bias because people don’t report crime. Dan Scott was not in support of an ordinance, specifically because he thought more enforcement and public safety already do this and don’t ask questions. Chief Olson, the previous Police Chief, was also opposed to an ordinance. If they took the public safety piece out of the equation and looked at this in the context of this community being a welcoming community, that they be in sync with people accessing City services. People keep deferring to the public safety issue and have a hard time thinking of it outside of the context of government across the board. Mr. Armbrecht liked that they were having forums and talking about it, which was somewhere this Commission could be involved. What was the biggest obstacle to take out the public safety issue? Councilmember Schiff responded that the ordinance clarified employee matters in regards to immigration and that no employee of the City had the responsibility to enforce immigration law. Minneapolis has a high percentage of immigrants and foreign-born individuals. About 20% of the population speaks a language other than English as a primary language in the household. They wanted people to have access to city services without fear. A high percentage of residents do not have documentation. People are afraid to call 911 because of the fear that they would have to show identification and documentation. They were afraid to become involved in the community. Passing this policy was important so people would report crimes and not fear being reported themselves. Ms. Siegesmund asked if there were any members of the Council opposed to this? Councilmember Schiff responded some people were confused about it and didn’t know that it was already police policy in Minneapolis not to ask immigration status. It was a 12-1 vote. Ms. Siegesmund asked what steps he took to get a coalition to support this and what he saw as the biggest obstacles to get this passed? Councilmember Schiff replied that people were St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 5 confused and thought that Minneapolis police were already asking for ID papers. Minneapolis police didn’t want to be enforcing those laws. They would be at INS offices many hours each week waiting to process people. Residents would have to carry their papers. City staff would be required to be trained. INS is supposed to do these jobs and the City shouldn’t be required to do it. Ms. Bulman asked if this was a trend? Councilmember Schiff indicated many states had similar ordinances, but only St. Paul also did in Minnesota. Ms. Hext noted that Seattle was the first City to pass a law similar to this, post 9/11. Councilmember Schiff stated that the former police chief supported this as a policy and didn’t want a future chief to change that. Licensing staff had begun asking peoples status and they didn’t want that to happen. Mr. Roan asked if Governor Pawlenty would appeal this? He believed this was integral because of tightening of registration laws. What is the State involvement? Councilmember Schiff replied that Governor Pawlenty stated he was opposed to this just prior to the Republican convention. Ms. Siegesmund believed it was a burden to enforce and there was also the fear of lawsuits if they only randomly checked people. Councilmember Schiff replied that there could be lawsuits and it could be seen as discrimination. Ms. Hext stated that they researched the cost for training for one police officer to do this and it would take 17 weeks and cost $30,000. Councilmember Schiff stated that some Councilmember’s did not understand the jurisdictions. For example the Metro Transit Police does different enforcement. Mr. Hutchison inquired about State law where they can inquire if someone is harboring illegal aliens? Councilmember Schiff responded there is an extensive list of protections for City Attorneys. Councilmember Schiff stated that they talk at block meetings about crime. 30% of victims in his precinct are Latino men because people don’t believe they will report the crime. They want to send a message that people should report crime. Ms. Hext stated with passage of policy, there has to be education, an evaluation mechanism and training. The most frequent question was what are the tools? She learned that they needed to put that into the mix. It will make better community and better working relationships. Jewish Community Action has been trying to build relationship in the community. This aligned well with the Human Rights survey. It has become partisan issue. Some people didn’t want to go beyond their “group.” There was a disconnect and the public safety piece was hampering the process. There is often a connection that immigrant = terrorist. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 6 Mr. Armbrecht asked when Councilmember Schiff became involved? Ms. Hext replied early. Ms. Hext indicated they made a commitment not to meet with the Council yet. They wanted it to come out of the Human Rights Commission with the support of Jewish Community Action. Ms. McDonell asked if it was a part of the Jewish Community Action work plan to assist with this? Ms. Hext replied yes. She does immigrant right work and social justice. Ms. Siegesmund thought people not accessing city services was significant. Ms. Hext stated they ally with organizations whose constituencies work with unions, etc. Ms. Siegesmund believed it would be hard to get people to come forward. She had conversations with advocates who provided stories about this happening. This should be an agenda item at the next meeting. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer believed there was a link to discrimination and not accessing city services. They could raise this as another idea to look at. Ms. Taylor asked if there were any policies? Ms. Rudelius-Palmer replied no. Ms. Hext stated she would be available to discuss this further at another meeting. B. Who is writing an article for the June Sun Sailor Newspaper? No discussion. Set Agenda for Next Meeting Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:04 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy L. Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 7 City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission NOTES – June 15, 2005 Westwood Room, City Hall Call to Order Chair Armbrecht called the meeting to order at 7:28 p.m. Present Commissioners: Matthew Armbrecht, Michael Cohn, Annie Gaffney and Shelly Taylor Staff: Martha McDonell, Commission Liaison Guests: Michael Roan, The Tandem Project Old Business D. Update from guest Michael Roan on the freedom of religion or belief project Mr. Roan updated the Commission on the Tandem Project and the Call for Volunteers. A working group meets on Saturday mornings to discuss issues and volunteer assignments (7:30 AM-9:00 AM, Starbucks on Excelsior Blvd and Grand). He requested Commission members to respond to questions on the ultimate meaning of life and how you live according to your understanding of the ultimate meaning of life. Questions can be Emailed to Commissioners to answer and returned to him as an attachment. He was also looking for volunteers to interview residents and non-residents working in St. Louis Park (30 places of worship, artists, media, social services, etc.). There will be a training session on how to do interviews. He wanted to interview a cross section of people and the number of people would depend on how many volunteers were doing the interviewing. Interviews should take less than an hour. Mr. Roan can be reached at 612-825-2842 or Email mroan@tandemproject.com or further information viewed at www.tandemproject.com. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy L. Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 8 City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Notes – July 20, 2005 Westwood Room, City Hall Present Commissioners: Michael Cohn, Jason Hutchison, Kristi Rudelius-Palmer and Shelley Taylor Staff: Martha McDonell, Commission Liaison Guest: Michael Roan Commissioner Report Mr. Hutchison talked with the person who developed Where’s Somalia? course curriculum in the St. Paul public schools, and was looking into getting a copy. Ms. McDonell stated that for the upcoming year more money had been put into the budget for educational materials. There is money in the current budget to purchase curricula. She suggested recruiting an adult volunteer to present Where’s Somalia? at schools, which would be preferred by teachers. Mr. Hutchison stated the Commission had talked about not knowing who were leaders in the Somali community of St. Louis Park. He would be talking with a member of the Somali community to identify if there is a cohesive community or leader. Ms. Taylor believed, from her experience, that some people didn’t have anyone, but that the families were tight, but not possibly with each other. Call to Order Ms. Rudelius-Palmer called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. New Business A. League of MN Human Rights Commission annual conference, Sept. 24, 2005 Ms. Rudelius-Palmer stated that the conference would be Sept. 24th from 8:30-4:00 at Hamline University. Ted Mondale would be speaking. The topic is, This is My Home, Human Rights for All. The City covers the cost for Commissioners to attend. Those interested should speak with Ms. McDonell. Mr. Cohen and Mr. Hutchison expressed an interest in attending. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer indicated she serves as a district member at large on the League Board and requested other commissioners to serve as back up when she was unable to attend the meeting. Mr. Cohen and Ms. Taylor volunteered to serve as back ups. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 9 B. Review bias crimes reported in the first half of 2005, decide if any response is needed Ms. McDonell indicated there is a hate bias plan that indicates whenever there is a bias crime, the Police would inform the Commission within three days so they could respond either to support the victim or let the community know that they don’t tolerate this. The Police Dept. has not been doing it in a timely fashion. She reviewed a list of five reports she had obtained. The Commissioners present expressed an interest in receiving domestic violence reports. Ms. McDonell would request a copy of the report. The Commission discussed which information was considered confidential. Ms. McDonell indicated that the Commission had agreed in the Bias Hate Crime Plan with the Police Department, that they would not publicize anything without the victim’s permission. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer thought the Police were supposed to ask victims if they would like to be contacted by a Human Rights Commissioner. Ms. McDonell replied that had been taken out of the plan because they never did it. They provided an information sheet listing many numbers. It was changed to reflect that the Commission could contact the victim. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer believed they should acknowledge all of the reports with a letter. Ms. McDonell indicated the Commission could send a letter stating they had become aware of the incident and provide the phone number if they wanted to contact the Commission. None of the reports seemed pervasive or required further community education. She could notify the Police Sergeant that they would be sending letters for the bias reports. Mr. Roan asked if they knew how many crimes went unreported? Ms. McDonell was unsure. If a victim believes it was a hate crime, the officer is required by law to fill out the report, whether they believe it or not. Statistics were recorded at the State on hate crimes. Mr. Roan noted that the JCRC (Jewish Community Relations Council) and Arab American Anti Discrimination Committee both had hot lines for reporting. They could check what statistics they had. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer indicated she would put together a task sheet listing Commissioners assignments for future follow up. Ms. Taylor stated she would call the JCRC and Arab American Anti Discrimination Committee for statistics. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer volunteered to check with the MN Human Rights Council to see if they had statistics. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 10 Mr. Hutchison volunteered to speak with a member of the Police Department about getting the bias reports in a timelier manner. Ms. Taylor would draft a letter for the Commission to send to the victims of bias crimes. She suggested the Commissions brochure be included. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer indicated two of the incidents happened at the Park Tavern. She would contact the owner to see if there were any problems. Mr. Cohn recalled an incident he had while bowling at the Park Tavern with other patrons complaining he was going too slow and requesting he be moved to another lane. They were subsequently kicked out. Mr. Cohn volunteered to do an article on hate crimes. Ms. Taylor suggested the article include the Commissions phone number. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer also suggested including that they were looking for Commission members. Ms. McDonell noted the article would need to be presented to the Communication Department first. Ms. Taylor suggested providing the Police Department with a business card listing the Commissions phone number to hand out. Ms. McDonell responded they had tried that before and because Officers had so many numbers to give out, they didn’t want to carry them around. The number is on a sheet that they provide to victims. She would obtain a copy of the handout that the Police Department provided to victims of crimes for the Commission to review. C. Web site Ms. McDonell indicated the Communications Department is in charge of the web site for the City and the staff has been overwhelmed with all of the City departments’ needs. They were hiring another web staff person. A request could be submitted for a Commission web site and she would pursue that. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer showed examples of other Human Rights Commission web sites. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer stated she had gotten permission from the MN Department of Human Rights to show This is My Home on the City Cable channel. She would provide a copy to Ms. McDonell to give to the Telecommunications staff. It was suggested it state prior to the program that it was brought to the viewers by the St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission and list the contact number. Mr. Roan suggested they have guest speakers present this at schools. Old Business St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 4d - MayJune Notes and July Minutes HRC 2005 Page 11 A. Continue discussion for creating a new commission work plan for 05-06 Ms. McDonell provided a handout worksheet for discussion at the next meeting. Mr. Roan indicated he talked with the Police Chief who noted they hadn’t had diversity training while he had been Chief. The Commission discussed the possibility of diversity training for City staff and having training set up. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer discussed setting up a time for she and Ms. McDonell to present the survey results and This is My Home to the Rotary Club. Ms. McDonell would contact Councilmember Finkelstein a good time to do the presentation. Set Agenda for Next Meeting • Work Plan 2005-06 • Review Tasks: v Mr. Hutchison Ø Research obtaining course curriculum for Where’s Somalia? Ø Talk with the Police Department about getting bias reports in a timelier manner v Ms. Taylor - call the JCRC and Arab American Anti Discrimination Committee for hate crime statistics v Ms. Rudelius-Palmer Ø Check with the MN Human Rights Council for hate crime statistics Ø Contact the owner of the Park Tavern relating to the bias crime report v Mr. Cohn - article on hate crimes v Ms. McDonell Ø Obtain a copy of domestic violence reports Ø Notify the Police Lieutenant the Commission would be sending letters to the bias report victims Ø Obtain a copy of the information sheet the Police Department provides to victims of crimes Ø Pursue getting a Commission web site Ø Contact Councilmember Finkelstein about a time to present the survey results and This is My Home to the Rotary. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:34 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Amy L. Stegora-Peterson Recording Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 1 6a. Public Hearing – Knollwood Place Apartment Project Private Activity Revenue Bond Public Hearing to consider issuance, sale, and delivery of variable rate demand Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds for the benefit of Knollwood Place Apartments Project. Recommended Action: Mayor to close Public Hearing. Resolution authorizing the issuance, sale, and delivery of variable rate demand multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds in the amounts of $12,300,000 and a Housing Revenue note in the amount not to exceed $1,700,000. Background: In 1985 the City of St. Louis Park issued $10,145,000 of Private Activity Revenue Bonds for the benefit of the Knollwood Place Apartments Project. The proceeds of the original bond issue went to the Community Housing and Service Corporation, the owners of the Knollwood Place Apartments Project. The 1985 bond issue was subsequently refunded/refinanced in 1995. The City has received a request from Sholom Community Alliance, Knollwood Place Apartments Project Management Company, an affiliate of Community Housing and Service Corporation, to refinance the 1995 debt as well as to replace windows and upgrade the exterior of the building. Sholom Community Alliance is requesting the City to issue Variable Rate Demand Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds for the benefit of Knollwood Place Apartments Project in the approximate principal amount not to exceed $12,300,000, to refund the outstanding bonds and refinance the existing bonds. They are also asking the City to issue a Housing Revenue Note in the approximate principal amount not to exceed $1,700,000, to finance capital improvements and related expenditures with respect to the Project under the Act. The City of St. Louis Park is not responsible for the repayment of this debt. The Community Housing and Service Corporation submitted the required $2,500 application fee along with the appropriate application materials. In addition, they will be responsible for paying a bond administration fee of 1/8 of 1% of the outstanding principal to the City. The City of St. Louis Park is currently receiving this bond administrative fee based on the outstanding debt of $8,860,000. On August 15, 2005 the City Council did approve the preliminary resolution calling for a public hearing regarding the issuance of this debt. If approved, the closing of this bond is scheduled for September 26, 2005. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 2 Recommendation: Staff has been working closely with Kennedy & Graven on this application and recommends approval of this refunding issue. Attachments: Resolution Prepared By: Jean McGann, Director of Finance Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. 05-120 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA, AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE, AND DELIVERY OF VARIABLE RATE DEMAND MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE REFUNDING BONDS (KNOLLWOOD PLACE APARTMENTS PROJECT), SERIES 2005, PAYABLE SOLELY FROM REVENUES PLEDGED PURSUANT TO THE INDENTURE; AND AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE, SALE, AND DELIVERY OF ITS MULTIFAMILY HOUSING REVENUE NOTE (KNOLLWOOD PLACE APARTMENTS PROJECT), SERIES 2005, PAYABLE SOLEY FROM REVENUES PLEDGED PURSUANT TO A LOAN AGREEMENT; APPROVING THE FORM OF AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF THE BONDS, THE NOTE AND THE RELATED DOCUMENTS; AND PROVIDING FOR THE SECURITY, RIGHTS, AND REMEDIES WITH RESPECT TO THE BONDS AND THE NOTE. WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the “City”), is a home rule city duly organized and existing under its Charter and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota, particularly Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 462C, as amended (the “Act”), the City is authorized to carry out the public purposes described therein and contemplated thereby by issuing its revenue bonds to provide funds to finance multifamily housing developments within its boundaries, and is authorized to enter into any agreements made in connection therewith and pledge those agreements as security for the payment of the principal of and interest on any such revenue bonds; and WHEREAS, in order to provide a means of financing the cost of the construction of decent, safe, and sanitary housing for residents of the City and to advance the goals of the Act, the City developed a housing program and authorized the issuance of its Multifamily Rental Housing Revenue Bonds (Community Housing and Service Corporation Project), Series 1985 (the “Series 1985 Bonds”), in the original principal aggregate amount of $11,000,000. The Series 1985 Bonds were issued pursuant to the terms of Resolution No. 85-222, adopted by the City Council of the Issuer on December 16, 1985, and an Indenture of Trust, dated as of December 1, 1985 (the “Series 1985 Indenture”), between the City and the Trustee (successor-by-merger to Norwest Bank Minneapolis, National Association). The proceeds derived from the sale of the Series 1985 Bonds were loaned to Community Housing and Service Corporation, a Minnesota nonprofit corporation (the “Owner”), pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated as of December 1, 1985 (the “Series 1985 Loan Agreement”). WHEREAS, on April 23, 1987, the City remarketed the Series 1985 Bonds pursuant to the terms of Resolution No. 87-30, adopted by the City Council of the City on March 16, 1987, and Supplement Number Three, dated as of April 1, 1987, to the Series 1985 Indenture, as amended August 1, 1986, and October 1, 1986 (the “Series 1987 Indenture”). The Series 1985 Indenture was amended and restated in its entirety by the Series 1987 Indenture. The Series 1985 Bonds were re-designated as Multifamily Rental Housing Revenue Bonds (FHA Insured Mortgage Loan — Community Housing and Service Corporation Project), Series 1985 (the “Series 1987 Bonds”), and were remarketed in the original aggregate principal amount of $10,240,000. In conjunction with the remarketing of the Series 1987 Bonds, the Series 1985 Loan Agreement was amended and restated in its entirety by the First Amended St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 4 and Restated Loan Agreement, dated as of April 1, 1987 (the “Series 1987 Loan Agreement”), between the City and the Owner. WHEREAS, the proceeds of the Series 1987 Bonds were applied by the Owner to the acquisition, construction, and equipping of a 153-unit multifamily housing development for seniors located at 3630 Phillips Parkway in St. Louis Park, Minnesota, and commonly known as Knollwood Place Apartments (the “Project”). The one-bedroom and two-bedroom units of the Project are located in a single eight-story building that includes approximately 35,000 square feet of common areas and seventy (70) heated underground parking stalls. The Project was opened in 1988 and has been continuously operated as a senior housing residential apartment facility since its opening. WHEREAS, on October 26, 1995, the City issued its Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds (FHA Insured Mortgage Loans — Community Housing and Service Corporation Project), Series 1995 (the “Prior Bonds”), in the original aggregate principal amount of $10,145,000, pursuant to the terms of Resolution No. 95-130, adopted by the City Council of the City on October 2, 1995, and an Indenture of Trust, dated as of October 1, 1995 (the “Prior Indenture”), between the City and the Trustee (successor-by-merger to Norwest Bank Minnesota, National Association). The proceeds derived from the sale of the Prior Bonds were loaned to the Owner pursuant to the terms of a Financing Agreement, dated as of October 1, 1995 (the “Prior Financing Agreement”), between the City and the Owner, and applied to the redemption and prepayment of the Series 1987 Bonds. WHEREAS, the Owner has requested that the City issue its Variable Rate Demand Multifamily Housing Revenue Refunding Bonds (Knollwood Place Apartments Project), Series 2005 (the “Bonds”), in the original aggregate principal amount of $12,300,000, to provide funds to redeem an equal amount of the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the Prior Bonds; and WHEREAS, the proceeds of the Bonds will be loaned to the Owner pursuant to the terms of a Financing Agreement, to be dated on or after September 1, 2005 (the “Financing Agreement”), between the City, Wells Fargo Bank, National Association (the “Trustee”), and the Owner. The proceeds of the loan will be applied by the Owner to: (i) the redemption and prepayment of the Prior Bonds; and (ii) the acquisition, rehabilitation, and construction of certain capital improvements to the Project; and WHEREAS, the loan (the “Bond Mortgage Loan”), under the terms of the Financing Agreement will be evidenced by a Bond Mortgage Note, to be dated on or after September 1, 2005 (the “Bond Mortgage Note”), in the principal amount of $12,300,000, payable to the order of the City and assigned by the City pursuant to the terms of the Indenture (as hereinafter defined) to the Trustee; and WHEREAS, the Bonds will be issued under a Trust Indenture, to be dated on or after September 1, 2005 (the “Indenture”), between the City and the Trustee, and the Bonds and the interest on the Bonds: (i) shall be payable solely from the revenues pledged therefor; (ii) shall not constitute a debt of the City within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation; (iii) shall not constitute nor give rise to a pecuniary liability of the City or a charge against its general credit or taxing powers; and (iv) shall not constitute a charge, lien, or encumbrance, legal or equitable, upon any property of the City other than the City's interest in the Project and the Financing Agreement; and WHEREAS, the Owner will cause to be delivered to the Trustee on the date of issuance of the Bonds a direct-pay Credit Enhancement Agreement, to be dated on or after September 1, 2005 (the “Credit Enhancement Agreement”), between the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”) and the Trustee, which will provide for: (i) draws in an amount equal to loan repayments due from the Owner with respect to the Bond Mortgage Loan; and (ii) liquidity draws by the Trustee to the extent St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 5 remarketing proceeds are insufficient to pay the purchase price of Bonds tendered for purchase while the Bonds bear interest at a variable rate; and WHEREAS, to evidence the Owner’s reimbursement obligations to Freddie Mac for draws made under the Credit Enhancement Agreement, the Owner and Freddie Mac will enter into a Reimbursement and Security Agreement, to be dated on or after September 1, 2005 (the “Reimbursement Agreement”); and WHEREAS, to secure the Owner’s reimbursement obligations to Freddie Mac under the Reimbursement Agreement and to secure the Owner’s obligations to the Issuer and the Trustee under the Financing Agreement, the Owner will execute and deliver to the Issuer, the Trustee and Freddie Mac a Multifamily Mortgage, Assignment of Rents, Security Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement, to be dated on or after September 1, 2005, with respect to the Project; and WHEREAS, the City, the Trustee, and Freddie Mac propose to enter into an Intercreditor Agreement, to be dated on or after September 1, 2005 (the “Intercreditor Agreement”), in connection with Freddie Mac’s provision of credit enhancement under the Credit Enhancement Agreement; and WHEREAS, to provide additional funds to finance the acquisition, rehabilitation, and construction of capital improvements to the Project in addition to the those financed with the proceeds of the Bonds, the Owner has requested that the City issue its Housing Revenue Note (Knollwood Place Apartments Project), Series 2005 (the “Note”), in the approximate principal amount not to exceed $1,700,000; and WHEREAS, the proceeds derived from the sale of the Note will be loaned and disbursed to the Owner pursuant to the terms of a Loan Agreement, dated as of September 1, 2005 (the “Loan Agreement”), between the City and the Owner; and WHEREAS, a notice of public hearing regarding the issuance of the Bonds and the Note and the refinancing of the Project was published in the Sun-Sailor, the official newspaper and a newspaper of general circulation in the City, on August 25, 2005; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was conducted on September 19, 2005, by the City Council of the City prior to the consideration of this resolution; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA, AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City acknowledges, finds, determines, and declares that the issuance of the Bonds is authorized by the Act and is consistent with the purposes of the Act and that the issuance of the Bonds and the Note and the other actions of the City under the Indenture, the Financing Agreement, the Loan Agreement, and this resolution constitute a public purpose and are in the best interests of the City. 2. An Amended and Restated Housing Program, dated as of September 1, 2005 (the “Housing Program”), has been prepared to amend and restate the original housing program approved with respect to the Project. The Housing Program reflects the issuance of the Bonds to refund the Prior Bonds and to refinance the Project. The Housing Program, in the form on file with the City, is hereby approved. The City Council of the City further finds, determines, and declares that the purpose of the Housing Program is to finance and refinance the Project. At the request of the Owner, to accomplish the purposes of the Housing Program, the City proposes to issue the Bonds and the Note and loan the proceeds derived St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 6 from the sale of the Bonds and the Note to the Owner in order to finance the redemption and prepayment of the Prior Bonds and to finance capital improvements to the Project. 3. For the purposes set forth above, there is hereby authorized the issuance, sale and delivery of the Bonds in the original aggregate principal amount of $12,300,000. The Bonds shall initially bear interest at a variable rate not to exceed the maximum interest rate per annum established by the terms of the Indenture. The Bonds shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall mature, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, shall be in such form, and shall have such other terms, details, and provisions as are prescribed in the Indenture, in the form now on file with the City, with the amendments referenced herein. The City hereby authorizes the Bonds to be issued as “tax-exempt bonds” the interest on which is not includable in gross income for federal and State of Minnesota income tax purposes. All of the provisions of the Bonds, when executed as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Bonds shall be substantially in the form on file with the City, which is hereby approved, with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions, and insertions (including changes to the principal amount, the maturity schedule, optional and mandatory redemption terms, mandatory sinking fund payment schedules, and other terms and provisions of the Bonds) as the Mayor and the City Manager of the City (the “Mayor” and “City Manager,” respectively), in their discretion, shall determine. The execution of the Bonds with the manual or facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager and the delivery of the Bonds by the City shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. 4. The Bonds and the interest thereon are not general or moral obligations of the City. The Bonds and the interest thereon are limited obligations of the City, payable solely from the Trust Estate pledged therefor under the Indenture, including, without limitation, its interest in payments received under the Bond Mortgage Note and the Credit Enhancement Agreement. The City Council hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and the City Manager to execute the Indenture and to deliver the Indenture to the Trustee and hereby authorizes and directs the execution of the Bonds in accordance with the Indenture, and hereby provides that the Indenture shall provide the terms and conditions, covenants, rights, obligations, duties, and agreements of the bondholders, the City, and the Trustee as set forth therein. All of the provisions of the Indenture, when executed as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Indenture shall be substantially in the form on file with the City on the date hereof, and is hereby approved, with such changes as shall be approved by the Mayor and the City Manager, and with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions, and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such form and as the Mayor and the City Manager, in their discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution and delivery thereof by the Mayor and the City Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. 5. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby designated as the representatives of the City with respect to the issuance of the Bonds and the transactions related thereto and are hereby authorized and directed to accept and execute the Bond Purchase Agreement, to be dated on or after the date of adoption of this resolution (the “Bond Purchase Agreement”), between Piper Jaffray & Co. (the “Underwriter”), the City, and the Owner. All of the provisions of the Bond Purchase Agreement, when executed and delivered as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Bond Purchase Agreement shall be substantially in the form on file St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 7 with the City on the date hereof, and is hereby approved, with such necessary and appropriate variations, omissions, and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such form as the Mayor and the City Manager, in their discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution thereof by the Mayor and the City Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. 6. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute the Financing Agreement with the Owner and the Trustee, and when executed and delivered as authorized herein, the Financing Agreement shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Financing Agreement shall be substantially in the form on file with the City on the date hereof, which is hereby approved, with such necessary variations, omissions, and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such forms and as the Mayor and the City Manager, in their discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution thereof by the Mayor and the City Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. 7. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to accept the Bond Mortgage Note. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to endorse the Bond Mortgage Note to the Trustee, without recourse, for the benefit of the owners of the Bonds. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Intercreditor Agreement and, when executed and delivered as authorized herein, the Intercreditor Agreement shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Intercreditor Agreement shall be substantially in the form on file with the City on the date hereof, which is hereby approved, with such necessary variations, omissions, and insertions as are not materially inconsistent with such form and as the Mayor and the City Manager, in their discretion, shall determine; provided that the execution thereof by the Mayor and the City Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver all other instruments and documents necessary to accomplish the purposes for which the Bonds are to be issued and the Indenture, the Financing Agreement, the Intercreditor Agreement, and the Bond Purchase Agreement are to be executed and delivered. The City Council hereby authorizes the preparation and filing of Uniform Commercial Code financing statements (with respect to the assignment of the interests of the City in the Financing Agreement, the Bond Mortgage Note, and the other loan documents, other than the Unassigned Rights (as defined in the Indenture), to the Trustee, for the benefit of the owners of the Bonds). 8. The City hereby consents to the preparation and distribution of an Official Statement with respect to the offer and sale of the Bonds (the “Official Statement”) as requested by the Underwriter and the Owner; provided that it is understood that the City has not been requested to participate in the preparation of or to review the Official Statement and has not done so. The City has made no independent investigation of the facts and statements set forth in the Official Statement; accordingly, the City assumes no responsibility with respect thereto including, without limitation, as to matters relating to the accuracy, fairness, completeness, or sufficiency of the Official Statement, except any information specifically relating to the City under the heading “THE ISSUER” and “NO LITIGATION—The Issuer” in the Official Statement. 9. The Mayor, the City Manager, and other officers of the City are authorized upon request to furnish certified copies of all proceedings and records of the City relating to the Bonds, and such other affidavits and certificates as may be required to show the facts relating to the Bonds as such facts appear from the books and records in the officers’ custody and control or as otherwise known to them; and all such certified copies, certificates and affidavits, including any heretofore furnished, shall constitute St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 8 representations of the City as to the truth of all statements contained herein. Such officers, employees, and agents of the City are hereby authorized to execute and deliver, on behalf of the City, all other certificates, instruments, and other written documents that may be requested by bond counsel, the Underwriter, the Trustee, Freddie Mac, or other persons or entities in conjunction with the issuance of the Bonds and the expenditure of the proceeds of the Bonds. Without imposing any limitations on the scope of the preceding sentence, such officers and employees are specifically authorized to execute and deliver a certificate relating to federal tax matters including matters relating to arbitrage and arbitrage rebate, a receipt for the proceeds derived from the sale of the Bonds, an order to the Trustee with respect to the delivery of the Bonds and the application of the proceeds derived from the sale of the Bonds, a general certificate of the City with respect to the issuance of the Bonds, an Information Return for Tax-Exempt Private Activity Bond Issues, Form 8038 (Rev. January, 2002), and a Tax Regulatory Agreement, dated as of September 1, 2005, between the City, the Owner, and the Trustee, imposing on the parties certain obligations with respect to the tax-exempt status of the Bonds. 10. All covenants, stipulations, obligations, representations, and agreements of the City contained in this resolution or contained in the Indenture or other documents referred to above shall be deemed to be the covenants, stipulations, obligations, representatives, and agreements of the City to the full extent authorized or permitted by law, and all such covenants, stipulations, obligations, representations, and agreements shall be binding upon the City. Except as otherwise provided in this resolution, all rights, powers, and privileges conferred, and duties and liabilities imposed, upon the City by the provisions of this resolution or of the respective Indenture or other documents referred to above shall be exercised or performed by the City, or by such officers, board, body, or agency as may be required or authorized by law to exercise such powers and to perform such duties. No covenant, stipulation, obligation, representation, or agreement herein contained or contained in the Indenture or other documents referred to above shall be deemed to be a covenant, stipulation, obligation, representation, or agreement of any elected official, officer, agent, or employee of the City in that person’s individual capacity, and neither the members of the City Council of the City nor any officer or employee executing the Bonds shall be liable personally on the Bonds or be subject to any personal liability or accountability by reason of the issuance thereof. 11. Except as herein otherwise expressly provided, nothing in this resolution or in the Indenture, expressed or implied, is intended or shall be construed to confer upon any person, firm, or corporation other than the City, and the Trustee, as fiduciary for owners of the Bonds, any right, remedy, or claim, legal or equitable, under and by reason of this resolution or any provision hereof or of the Indenture or any provision thereof; this resolution, the Indenture and all of their provisions being intended to be, and being for the sole and exclusive benefit of the City and the Trustee as fiduciary for owners of the Bonds issued under the provisions of this resolution and the Indenture, and the Owner to the extent expressly provided in the Indenture. 12. In case any one or more of the provisions of this resolution, or of the documents mentioned herein, or of the Bonds issued hereunder shall for any reason be held to be illegal or invalid, such illegality or invalidity shall not affect any other provision of this resolution, or of the aforementioned documents, or of the Bonds, but this resolution, the aforementioned documents, and the Bonds shall be construed and endorsed as if such illegal or invalid provisions had not been contained therein. The terms and conditions set forth in the Indenture, the pledge of revenues derived from the Project referred to in the Indenture, the pledge of collateral derived from the Project referred to in the Indenture, the creation of the funds provided for in the Indenture, the provisions relating to the application of the proceeds derived from the sale of the Bonds pursuant to and under the Indenture, and the application of said revenues, collateral, and other money are all commitments, obligations, and agreements on the part of the City contained in the Indenture, and the invalidity of the Indenture shall not St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 9 affect the commitments, obligations, and agreements on the part of the City to create such funds and to apply said revenues, other money, and proceeds of the Bonds for the purposes, in the manner, and according to the terms and conditions fixed in the Indenture, it being the intention hereof that such commitments on the part of the City are as binding as if contained in this resolution separate and apart from the Indenture. 13. All acts, conditions, and things required by the laws of the State of Minnesota, relating to the adoption of this resolution, to the issuance of the Bonds, and to the execution of the Indenture and the other documents referred to above to happen, exist, and be performed precedent to and in the enactment of this resolution, and precedent to the issuance of the Bonds, and precedent to the execution of the Indenture and the other documents referred to above have happened, exist, and have been performed as so required by law. 14. For the purpose of providing additional financing for the Project, the Note, to be dated as of September 1, 2005, is hereby authorized to be issued by the City in the original aggregate principal amount of not to exceed $1,700,000. The City hereby authorizes the Note to be issued, in whole or in part, as a “tax-exempt bond” the interest on which is not includable in gross income for federal and State of Minnesota income tax purposes. The Note shall be issued in one or more series, shall bear interest at such rate, shall be in such denomination, shall be numbered, shall be dated, shall mature, shall be subject to redemption prior to maturity, shall be in such form, and shall have such other details and provisions as are prescribed in the Note substantially in the form on file with the City on the date hereof, which is hereby approved, with such necessary variations, omissions, and insertions (including changes to the aggregate principal amount of the Note, the stated maturity of the Note, the interest rates on the Note, the terms of redemption of the Note, and variation from City policies regarding methods of offering conduit bonds) as the Mayor and the City Manager, in their discretion, shall determine. The execution of the Note with the manual or facsimile signatures of the Mayor and the City Manager and the delivery of the Note by the City shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. 15. The proceeds derived from the sale of the Note are to be loaned to the Owner pursuant to the terms of the Loan Agreement. The Owner is required to make loan repayments (the “Loan Repayments”) under the Loan Agreement on such dates and in such amounts to provide revenues sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on the Note when due. The Loan Repayments are to be assigned to the holders of the Note pursuant to the terms of an Assignment of Loan Agreement, to be dated as of September 1, 2005 (the “Assignment”). The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Note, the Loan Agreement, and the Assignment. All of the provisions of the Note, the Loan Agreement, and the Assignment, when executed and delivered as authorized herein, shall be deemed to be a part of this resolution as fully and to the same extent as if incorporated verbatim herein and shall be in full force and effect from the date of execution and delivery thereof. The Note, the Loan Agreement, and the Assignment shall be substantially in the forms on file with the City which are hereby approved, with such omissions and insertions as do not materially change the substance thereof, or as the Mayor and the City Manager, in their discretion, shall determine, and the execution thereof by the Mayor and the City Manager shall be conclusive evidence of such determination. 16. The Note shall be a revenue obligation of the City the proceeds of which shall be disbursed pursuant to the terms of the Loan Agreement, and the principal, premium, and interest on the Note shall be payable solely from the loan repayments to be made by the Owner pursuant to the terms of the Loan Agreement. The Note is to be secured in accordance with the terms of the Loan Agreement. The Note, when executed and delivered, shall contain a recital that it is issued pursuant to the Act, and such recital shall be conclusive evidence of the validity of the Note and the regularity of the issuance thereof, and that all acts, conditions, and things required by the laws of the State of Minnesota relating to St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 10 the adoption of this resolution, to the issuance of the Note, and to the execution of the Loan Agreement and the Assignment have happened, exist, and have been performed as so required by law. 17. The members of the City Council of the City, officers of the City, and attorneys and other agents or employees of the City are hereby authorized to do all acts and things required by them by or in connection with this resolution and the Indenture and the other documents referred to above for the full, punctual, and complete performance of all the terms, covenants, and agreements contained in the Bonds, the Note, the Indenture, the Loan Agreement, and the other documents referred to above, and this resolution. 18. The Mayor and the City Manager are hereby designated and authorized to take such administrative actions as are permitted or required in connection with the issuance of the Bonds and pursuant to the Indenture, the Financing Agreement, the Tax Regulatory Agreement, the Intercreditor Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement, the Note, the Loan Agreement and the Assignment. 19. The Mayor and the City Manager of the City are authorized and directed to execute and deliver any and all certificates, agreements, or other documents which are required by the Indenture, the Financing Agreement, the Bond Purchase Agreement, the Tax Regulatory Agreement, the Intercreditor Agreement, the Note, the Loan Agreement, the Assignment, or any other agreements, certificates, or documents which are deemed necessary by bond counsel to evidence the validity or enforceability of the Bonds, the Indenture, or the other documents referred to in this resolution, or to evidence compliance with Section 103(b)(4)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended, and applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder, and applicable provisions of Sections 141—150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder; and all such agreements or representations when made shall be deemed to be agreements or representations, as the case may be, of the City. 20. If for any reason the Mayor is unable to execute and deliver those documents referred to in this resolution, any other member of the City Council of the City, or any officer of the City duly delegated to act on behalf of the Mayor, may execute and deliver such documents with the same force and effect as if such documents were executed by the Mayor. If for any reason the City Manager is unable to execute and deliver the documents referred to in this resolution, such documents may be executed and delivered by any member of the City Council or any officer of the City duly delegated to act on behalf of the City Manager, with the same force and effect as if such documents were executed and delivered by the City Manager. 21. This resolution shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6a - Public Hearing Knollwood PARB Page 11 Passed and duly adopted by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, this 19th day of September, 2005. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA Mayor ATTEST: City Manager SA140-080 (JU)\ 266934v.2 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6b - Comcast transfer Page 1 6b. Proposed Transfer of Cable Television System Public hearing to discuss issues regarding the proposed transfer of the Cable Communications Franchise Ordinance and cable system from Time Warner Cable, Inc. to Comcast Cable Communications, LLC. Recommended Action: Motion to close the public hearing and refer this item to the October 10, 2005 Council meeting. Background: On June 15, 2005, Comcast notified the City about an agreement to purchase all of Time Warner Cable’s Minnesota cable TV systems, including St. Louis Park’s franchise. Time Warner and Comcast are purchasing the bankrupt Adelphia cable systems for about $12.7 billion in cash. Adelphia has about 5 million subscribers, and the systems will be geographically divided between Comcast and Time Warner so the systems can be clustered together. As part of the clustering, Time Warner’s Minnesota, Florida and Louisiana franchises would be swapped for Comcast’s Dallas, Los Angeles and Cleveland area franchises. One area of uncertainty is that the Time Warner and Comcast agreement is contingent on the completion of the Adelphia deal. The Adelphia bankruptcy proceedings are expected to be resolved at the end of this year. Some Minnesota cities have already granted Comcast’s request for franchise transfers, including Helena, Jackson, Jordan, Lanesboro, Lewisville, Madelia, New Ulm, Sand Creek and Waverly. The City has retained Brian Grogan of Moss & Barnett to assist with the franchise transfer process. A report from Mr. Grogan is expected in late September on Comcast’s legal, technical and financial ability to operate the franchise, the parameters set by federal law. Comcast and Time Warner Cable are the two largest cable operators in the United States, and offer similar services, including video, high speed data, and telephone. Fridley’s Cable TV Coordinator, Brian Strand, conducted an informal survey of Comcast’s city representatives last week. Generally, the city representatives say: • They have no problems receiving Franchise Fees or Access Fees, or Performance Bonds. • All areas have recently been upgraded to fiber and the system is in good working order. • They receive very few citizen complaints concerning signal quality or service. They receive standard complaints about prices, channel selection and no competing cable company… • All have said the customer service has greatly improved over the previous franchisee. Ramsey Washington Cable Commission’s Executive Director, Tim Finnerty, said “Comcast is extremely responsive to citizen complaints that I handle, which are almost 100% immediately resolved by an escalated complaints department.” St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6b - Comcast transfer Page 2 Regarding St. Louis Park’s specific franchise, set to expire on September 19, 2005, Comcast’s Director of Government Relations, Kathi Donnelly-Cohen told the Telecommunications Advisory Commission on August 4, 2005 that until a new franchise agreement is in effect, Comcast would meet all terms of the existing franchise after the transfer. Area of concern: There is one customer benefit Time Warner offers that probably will not continue if the system is transferred to Comcast: a choice of high speed data internet service providers (ISP’s). When America Online purchased Time Warner in 2000, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) required that customers have a choice of ISP’s, a unique arrangement in the cable television industry. An FTC press release on December 14, 2000 summarized the issue this way: "In the broad sense, our concern was that the merger of these two powerful companies would deny to competitors access to this amazing new broadband technology," said Robert Pitofsky, Chairman of the FTC. "This order is intended to ensure that this new medium, characterized by openness, diversity and freedom, will not be closed down as a result of this merger." Under the proposed order, the Commission's antitrust concerns would be resolved by: (1) requiring AOL Time Warner to make available to subscribers at least one non-affiliated cable broadband ISP service on Time Warner's cable system before AOL itself began offering service, followed by two other non-affiliated ISPs within 90 days and a requirement to negotiate in good faith with others after that… As a result, Time Warner high speed data customers can choose between these ISP’s: Road Runner, AOL Broadband and EarthLink. Comcast customers do not have a choice of ISP’s. The Supreme Court has recently ruled that cable companies are not required to offer competitive ISP’s in the “Brand X” case. As reported in C/net news.com on June 27, 2005: The cable industry can breathe a sigh of relief, as the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that cable companies will not have to share their infrastructure with competing Internet service providers. In a 6-3 decision, the court overturned a federal court decision that would have forced cable companies to open up their networks to Internet service providers such as Brand X and EarthLink. The majority opinion was written by Justice Clarence Thomas. Dissenting justices were Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Antonin Scalia and David Souter. The decision likely will not affect consumers immediately, since cable companies have long been exempt from having to share their networks. But Brand X and its supporters believe that over the long term, the decision will hamper competition and will ultimately lead to higher broadband prices. Traditional “common carrier” telephone companies like Qwest and Verizon must allow competing ISP’s on their systems. A recent Federal Communications Commission ruling may remove this requirement within a year, thereby removing the requirement for ISP competition for both the cable and telephone industry. Cable systems lead in the competition for residential high St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6b - Comcast transfer Page 3 speed data customers with 18.7 million customers compared to the telephone companies’ 11.8 million customers (December 31, 2004 figures reported by Pike & Fischer). The City has no direct authority over the high speed data or telephone services offered by Time Warner due to Federal Communications Commission rulings or Federal law. However, City staff has received an email stating the customer’s desire to continue to receive EarthLink after the system is transferred to Comcast. Other subscribers have addressed the City Council on this item as well. Comcast has been notified of this concern and may be willing address the City Council on its plans to assist subscribers make whatever transition may be necessary should the transfer actually be completed. Process and Recommendation: Brian Grogan’s Comcast report and a final Time Warner franchise fee review are both expected about by late September. Staff expects to collect and analyze further information and report back to the Council at its next regular meeting of October 10, 2005. However, staff recommends Council close this public hearing at this time because after the public hearing is closed, the City must give proper and timely notice to Comcast. Also, Council action is required by October 15, 2005 or the transfer is deemed approved. Prepared by: Clint Pires, Director of Technology and Support Services Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 6c - Time Warner Franchise Renewal Page 1 6c. Time Warner Cable TV Franchise Renewal Public hearing to discuss the status of the franchise renewal process with Time Warner Cable, Inc. Recommended Action: Motion to continue the public hearing and extend the term of the franchise agreement to October 10, 2005 or direct staff to proceed to the formal process for the cable TV franchise renewal (a specific recommendation will be made at the meeting). Background: Council was last updated on the status of the franchise renewal process with a written report for the July 18, 2005 regular meeting, at its study session on July 25, 2005, and at its regular meetings of August 15 and September 6, 2005. The current franchise agreement extension with Time Warner (TW) is due to expire on September 19 unless extended by Council. As indicated at all meetings, progress on the 2+ year franchise renewal process has been slow. TW and City staff appeared at the Council’s September 12 study session. City staff reported that some progress had been made since the last Council meeting. TW presented its case for its position in the franchise renewal and City Council directed City staff to continue negotiations and return to Council with a progress report and options on September 19. Latest Negotiations: City and TW negotiations teams are scheduled to meet again on Friday, September 16. At that meeting, the City plans to present a package of major business points to meet the Council’s major concerns related to continuation of local programming and costs. Staff will also be including other operational business points in the interest of the community in this package. Latest Developments: Staff will e-mail Council with the latest developments from the Friday, September 16 meeting. It may be that TW staff will be unable to provide its response to the City proposal until Monday. In any event, staff will report the latest developments at the September 19 Council meeting. Recommendation: Consistent with the current status of negotiations, and pending results from the September 16 negotiations session, staff will recommend to Council one of the following actions at the September 19 Council meeting: 1. Continue the public hearing and extend the term of the franchise agreement to October 10, 2005. 2. Direct staff to proceed to the formal process for the cable TV franchise renewal. Staff will be present at the Council meeting to answer questions. Prepared by: Clint Pires, Director of Technology and Support Services Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8a - Canvass 2005 Primary Election Results Page 1 8a. Canvass of City Primary Election Results Resolution declaring results of the Municipal Primary Election held September 13, 2005 Recommended Action: Motion to approve the resolution declaring results of the Municipal Primary Election held September 13, 2005 Background: City Charter section 4.08 requires the City Council to meet and canvass election returns within seven days of any election and declare the results as soon as possible. As required by charter, the resolution includes: • total number of good ballots cast • total number of spoiled or defective ballots • the vote for each candidate with a declaration of those who were elected • a true copy of the ballots used • the names of the judges and clerks of election Attachments: Resolution Exhibit A Complete Results Exhibit B Ballot Samples (supplement) Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, Deputy City Clerk Approved by: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8a - Canvass 2005 Primary Election Results Page 2 RESOLUTION NO. 05-121 RESOLUTION CANVASSING ELECTION RETURNS OF ST. LOUIS PARK – SEPTEMBER 13, 2005 MUNICIPAL PRIMARY ELECTION WHEREAS, pursuant to City Charter Section 4.08, the City Council shall meet and canvass election returns within seven days of any election and shall declare the results as soon as possible; and WHEREAS, the results prepared and certified to by the election judges have been presented in summary form to the City Council for inspection, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council as follows: 1. The September 13, 2005 election returns having been canvassed, the votes received by each candidate for city offices are as follows: CITY OFFICES Councilmember WARD 1 TOTAL VOTES % of vote SUSAN SANGER 430 58.2% ANN THOMAS 291 39.4% MICHAEL ANTONOFF 18 2.4% 739 Councilmember WARD 4 TOTAL VOTES % of vote C. PAUL CARVER 156 58.9% MICHAEL COHN 59 22.3% TOM PETERSON 50 18.8% 265 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8a - Canvass 2005 Primary Election Results Page 3 2. The number of spoiled ballots, the number of persons registered prior to the election and on election day, the number of voter receipts, the number of absentee ballots, and the total number of good votes cast in the city are as follows: SPOILED BALLOTS 11 REGISTERED AT 7 A.M. 15,037 REG AT THE POLLS 10 TOTAL REGISTERED 15,047 VOTER RECEIPTS 973 ABSENTEE BALLOTS 31 TOTAL VOTERS 1004 (Percent Voting) 7% 3. The Judges and Clerks of the election were as follows: Cynthia D. Reichert, City Clerk Nancy J. Stroth, Deputy City Clerk Tim Jones, Election Technician Poll # Precinct Location Last Name First Name Position 1 Benilde-St. Margaret Steege Richard Chair Koepcke Steve Co-Chair Enz Mary Judge Laiderman Nessa Lee Judge 2 Peter Hobart Hintz Todd Chair Slager Eunice Co-Chair Rheinhart Ethel Judge Muszynski Mary Ann Judge Hansen Betty Judge 3 Groves Academy Tape William Chair Magdziarz- Rainey William Co-Chair Murman Jeffrev Judge Kurtz J. Hamilton Judge Krishef Dale Judge 4 Groves Academy LaPray Jami Chair Novotney Dolores Co-Chair Botner Loren Judge Cox JoAnn Judge St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8a - Canvass 2005 Primary Election Results Page 4 Poll # Precinct Location Last Name First Name Position 5 City Hall Berthene Sandra Chair Ruhl Barbara Co-Chair Manuel Julie Ann Judge Drache Kay Judge 14 Westwood Lutheran Stulberg Jean Chair Posz Albert Co-Chair Tanick Paul Judge Johnson Shirley Judge 15 Peace Presbyterian Martens Brenda Chair Carlson Cheryl Co-Chair Swenson Joyce Judge Gabraith Ardis Judge Murman Gloria Judge 16 SLP Junior High Christensen Mary Lou Chair Decker Sharon Co-Chair Savick Elaine Judge Bratland Rose Judge 17 Eliot Wickersham Mary Chair Mayes Nancy Co-Chair Lipson Harvey Judge Stalling Geri Judge Absentee/NH Board Berlin Nancy Judge Huiras Ken Judge 4. True copies of the ballots are attached. NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the following nominees are certified as the candidates for Ward 1 and Ward 4 on the general election ballot: Ward 1 Candidates Ward 4 Candidates Sue Sanger Paul Carver Ann Thomas Michael Cohn Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 19, 2005 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8a - Canvass 2005 Primary Election Results Page 5 City of St. Louis Park OFFICIAL Local Primary Election September 13, 2005 Total % of WARD I WARD IV Office Votes Vote Total 1 2 3 4 5 Total 14 15 16 17 CITY OFFICES Councilmember Ward 1 Susan Sanger 430 58.2%430 211 59 56 39 65 Michael Antonoff 18 2.4%18 6 7 2 0 3 Ann Thomas 291 39.4%291 83 41 92 33 42 739 100.0% Councilmember Ward 4 C. Paul Carver 156 58.9%156 11 34 88 23 Michael Cohn 59 22.3%59 16 24 16 3 Tom Peterson 50 18.9%50 8 10 16 16 265 100.0% SPOILED BALLOTS 11 7 0 2 3 1 1 4 1 2 1 0 REGISTERED AT 7 A.M.15,037 8,031 2,670 1,657 1,511 1,044 1,149 7,006 1,626 1,556 2,220 1,604 REG AT THE POLLS 10 4 0 0 1 0 3 6 1 3 1 1 TOTAL REGISTERED 15,047 8,035 2,670 1,657 1,512 1,044 1,152 7,012 1,627 1,559 2,221 1,605 VOTER RECEIPTS 973 718 291 105 145 70 107 255 34 64 116 41 ABSENTEE BALLOTS 31 21 9 2 5 2 3 10 1 4 4 1 TOTAL VOTERS 1,004 739 300 107 150 72 110 265 35 68 120 42 (PERCENT VOTING)7%9%11%6%10%7%10%4%2%4%5%3% St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8b - 1st reading amending local tax Page 1 8b. 1st Reading of an Ordinance Amending the Local Tax on Lawful Gambling and Adoption of a Resolution Concerning its Collection This action will reduce the amount of tax paid to the city from charitable gambling organizations from .0075% to .0010% and suspend collection for the remainder of calendar year 2005. Recommended Action: § Motion to approve first reading of an ordinance concerning local gambling tax and set second reading for October 10, 2005 § Motion to adopt the resolution suspending collection of the gambling tax effective immediately. Background: In December of 1999 Council enacted a tax on lawful gambling in the city calculated at 2% of the gross receipts of all licensed organizations less prizes actually paid out by the organizations. Council’s stated intent in passing the tax was to ensure that city costs are recovered, and adequate investigation and enforcement activities are conducted. The amount of tax to be collected was reevaluated in 2001 and reduced to .0075% (three quarters of one percent). The city’s costs related to charitable gambling have continued to decline. Staff believes the decline is directly attributable to the trade area restriction which has stabilized charitable gambling activity in the city. Staff is recommending that Council again reduce the amount of tax to be collected from .0075% to .0010 (one tenth of one percent). Fund Balance and Suspension of Collection: Cities which collect a local gambling tax are required to submit an annual report showing fund balance. If a positive fund balance exists, the city must justify the reason for maintaining the positive balance, or refund the money directly to those organizations that contributed to the fund. Our current gambling fund balance is approximately $15,000. As part of the on-going fee study the finance department has projected that given current activity levels, the city could fully fund administration and enforcement costs related to gambling through 2009 by spending down the current fund balance. Therefore, staff is recommending that in addition to lowering the amount of tax to be collected, the city also adopt the attached resolution suspending collection of the tax for the remainder of 2005 and all of 2006. Similar resolutions will be presented to council each January until the fund balance is spent down. If extraordinary costs are incurred in the future, the suspension of tax collection can be reevaluated. The State Gambling Control Board has been apprised of this proposal and supports the action. Attachments: Ordinance Resolution Prepared By: Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8b - 1st reading amending local tax Page 2 ORDINANCE NO. _______-05 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE CHAPTER 15 RELATED TO CHARITABLE GAMBLING ORGANIZATION AMOUNT OF LOCAL TAX THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Chapter 15 is hereby amended as follows Sec. 15-9. Local tax. Any organization authorized to conduct lawful gambling shall pay to the city on a monthly basis a local gambling tax in the amount of .0075 0.0010 percent (one tenth of one percent) of the gross receipts of a licensed organization from all lawful gambling less prizes actually paid out by the organization. Payment shall be made no later than 25 days after the end of the preceding month and shall be accompanied by a copy of the monthly return filed with the Minnesota Department of Revenue. Section 2. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after its publication. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council ________, 2005 City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8b - 1st reading amending local tax Page 3 RESOLUTION NO. 05-_____ RESOLUTION SUSPENDING COLLECTION OF THE LOCAL CHARITABLE GAMBLING TAX WHEREAS, St. Louis Park City Code Section 15-9 requires that charitable gambling organizations operating in the city pay a tax to the city which can only be used to fund the city’s efforts in administration and enforcement of gambling; and WHEREAS, a positive tax fund balance exists which will adequately provide the city with resources needed to fully fund gambling administration and enforcement operations over the remainder of 2005 and all of 2006. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that collection of the charitable gambling tax is hereby suspended for the remainder of 2005 and for calendar year 2006 effective upon passage of this resolution. LET IT BE FURTHER RESOLVED that the suspension be reevaluated prior to calendar year 2007. Reviewed for Administration:: Adopted by the City Council _____________ City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 1 8c. Wireless Internet Service Feasibility Study Recommended Action: Motion to receive wireless study report and refer it to September 26 study session for further review, analysis, and discussion of issues and options. Direct staff to conduct any follow-up activities Council feels appropriate at this time. PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION: The purpose of this item is to present to Council the summary report of the Wireless Internet Service Feasibility Study requested by Council. While the utility of data from any report is always time sensitive, it is staff’s recommendation that Council refer the report to an upcoming study session for detailed discussion and direction. This will allow Council members, ISD #283 School Board members, and the several other interested stakeholders following this study time to both review report findings and provide input for Council consideration. St. Louis Park Schools (ISD #283) and the City are partners in this study. BACKGROUND: At its May 23 special meeting, Council authorized execution of a contract with Virchow, Krause &Company, LLP (VK) for completion of a study of the technical, market, and financial feasibility and options to ensure access to competitively priced wireless high speed Internet service. VK is a member of the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce. This study follows results of an informal community interest survey of residents and businesses on this topic. Results from those who expressed an opinion clearly indicated that further study was warranted. Staff most recently updated Council at its August 22 study session (see attached report). Since that time, a number of additional meetings have taken place and analysis completed. In addition, the Town Hall meeting was aired several times on cable TV in late July and in the month of August. Additional input on the study has been received. The consultant was asked to complete a feasibility study focused on the market, technical, and financial issues around wireless technologies. In other words, VK’s goal was to determine whether there is sufficient interest among residents and businesses in high-speed wireless Internet service, if it is technically possible to make such a service work, and if sufficient revenues can be generated to meet operational and replacement costs. VK also looked at several different business models. After Council reviews these findings, its role primarily turns to one of policy – what are the issues raised by the study, how have they or should they be addressed, and is this fundamentally something that can enhance the strength of the community? STUDY CONTEXT: This study was undertaken as a result of Council’s interest in studying the potential for high- speed wireless Internet services as it relates to a number of challenges that are witnessed nationwide: St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 2 • Increasing perception that access to high-speed Internet service is becoming an essential service similar to water, sewer, streets, and electricity utilities. • Availability of high-speed Internet service is not universal throughout many communities. • Price of high-speed Internet service. Internet service is considered high by many subscribers. • Price of high-speed Internet service. Internet service is not affordable for many others. • Choice of high-speed Internet service Internet service providers, where it exists, is often limited to one. • Access to affordable high-speed Internet service appears to be of most interest to residents and small businesses – important because small businesses create most jobs in America. • Municipal and School Operations – Police, Fire, Public Services, Educational Tools – can benefit greatly from high-speed Internet service (Corpus Christi, Texas centers its wireless project on these areas). • Mobility / Portability is offered with wireless high-speed Internet service – wireless is here and growing. • St. Louis Park competes with 800+ cities in Minnesota and 18,000+ cities nationwide for residents and businesses to come and stay here • About 200 other cities nationwide are currently in the planning or implementation stages for high-speed Internet services • USA ranks Number 16 worldwide in high-speed Internet penetration rates. STUDY FINDINGS: The study revealed a number of findings, which are detailed in the attached report, and highlighted below: • Residential and Business Surveys revealed significant interest among both the residential and business community for competitively priced wireless high-speed Internet service. • City Branding of wireless high-speed Internet service increases residential and business interest. • Technically, it is feasible to provide wireless high-speed Internet service. • Financially, the analysis indicates that a wireless high-speed internet services would cash flow based on input from likely residential and business subscribers. • Public Safety and Public Services would benefit significantly from a wireless high- speed Internet service as much work is done remotely and on a mobile basis, and speed is essential service provision efficiency improvements. This could offset a significant portion of costs. • Educational Applications available to students, parents, and teachers through wireless high-speed Internet service would strengthen schools. • Price is critical, with residents indicating a monthly price point of under $25 and small businesses under $30. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 3 • Small Business Support in St. Louis Park for wireless high-speed Internet service is strong. • Major Industry Support for wireless high-speed Internet service exists from companies such as Dell, Cisco, and Intel. • TwinWest Chamber of Commerce has taken the position that municipal governments should not enter the free market and become a provider of high-speed internet services. • Promoting Innovation is desirable among some businesses which have approached the City in support of a municipal role. • Risks are always present, especially when important and bold decisions are pending, and so due diligence is necessary to mitigate and manage risk. STUDY ISSUES: Issues emerge along the path of any significant study, and in this study here are the issues that have gained the most attention. All of these issues have been addressed by the many study documents for Council review: • Security Concerns: The concern that wireless high-speed Internet service is inherently insecure and subject to intrusion. While it is true that people must secure wireless routers they buy for their homes, any wireless devices contemplated in a study project would be secured prior to deployment. • Legal Concerns: First amendment and liability concerns about information transmitted over the Internet. As an industry practice, these are addressed by current Internet Service Providers with legally supportable language. Similar practices are employed by cities that play a role in this service. • Health Concerns: A significant amount of material in the report relates to health concerns raised most prominently at the July 26 Town Hall meeting. As a result of this meeting, people concerned with this issue provided a set of materials which are included in the study. Some materials cite major concerns, while others suggest minimal concerns. Importantly, many of these studies relate to technologies that emit significantly higher power levels than wireless technologies contemplated in the City’s study. Nevertheless, the consultant was directed to conduct further research into health concerns raised on July 26, and findings of that research are included in the report. The consultant indicates that they have found no evidence of harmful effects that would be introduced by a Wi-Fi network they may recommend for the City. • Role of Government in Utilities: There are various views of the proper role of government when it comes to any utility service that could be provided in the free market. Indeed, the large bulk of telecommunications services are provided by the private sector in the free (and often regulated) markets. Some markets do not result in the desired level of competition around price, service, choice, and innovation. Some people believe this is the best possible outcome, while others believe services that are evolving into essential utilities suggest different approaches. These different approaches include reconsideration of regulation and other potential roles for government. Regulation of telecommunications occurs most significantly at the state and federal levels. One role some local governments are beginning to play is to promote innovation and free markets through priming use of newer technologies such as wireless high-speed Internet access. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 4 This role can take many forms including partnerships with innovative private sector companies. A concern raised is that any role cities may play in the provision of telecommunications services will put private sector companies out of business or discourage investment. This may be true; however, to date we have found no evidence to support this. City s taff and the consultant feel all these issues that emerged raise fair questions deserving of respectful follow-up. The study documents reflect that follow-up, and that follow-up is significant. Council has the option to direct staff to conduct further follow-up, such as financing the cost of subject matter experts to address security, legal, health, and role of government concerns. OPTIONS: As the City Council and School Board review findings of this report and determine next steps, several options are presented. These range from the Private Enterprise model, which is the status quo or “do nothing” model, to the Universal Access model where the public sector builds, operates, and maintains a wireless high-speed Internet utility with free access. Here is what the study concludes thus far: • First and foremost, the Philosophical Decision as to whether high-speed Internet access is becoming an essential service in which the City has some role regarding price and availability can only be informed by many of the study documents. The ultimate policy decision rests with elected officials. • If elected officials are interested in a role, the study suggests that a Public – Private Partnership holds the greatest promise for a successful service. This allows the private sector to do what it does best in terms of providing a competitive service option and technical support, while the City is able to bring its strengths of branding, affordability, and access. • Approximate 7,000 Subscribers (36% of all residences and 15% of all businesses) are required for the wireless high-speed Internet utility to cash flow based on subscriptions alone. These percentages are challenging and yet have also been met in other communities. • Price Point analysis suggests a residential monthly price point of under $25 and small business price point of under $30. • Cost Sharing of the wireless high-speed Internet utility for other purposes such as Public Safety and other public services reduces reliance on subscriber fees. This is similar to the benefit realized when other utilities use the same infrastructure to deliver additional services. • Maximizing Participation, not revenue, is one goal contemplated by this approach to wireless high-speed Internet service. • If elected officials are interested in moving forward without full commitment to a wireless project, the study offers an option to try a Pilot Project. This may be desirable as a way to both conduct a proof of concept and test some of the issues raised during the course of the study. Should a full commitment ultimately be made, a pilot project will also have offered the chance to work through many technical issues. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 5 • It is also possible that over time, private sector interest in the provision of wireless high- speed Internet service at competitive prices throughout St. Louis Park could reach the point where a partial or full exit strategy makes sense to employ. This could involve sale of both intellectual and infrastructure assets in ways that promote continued service to residents and small businesses, and access to the City and Schools for Public Safety, public service and educational purposes. PUBLIC PROCESS: The report includes information on many of the efforts at public notification and public process related to this study. Here is a brief list of some major efforts: • Informal Community Interest Surveys to Residents and Businesses • Letters from Interested People • E-Mails from Interested People • Voice Mails and Phone Calls from Interested People • Park Perspective Residential Newsletter Articles • Business Line Newsletter Articles • St. Louis Park Sun Sailor Articles • Minneapolis Star Tribune Article • City Web Site • “Park Perspective” Cable Channel 17 Show • TwinWest Chamber Task Force Meetings (May – September 2005) • July 26 Town Hall Meeting • Cable TV Replays of July 26 Town Hall Meeting • Sunrise Rotary Meeting • St. Louis Park Business Council Meetings • Lenox Men’s Club Meeting • St. Louis Park City Employees Meeting • City Intranet Information ACTION STEPS: The study provides an outline of potential action steps should the Council and School Board determine there is actual interest in a wireless high-speed Internet utility. This includes information on a pilot project alternative. In any event, it is projected that any citywide wireless high-speed Internet utility could be fully activated in the fall of 2006. NEXT STEPS: It is recommended that Council accept the consultant’s report, receive input and comments at tonight’s meeting, refer this item for further discussion and direction at its September 26 study session, and direct staff to conduct any additional follow-ups deemed appropriate at this time. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 6 Attachments: August 22, 2005 City Council Study Session Report Summary Report – Wireless Internet Service Feasibility Study (Supplement – copy available in Office of City Clerk) Prepared By: Clint Pires, Director of Technology and Support Services Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager COUNCIL REPORT FROM AGENDA PACKET OF 8/22/05 Wireless Study Update of August 22, 2005 Technology & Support Services PURPOSE OF DISCUSSION: To update Council on the status of the citywide wireless study, address any questions, and receive on-going input. Staff and the consultant will be present to discuss the study. This update will also include follow-ups to the July 26 Town Hall and TwinWest Chamber of Commerce meetings. The agenda for those meetings included the following items: 1. Background on why St. Louis Park is studying providing wireless Internet access (Clint) 2. Currently available Internet and wireless services (Tom Asp, Virchow & Krause) 3. Results of the recently conducted informal and random wireless surveys (Tom) 4. Options that appear feasible in St. Louis Park at this point in the study (Tom) 5. Public Q & A and comment period BACKGROUND: At its May 23 special meeting, Council authorized execution of a contract with Virchow, Krause &Company, LLP (VK) for completion of a study of the technical, market, and financial feasibility and options to ensure access to competitively priced wireless high speed Internet service. VK is a member of the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce. This study follows results of an informal community interest survey of residents and businesses on this topic. Results from those who expressed an opinion clearly indicated that further study was warranted. STUDY SCHEDULE AND UPDATE: The study is on 3 month schedule for completion. VK and City staff met on May 24 to share background information and study context, set meetings, and plan remaining steps to complete the project. Presented below is the high-level study due diligence timeline with status reports St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 7 2005 CITYWIDE WIRELESS STUDY DUE DILIGENCE TIMELINE FEBRUARY 29 – MAY 8 • Determine whether there are reasons to consider collaboration with the School District and/or other surrounding communities that may be interested in providing a similar service (to make the system usable over a wider geographical area). STATUS: Completed and School District agreed to partner while no bordering suburbs agreed to partner in the study. The potential to expand and provide service to surrounding communities should a service actually become available in St. Louis Park was discussed. The Minneapolis project was further along in its schedule, and had reached the RFP phase. • Design informal business and residential community interest surveys. STATUS: Completed by staff in April. • TwinWest Chamber Mayor and Manager Luncheon. STATUS: Held on March 17 and City staff, the Mayor, and Chamber representatives discussed the study directed by Council. Attendees discussed concerns about the proper role of government in ensuring access to competitively priced wireless high speed Internet service. Further discussed at the June 23 Twin West Mayor and Manager Lunch • Distribute surveys with associated articles in Park Perspective and Business Line newsletters. STATUS: Completed in April. • Issue study consultant Request for Qualifications (RFQ). STATUS: Completed and distributed on April 17 to approximately 15 consultants who either expressed interest or were established in this field of study. TwinWest Chamber distributed RFQ to its members to provide them an opportunity to respond. • Meet with SLP Business Council Task Force. STATUS: Met with TwinWest Chamber Task Force on May 5 to discuss study and potential ways in which Task Force could contribute. A second task force meeting was held on June 6. Consultant project team members were in attendance to review the study components and solicit feedback on the draft random residential and business surveys. A third task force meeting was held on July 26 following survey results and a meeting to present findings of the final report is St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 8 scheduled for September 7. Chamber staff has indicated they are currently working on a policy position statement to present to Council. MAY 9 - 23 • Draft a vision statement for competitive high speed wireless Internet service provision. STATUS: Draft ideas introduced to Council on May 9. A newer draft statement should also incorporate feedback from completed surveys and study research. • Tabulate, analyze, and present informal business and residential community interest survey results. STATUS: Completed and presented to Council on May 9. Survey indicated interest from both the residential and business communities in conducting further research. Results also shared with School District and TwinWest Chamber of Commerce to share with Task Force. • Engage consultant. STATUS: Completed at its May 23 special meeting, Council authorized execution of a contract with Virchow, Krause &Company, LLP (VK) for completion of a technical, market, and financial feasibility study. MAY 23 – AUGUST 22 • Conduct market research in the community to measure the likely demand for high speed wireless Internet services at various price points. STATUS: Residential and business telephone surveys completed and presented to Council on July 25. • Gather stakeholder input. STATUS: Meetings with Chamber Task Force. Meetings held with Lenox Men’s Club and Rotary Club. Chamber Task Force and City provided names of potential key informants. Meetings held with City employees on August 1, including representatives of unions. Town Hall meeting held the evening of Tuesday, July 26 to share basic survey findings and gather input on the wireless concept options. Special invitations to the Town Hall meeting were made to various community interest groups. • Research technical wireless alternatives available. STATUS: Consultant has completed. • Analyze various technical alternatives currently available and forthcoming. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8c - Wireless Study Report Page 9 STATUS: Consultant has completed. • Recommend technical alternatives (including migration path to forthcoming technologies) that appear to fit St. Louis Park’s particular situation. STATUS: Consultant has completed. • Based on the market research and technical research conducted, perform a Return on Investment (ROI) analysis that includes both hard and soft costs and benefits, business model options, and cash flow analysis that accounts for total cost of ownership and replacement. Follow-up on health concerns raised at July 26 Town Hall meeting, including extending an invitation to meet with concerned attendees with findings to date. STATUS: In process based on above analyses and Council will be updated. • Staff returns to Council with report findings, options, and recommendations. STATUS: Council will receive an update with the completed study currently scheduled to be formally presented to Council at its September 19 meeting. Key elements of the final report to be discussed in a broad overview fashion include the following: • Recommendations and Insights • Business Models and Financial Overview • Benefits and Costs Beyond the Balance Sheet • Health Considerations • Legal Considerations • Action Steps Staff and the consultant will be present at the Council meeting to provide further information and answer questions. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 1 8d. Request of Union Land II, LLC on behalf of Hoigaards, Inc, The Franz Family Partnership, David Turbenson Enterprise LLC, Larry H. Hjelle, and Avis K. Ahrndt for a Comprehensive Plan Map amendment for a Mixed-Use and Multi- Family Residential development for property located at 3550 State Hwy 100 S, 3547 Xenwood Avenue S, 3555 Xenwood Avenue S, 3501 Xenwood Avenue S, 5616 West 36th Street, 5626 West 36th Street. Case Nos. 05-36-CP Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use designation from Commercial and Industrial to Mixed-Use and Residential High Density Recommended Action: Motion to approve resolution and summary for publication for amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020 land use map from C – Commericial and I – Industrial to CMX – Commercial Mixed-Use and RH – Residential High Density with conditions as stated in the resolution. Background: In early 2002 the City undertook a study of the Elmwood Area that encompasses the area bounded by TH 7 on the north, TH 100 on the east, Wooddale Avenue and Alabama Avenue on the west. This study, known as the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transportation and Transit Study, was completed in 2003 and serves as a basis for redevelopment decisions in the area. The City Council adopted development guidelines recommended in the Elmwood Study into the Comprehensive Plan in 2003. The first development project to be approved since the Elmwood Study was completed is currently being constructed on the west side of Wooddale Avenue. Subsequent to the Study, other studies have been conducted including traffic studies and a stormwater study. Also subsequent to the Elmwood Study, the City applied for and received a grant from Hennepin County to upgrade the watermain in West 36th Street to accommodate new development in the area. The subject application is the second private-sector project within the Elmwood area. The project area covers 9.33 acres, exclusive of existing public streets, and includes the Hoigaards property. The Elmwood Study did not anticipate Hoigaards, a well recognized long time retail destination, to redevelop in the near term. It did suggest, however, that in the event of redevelopment of the Hoigaards site, it could be replaced with a campus style office use. Another alternative use, discussed but not included as a recommendation, was high density residential. High density residential would contribute to the mixture of uses in the area and would support the future light rail transit in the SW LRT Corridor. Two neighborhood meetings have been held by the developer to review the proposal. Property owners within the entire Elmwood Neighborhood and the south half of the Sorensen Neighborhood were mailed notice of the meetings. The major concern voiced by the neighborhood was related to traffic that would be generated by the residential use. A traffic study was completed by SRF Consulting Group and the results were presented St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 2 at the second neighborhood meeting. The traffic study found that the proposed use would not have a major impact on peak hour traffic (see discussion later in this report). The Planning Commission held a public hearing for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment and a zoning map amendment on August 3, 2005, and recommended approval of both. Concerns about the project centered mainly on traffic. Another Planning Commission concern was the loss of industrial land. Staff informed the Planning Commission that the decision to reguide industrial property in this area was based upon the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transportation, and Transit Study that had already been accepted by the City Council. The City Council reviewed this request at a Study Session on September 12, 2005, and stated that they would prefer to consider the Comprehensive Plan map amendment separate from the zoning map amendment. Staff will bring the zoning map amendment to the City Council in conjunction with an application for a preliminary PUD and plat at a later date. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 3 Current Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial and Industrial Proposed Comprehensive Plan Designation: Mixed-Use and Residential High Density Zoning: Current Proposed 3550 State Highway 100 S C2 – General Comm. RC – High Density Res. and MX – Mixed Use 3547 Xenwood Avenue S C2 – General Comm. RC – High Density Res. 3555 Xenwood Avenue S C2 – General Comm. RC – High Density Res. 3501 Xenwood Avenue S. IP – Industrial Park RC – High Density Res. 5616 36th Street W. IP – Industrial Park MX – Mixed Use 5626 36th Street W. IP – Industrial Park MX – Mixed Use Parcel Size: 9.33 acres Current Land Use: Retail, outdoor storage, office, Office warehouse, appliance repair Proposed Land Use: Mixed-use (retail and residential) and multi-family residential Other required City approvals: PUD, Subdivision, alley vacation Proposal: The developer is proposing to demolish all of the buildings currently on the site and to construct the following in four phases (see attached concept plan): v A 4-story mixed-use building on West 36th Street that may include Hoigaards on the first floor v Two-story townhouses with two stories of residential condominiums above on the block facing West 35 ½ Street v Row houses v Apartments The proposed site plan offers a variety of housing options; and, accommodates stormwater quality and quantity requirements for the drainage area that includes more than just the applicant’s property. The stormwater improvements serve the applicant’s property and the central portion of the Elmwood Area (see attached). The proposal maintains the existing public streets and grid street pattern in their current locations. Additional approvals: If the City Council approves of the proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendments, several other approvals will also be required for the applicant to proceed with their proposed project. § The Metropolitan Council must review the Comprehensive Plan. § The City must rezone the parcels consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 4 § The developer proposes to replat the property to recombine the various parcels within the proposed area. § The developer is proposing to vacate the existing alley between West 36th Street and West 35 ½ Street. § The development will require approval of a PUD. Traffic, access, open space, drainage, storm water retention, architecture, and other issues will be addressed during this approval process. It is likely the developer will combine a PUD with a plat and these will be reviewed simultaneously. § Although not a land use approval, the developer has also indicated they may be requesting approval of TIF to make the project feasible. The developer has stated that the intent is to begin construction in 2006. If Hoigaards occupies the first floor of the mixed-use building on 36th Street, it will be constructed prior to demolishing the existing Hoigaards building. Issues: § Is the proposal consistent with the Elmwood Study Recommendations and the Comprehensive Plan? § What are traffic implications for this change in land use? § What are the impacts of not reguiding property at 3535 Webster and 3536 State Hwy 100 S? Issue Analysis: § Is the proposal consistent with the Elmwood Study Recommendations and the Comprehensive Plan? Chapter U of the Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020 refers to the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study. It states that the 30-year vision for the area established by the Study and its planning principles (also adopted into the Comprehensive Plan) are to be used to evaluate future redevelopment plans. The Study considered that parts of the area north of West 36th Street would redevelop over time, but expected Hoigaards, a well recognized long term destination retailer, to remain over the long term. There was some discussion during the study process about alternative land uses in the event the Hoigaards site land use was to change in the future. Alternatives identified that would support transit-oriented development included both residential and office, although the final text only refers to office use. The factors for identifying office as an alternative use were that office would contribute to the mixture of uses in the area and would generate an employment base that would support the light rail transit station planned at Wooddale and West 36th Street. It also referred to site visibility as an advantage for a future office use. Access to the site and traffic were not a consideration for the study conclusion. The developer is proposing high density residential for the Hoigaard’s site. This land use would also support light rail in the Southwest Corridor as the future transit station is St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 5 within a short walking distance from the site. Peak-hour trip generation is significantly lower for the proposed residential use than for an office use. Peak hour traffic on West 36th Street is considered a problem due to the need for a grade-separated intersection at Wooddale and TH 7. Currently traffic backs up on West 36th Street during the peak hour. The residential use generates less traffic and has an opposite peak movement than what would be generated by office, i.e. residential traffic drives into the site during the p.m. peak and out of the site during a.m. peak, so the impact on traffic would be less (see heading below). One of the factors of a successful transit-oriented development is that a mixture of land uses is provided within walking distance. The Elmwood Study does recommend an office use for the Burlington Coat Factory/Micro Centers property and office occupies part of the Rottlund site. Other work related uses are within walking distance of the site including the medical office at Park Nicollet. Since residential uses on the Hoigaards site do not diminish the mixed-use concept, staff recommends consideration of the high density residential use for the Hoigaards site. The Hoigaards Village proposal is consistent with the Elmwood Study recommendation for mixed-use development along West 36th Street. If Hoigaards is relocated to West 36th Street it would also meet the Comprehensive Plan goals of retaining businesses in the community. A relocated Hoigaards would have greater accessibility, visibility, and more usable retail space within the new construction. If Hoigaards relocates outside the City, this space would be used for neighborhood retail supporting the proposed residential development as well as the entire neighborhood. The applicant is also proposing to amend the Plan By Neighborhood map to correspond with the proposed reguiding. The map will automatically be amended. The applicant has requested a change to the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit & Transportation Study to revise the recommended land use from office to residential for the Hoigaards site. Since the Elmwood Study is not part of the Comprehensive Plan, it cannot be amended as such. § What are traffic implications for this change in land use? There have been a number of traffic studies that included the Elmwood area. Currently, the City is considering a grade separation at Wooddale Avenue and TH 7 as well as a realignment of the south TH 7 frontage road at Wooddale Avenue. These two improvements will greatly relieve the peak hour traffic congestion that occurs on West 36th Street adjacent to this project site. The traffic study completed for this project has found that the proposed residential and mixed-use cause less of an impact on the traffic congestion in the area than an office of similar size. Typically, residential development has less impact on peak hour traffic than other uses such as office. This is because the number of trips generated per square foot is less and the trips are spread over a longer period of time. A copy of the traffic study is attached. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 6 § What are the impacts of not reguiding and rezoning property at 3535 Webster and 3536 State Hwy 100 S? Properties located at 3535 Webster Avenue and 3536 State Highway 100 S. are not included in this project. The developer initially tried to acquire these properties but the costs were prohibitive. These small properties (together totaling less than 10,000 square feet) guided for Commercial and are both deficient in parking. The use of these properties falls under the “non-conforming” provisions of the zoning code. Land adjacent and east of these properties is part of the Hoigaards site. Since the owner’s of these properties were not interested in becoming part of the redevelopment, their property is not included in this proposed Comprehensive Plan change. The Comprehensive Plan land use designation for these two parcels remain Commercial for the time being. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of Comprehensive Plan Map amendments to change the land use designation from Commercial and Industrial to High Density Residential and Commercial Mixed Use subject consistent with the attached map subject to review by the Metropolitan Council. Attachments: Resolution Summary for publication Elmwood Area Aerial photo Concept of Proposed Development Elmwood Study Land Use Recommendations Elmwood Study Concept Plan Existing Comprehensive Plan Existing Zoning Traffic Study Drainage area map Prepared by: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 7 RESOLUTION NO. 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 3550 State Highway 100 South 3547 Xenwood Avenue South 3555 Xenwood Avenue South 3501 Xenwood Avenue South 5616 West 36th Street 5626 West 36th Street 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 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 8 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 WHEREAS, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan may be initiated by petition of the owners of the actual property, the guiding of which is proposed to be changed, and WHEREAS, the owners of the properties at 3550 State Highway 100 South, 3547 Xenwood Avenue South, 3555 Xenwood Avenue South, 3501 Xenwood Avenue South, 5616 West 36th Street, and 5626 West 36th Street petitioned the City to change the Comprehensive Plan land use designation from Industrial and Commercial to Mixed-Use and High Density Residential, and WHEREAS, the proposed Comprehensive Plan land use designations are consistent with the goals of the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transportation, and Transit Study, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended adoption of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 on August 3, 2005, 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. 05-36-CP); WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case File No.05-36-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 Commercial and Industrial to High Density Residential and Mixed Use. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 19, 2005 Contingent upon review of the Metropolitan Council City Manager Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 9 Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 10 SUMMARY RESOLUTION NO. 05-123 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 3550 State Highway 100 South 3547 Xenwood Avenue South 3555 Xenwood Avenue South 3501 Xenwood Avenue South 5616 West 36th Street 5626 West 36th Street This resolution states that land use designations of the subject properties will be changed from Commercial and Industrial to High Density Residential and Mixed Use. Adopted by the City Council September 19, 2005 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: September 29, 2005 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 11 RESOLUTION NO. 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 3550 State Highway 100 South 3547 Xenwood Avenue South 3555 Xenwood Avenue South 3501 Xenwood Avenue South 5616 West 36th Street 5626 West 36th Street 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 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 12 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 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended adoption of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 on August 3, 2005, 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. 05-36-CP); WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case File No.05-36-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 Commercial and Industrial to High Density Residential and Mixed Use. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 19, 2005 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8d - Hoigaards Village Comprehensive Plan amendment Page 13 SUMMARY RESOLUTION NO.________ 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 3550 State Highway 100 South 3547 Xenwood Avenue South 3555 Xenwood Avenue South 3501 Xenwood Avenue South 5616 West 36th Street 5626 West 36th Street This resolution states that land use designations of the subject properties will be changed from Commercial and Industrial to High Density Residential and Mixed Use. Adopted by the City Council September 19, 2005 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: September 29, 2005 St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 1 8f. Request of RKL Landholdings, LLC (Emad Abed) and ARCA for Preliminary and Final Plat approval for “MODA of St. Louis Park” and Preliminary and Final PUD approval for Meadowbrook Lofts for property located at 7000, 7002, 7050, 7052 Excelsior Boulevard and 3985 Meadowbrook Road. Case Nos. 05-44-PUD and 05-45-S Description: Plat property, construct a 6-story, 107 unit condominium project, mitigate existing floodplain and wetland Recommended Action: ü Motion to approve resolution for Preliminary and Final Plat for “MODA of St. Louis Park” ü Motion to approve resolution for Preliminary and Final PUD for Meadowbrook Lofts BACKGROUND On April 20, 2005, the Planning Commission held a public hearing for a request for a Comprehensive Plan amendment changing the land use designation from Office to High Density Residential and a zoning map amendment from O - Office to RC - Multi-Family Residential for the developable portion of the subject property. The Planning Commission recommended approval of both. On June 20, 2005, the City Council approved a Comprehensive Plan amendment. Second reading for a zoning map amendment was approved on July 5, 2005. This proposal is in conformance with those approvals. Prior to the public hearing, the developer distributed plans to the presidents of the Creekside and Brooklawns Neighborhoods. No neighborhood meetings were requested or pursued. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Plat and PUD applications on August 17, 2005, and recommended approval on a vote of 5-1. Most of the discussion about the project centered around open space requirements. This is discussed below. Comprehensive Plan: High Density Residential and Industrial Zoning: RC - High Density Residential, IG – General Industrial, and FF – Flood Fringe Site Area: 11.6 acres for plat 12.4 acres in PUD (Incl. 0.8 acres ApplianceSmart property) Current Use: Vacant, except for a non-conforming billboard Proposed Use: 107 residential units (condominiums) St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 2 Density: Allowed: 50 units/acre Proposed: 32 units/acre (based on building lot only, 9.2 units per acre based on PUD area) Floor Area Ratio: Allowed: 1.20 Proposed: 1.12 (based on building lot only, 0.3 based on PUD area) Ground Floor Area Ratio Allowed: 0.25 Proposed: 0.21 (based on building lot only, 0.06 based on PUD area) Building Height: Allowed: 6 stories or 75 feet (modification allowed via PUD) Proposed: 81 feet Parking: Required: 214 with up to 30% allowable reductions (150) Proposed: 172 (134 underground and 38 surface) Reduction sought: 20% Open Space: Required: 0.37 acres (16,204 square feet) Provided: 8.5 acres PROPOSAL: The developer is proposing to remove the existing billboard and to construct a 6-story, 107 unit condominium project on the site. (Removal of the billboard is required by Zoning Ordinance.) Both floodplain and wetland mitigation are required for this site. The developer will meet requirements for floodplain mitigation on the property located at 3985 Meadowbrook Road (see below and attached exhibits). A wet stormwater pond is proposed on the southwest corner of the property adjacent to Excelsior Boulevard. The applicant is proposing to place an art object within the pond. ISSUES: Ø Are the Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD proposals in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and applicable ordinances and policies? Ø Does the proposed PUD meet the requirements of zoning? Is the applicant requesting PUD modifications and are they justified? Ø What are the likely impacts on adjacent neighbors? Ø What are the impacts to the adjacent wetland and floodplain? o Does the proposal meet zoning ordinance requirements for floodplain mitigation? o Does the proposal meet requirements for wetland mitigation? o How will a new building on this property be protected from flooding? St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 3 Analysis of Issues: Ø Are the Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD proposals in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and applicable ordinances and policies? The attached development conforms to the recent reguiding and rezoning of the property. The PUD covers additional land owned by ApplianceMart where floodplain mitigation is being proposed. Plat The proposed plat is establishing a property line along an existing school district boundary line. The southern parcel, zoned RC and located within the Hopkins School District, will be developed. The northern parcel, which is zoned General Industrial, will be platted as an “outlot” with a utility and drainage easement over the entire parcel. The City will also require a conservation easement over the entire Outlot A as a condition of approval. The conservation easement will allow creek bed alterations to occur on the property and will prohibit the placement of any permanent structures on the property. The condominium association will continue to own Outlot A. Staff finds the proposed preliminary and final plat to be acceptable. Since the plat is not technically a subdivision because it is combining two existing parcels, park and trail dedication are not required. Public Works has found that the proposed drainage and flood storage meets City requirements. The applicant will be required to apply to the City for an erosion control permit and also needs a permit from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. A copy of the PUD application was sent to MCWD and several comments were forwarded to the developer. The proposed plat was also sent to Hennepin County for its review because access to the parcel is from a county road. Hennepin County responded to the City with a letter stating that the plat was acceptable, and that the applicant would be required to apply for an access permit from the County. Ø Does the proposed PUD meet the requirements of zoning? Is the applicant requesting PUD modifications and are they justified? PUD modifications. The applicant is requesting a PUD modification to reduce required parking by 5%, to allow a building height increase of 6 feet, and to reduce the required side yard setback from 55 feet to 50 feet (based on average setback) along the west side of the building. Parking. The zoning code requires 2 parking spaces per unit with the following allowable reductions (107 units). o A 10% parking reduction is allowed if the development is located within ¼ mile of a frequently operating transit route, if there is a dedicated pedestrian route to the bus stop. The Route 12 bus operates on Excelsior Boulevard and is frequently operating. The St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 4 applicant is proposing to construct an on-site sidewalk that will connect to the existing sidewalk on Excelsior Boulevard. o The zoning ordinance allows up to a 5% parking reduction if the development constructs bicycle parking on site. The site plan does not show any area designated for bicycle parking, although the developer has agreed to include an area on the plan. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that bicycle parking be added to the plan as a condition of approval. o An additional 15% parking reduction is allowed via PUD, if the City Council finds this reduction is warranted based upon the development. The applicant is seeking a 20% total parking reduction. This would include a PUD modification of 5% in addition to the 10% allowed for transit and 5% for bicycle parking. Generally staff has found that parking reductions do not cause a parking shortage as long as one parking space per bedroom is provided and at least 10% of the parking provided is accessible to guests. The developer is proposing 172 parking spaces, 38 of which or 22% are accessible to guests. The development will have 137 bedrooms and 29 dens. Even if all of the dens were converted to bedrooms, the total number of bedrooms would be only 166, which means there will be more than one parking space per bedroom. 30 2-bedroom units 48 1-bedroom units 29 2-bedroom plus den units 137 bedrooms plus 29 dens - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Parking required (107 units) 214 spaces Less 20% - 43 spaces 171 spaces Proposed 172 spaces - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 space per bedroom analysis Number of bedrooms 137 Spaces per bedroom 1.25 Number of bedrooms + dens 166 Spaces per bedroom + den 1.04 The City Council has also stated that if the trail extending to Minnehaha Creek is accessible to the public, then parking should be made available to the public. The applicant has stated that the outdoor parking lot would be accessible to the public for parking for trail use. Building Height The RC zoning district allows building heights of 6 stories or 75 feet whichever is greater. The PUD process allows modifications to this building height. The proposal is for a 6-story building. However, due to the desirability of higher ceiling heights (9 feet), 2 levels of structured parking St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 5 under the building, and architectural features on top of the building, the developer is requesting a 6-foot building height modification. The building is proposed to be 81 feet high to the upper parapet measured from the ground along the front elevation. In the RC zoning district, building setbacks are determined based on building height. Since the proposed building will be set back 160 feet at its closest point from the east property line (about 2 times building height), staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts and finds the building height modification to be reasonable. Setback Reduction The applicant is seeking a 8-foot setback reduction along the west property line. The RC district requires a 56-foot average sideyard setback (based on building height), but the PUD allows modifications to reduce side-yard setbacks to 0 feet if the property does not abut a residential property. The west side of the property abuts a parking lot and loading dock for the adjacent industrial property. In this location, the lowest occupied floor of the proposed building is 14 feet above ground. The developer is proposing an average sideyard setback of 48 feet. Due to the limited buildable area of the lot and minimum impacts to adjacent land use, staff finds the setback modification reasonable. Bufferyards. The proposed landscape plan show that bufferyard requirements are being met. Landscaping. A revised landscape plan has been received that responds to comments made by staff and the Planning Commission. This plan has been forwarded to the Environmental Coordinator for further comments. Staff has included as a condition of approval that the Environmental Coordinator approve the plant species proposed prior to the City signing the final plat. Tree Replacement. The tree inventory shows a total of 3,185 caliper inches of trees on the site and 1,660 inches are subject to removal. The replacement requirement is 800 caliper inches. The landscape plan indicates 318 caliper inches being replaced (provided minimum size plants, 2.5 caliper inch for over-story trees, 6 feet minimum height for evergreen trees, and 1.5 caliper inch for ornamental trees are used). The applicant can either replace additional plants on site, or can contribute $90 per caliper inch in lieu of tree replacement. Traffic When the Planning Commission and City Council reviewed the developer’s request for a rezoning of the property, issues related to traffic were discussed, specifically comparing the old Comprehensive Plan and zoning of Office to the new High Density Residential designation. The Institute of Transportation Trip Generation manuals indicate that residential development generates fewer peak hour trips than an office use. The proposed 107-unit condominium project would generate 627 weekday trips, 47 a.m. peak hour trips, and 56 p.m. peak hour trips. The same size office building (based on the previous zoning) would generate 1,163 weekday trips, 234 a.m. peak hour trips and 225 p.m. peak hour trips. Site access to the site is right-in and right-out only from Excelsior Boulevard. A residential use on this property would generate fewer peak hour trips and would result in fewer U-turns on Excelsior Boulevard during rush hour St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 6 in order to access or exit the site. This would be beneficial as current traffic counts in Excelsior Boulevard were 25,600 vehicles per day in 2001 in this section. Open Space (DORA) The Zoning Code requires 12% of the building lot to be developed as “Designed Outdoor Recreational Area”. This is defined as outdoor space intended for passive or active recreation that is accessible and suited to the needs of residents and/or employees. The area shall be functional and aesthetic, designed with clear edges, relate to the principal building or buildings, include sidewalk connections, seating, landscaping, and other amenities. The area should be compatible with or enlarge upon existing pedestrian links and public parks or open space and may include swimming pools, tot lots, courtyards, plazas, picnic areas, and trails within natural areas. Outdoor recreational areas shall not include driveways, parking areas, steep slopes, or ponds designed solely for stormwater retention. (Ord. No. 2267-04, 4-12-04) Based upon the building lot, 0.37 acres of area is required for DORA. The developer is proposing that the entire Outlot A (8.5 acre parcel containing wetland and other low, natural area) be left as a natural area and will construct a pedestrian trail/boardwalk across the property to gain access to it and to Minnehaha Creek beyond. Passive seating/picnic areas will also be provided along the trail to enhance the outdoor experience. The definition of DORA does include “trails within natural areas” to be considered as part of the DORA. The developer is also proposing an outdoor plaza approximately 3,600 square feet in area that overlooks the wetland. Of the total 11.6 acre site, more than 10 acres will remain “green”. The Planning Commission was concerned that if the public had access to the open space, it could interfere with the enjoyment of the space by residents. They concluded that since access would be provided by an easement agreement, future residents could request a vacation of the easement if problems did arise. Public Art The applicant is proposing a public art sculpture within the pond located along the southwest portion of the site. Public art is a measure of “superior” development as identified in the Zoning Ordinance as a means to measure whether or not PUD modifications are warranted. The sculpture would be owned and maintained by the condominium association. Building Materials The proposal meets City requirements for Class 1 materials (see elevation plan) by using stucco, brick and glass on more than 60% of each building elevation. Ø What are the likely impacts on adjacent neighbors? The magenta image on the aerial photo below indicates the approximate location of the proposed condominium building. The yellow and orange buffers indicate distance from the existing parcels, yellow is 350 feet and orange is ¼ mile. Note that there are no single family residential St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 7 parcels within ¼ mile of the proposed development within St. Louis Park. The closest single family is located in Hopkins. Several buildings at Excelsior Townhomes and one at Meadowbrook Manor are located within 350 feet (the common notice requirement for public hearing notices). Due to the location of the proposed building and changes in topography, this building will not impact views to Minnehaha Creek or to the Meadowbrook Golf Course for any other residents. Due to the distance (over a quarter mile) from other single family residents in St. Louis Park, presidents of the Brooklawns and Creekside Neighborhoods did not have interest in holding a neighborhood meeting for the project. The closest single family neighborhood is located in the City of Hopkins. These are still a distance greater than the normal notification of 500 feet for a new plat. Ø What are the impacts to the adjacent wetland and floodplain? o Does the proposal meet zoning ordinance requirements for floodplain mitigation? o Does the proposal meet requirements for wetland mitigation? o How will a new building on this property be protected from flooding? In order to construct the proposed project, both a portion of an existing wetland and floodplain will be filled. City Ordinances allow for fill in the floodplain provided compensating storage is St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 8 provided in an area outside the floodplain. The applicant has proposed a plan that provides compensating storage in an area outside the floodplain on the adjacent property (see attached exhibits). The proposed plan does meet the City requirements for floodplain mitigation. The developer will be required to provide to the City evidence of an ownership right over the proposed mitigation site to allow this excavation to occur and to be maintained. Wetland mitigation is proposed to be provided on site and must be approved by Minnehaha Creek Watershed District, the regulating authority for wetlands. Due to the proposed ground elevations surrounding the building and the proposed building openings and flood-proofing of the garage level, staff finds that the proposal is acceptable. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Preliminary and Final PUD and Plat for Meadowbrook Lofts, subject to the conditions in the resolutions. Attachments: Ø Proposed Resolution approving Preliminary and Final PUD Ø Proposed Resolution approving Preliminary and Final Plat Ø Aerial Photo Ø Proposed Plat and PUD Exhibits Ø Planning Commission unofficial minutes Prepared By: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator 952-924-2574 jerickson@stlouispark.org Approved By: Tom Harmening, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 9 RESOLUTION NO. 05-125 A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED RC – HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, IG – GENERAL INDUSTRIAL, AND FF – FLOOD FRINGE LOCATED AT 7000, 7002, 7050, 7052 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD and 3985 MEADOWBROOK ROAD WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received on July 18, 2005 from the applicant, and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the Preliminary and Final 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, the Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary and Final PUD at the meeting of August 17, 2005, and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary and Final PUD was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on August 4, 2005, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the meeting of August 17, 2005, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary and Final PUD on a 5-1 vote with five members present voting in the affirmative and one opposed, 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. RKL Landholdings, LLC (Emad Abed) and ARCA have made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the RC – High Density Residential, IG – General Industrial, and FF – Flood Fringe districts located at 7000, 7002, 7050, 7052 Excelsior Boulevard and 3985 Meadowbrook Road for the legal description as follows, to-wit: St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 10 Tracts B and C and a portion of Tract D, RLS No. 167 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 05-44-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 05-44-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development 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, except that the landscape plan may be revised to reflect comments by the Environmental Coordinator related to proposed plant species. 2. Parking, building height, and setback modifications are approved as follows: a. A 20% total parking reduction including a 10% reduction for transit, 5% for bicycle parking provided that bicycle parking is provided for residents. b. Building height of 81 feet measured from the front elevation c. A sideyard setback modification of 8 feet on west side. 3. Prior to signing the Final Plat, the following conditions shall be met: a. Condominium association papers and other Final Plat documents shall be received and approved by the City Attorney. b. The applicant shall submit cash in lieu of tree replacement the meets the current replacement formula. c. An easement over all sidewalks and trails proposed on private property and intended for public access shall be submitted and approved by the City Attorney. d. A conservation easement over all of Outlot A is submitted and approved by the City Attorney. e. An easement document is submitted and approved by the City Attorney showing the ability to use the property at 3985 Meadowbrook Road for floodplain replacement. 4. Prior to starting any site work, the following conditions shall be met: a. The Planning Contract shall be signed that address, at a minimum, construction staging/routes/hours/duration, required completion of improvements prior to St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 11 occupancy, allowable administrative amendments, prevention of garage space sales to non-residents, the publics use of the conservation easement, specifics related to the City’s review of the proposed public art for the project, and consistency between documents as required by the City Attorney. b. A copy of permit from Minnehaha Creek Watershed District must be provided. c. An erosion control permit must be secured from the City. 5. The hours of construction shall be limited as follows: All outdoor activity and loud equipment operation shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 am and 5:00 pm weekdays and 9:00 am and 5:00 pm on holidays; no such activity shall take place on weekends. Indoor construction activity that does not involve loud equipment shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm on weekdays and 9:00 am and 10:00 pm on weekends and holidays. 6. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional conditions, the following conditions shall be met: a. Evidence of filing the final plat shall be submitted. b. Evidence of filing easements over all sidewalks proposed on private property to be used by the public. c. Color samples of all materials, shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator. d. An Irrigation Plan shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator. e. A Lighting Plan, including light fixture details shall be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator. f. The existing billboard shall be removed. 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 Preliminary and Final P.U.D. The development agreement shall address those issues which the City 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. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 19, 2005 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 12 RESOLUTION NO. 05-124 RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF MODA OF ST. LOUIS PARK BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. RKL Landholdings, LLC (Emad Abed) and ARCA, owners and subdividers of the land proposed to be platted as MODA of St. Louis Park have submitted an application for approval of preliminary and 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 preliminary and 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: Tracts B and C, RLS No. 167 Conclusion 1. The proposed preliminary and final plat of MODA of St. Louis Park 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. Drainage and utility easements shall be located over the entire Outlot A. b. A conservation easement shall be located over the entire Outlot A. c. Approval of the Final Plat is subject to the conditions of Meadowbrook Lofts PUD (Case No. 05-44-PUD) approval, the planning contract, and requirements of other agencies including the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and Hennepin County Department of Transportation. d. 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. provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 13 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. 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 September 19, 2005 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 14 Unofficial Excerpts Planning Commission Minutes August 17, 2005 3. Hearings A. Meadowbrook Lofts – Preliminary and Final Plat and Planned Unit Development to Construct 6-story, 107 unit Residential Condominium Building Location: 7200, 7202, 7250, 7252 Excelsior Boulevard and 3985 Meadowbrook Road Applicant: RKL Landholdings, LLC Case Nos.: 05-44-PUD and 05-45-S Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator, presented the staff report. Dean Dovalis, project architect, provided details regarding the sculpture by Nick Legeros which is proposed for the public art/gateway part of the project. Mr. Dovalis said that units have been enlarged since the Planning Commission reviewed the proposal in connection with the Comp Plan and rezoning applications. Larger units have resulted in fewer units than were originally proposed. Mr. Dovalis commented on the wetlands and the incorporation of a boardwalk to re-establish the creek as a central piece of the project. Commissioner Morris asked about the conservation easement. He asked what in the condominium covenants will give access rights to the residents, or would it just be open to the public. Mr. Dovalis responded that the easement would be open to the public. Commissioner Timian asked how the public would exit. Mr. Dovalis said at this point the trail is a one-way walk. Commissioner Morris asked about vegetation management. Mr. Dovalis said the developer does not want to adapt or modify the area. It is a wild and natural space. Commissioner Morris said he asked the question because the 12% open space requirements are for recreational use of residents. If the area is open to the public, is not accessible to residents, and is not maintained, he asked how the 12% open space requirement is met. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 15 Mr. Dovalis said the boardwalk and path provide the recreation. Some maintenance would occur along the edges of the boardwalk and the pathway. It isn’t an active area, it is a passive recreational area for observation of wildlife and the creek. It would be the first phase of opening up the creek area. Ms. Erickson stated that the Park and Recreation Dept. discussed the proposal. The City Attorney will draft the easement document. Commissioner Morris said he was concerned about the intent of the zoning requirement for 12% recreational open space and a new view of how that requirement is being utilized. Ms. Erickson said the staff report suggests further development of passive areas like a picnic area, tables, or gazebos that make the walk more desirable. She added that there is land available for an informal trail along the creek on the southside to Meadowbrook Lane. The DNR owns the property right next to the creek so that eventually the trail could be connected. Chair Carper asked if buckthorn removal included both lots. Ms. Erickson responded that it mostly included the outlot. Commissioner Robertson asked if the area along the trail measures out to 12% open space. Ms. Erickson said it is difficult to measure along the trail but it does seem to meet the 12% open space requirement. Ms. Erickson said prior to City Council consideration of the request, she will make the calculation of the area along the trail. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked why Ms. Erickson equated the area to Excelsior & Grand in terms of parking. She also asked about parking for public access. Ms. Erickson said what seems to have worked at Excelsior & Grand, and other developments as well, is parking based on one car per bedroom. The 30% reduction for this project would have been a little high, but staff was comfortable with the parking because the project exceeds the one car per bedroom measurement. She went on to say that the City Council expressed a concern that there should be some parking available for public use of the trail. The developer has stated that they will make some of the spaces available for the public. She said there is a sidewalk all along Excelsior Blvd. so there is pedestrian access for people at adjacent properties wanting to use the trail. Ms. McMonigal added that when looking at parking reductions related to bedroom size, just as another standard, staff asks if the development has 1 parking space per bedroom. Often that equates to the number of cars. Staff has used that informally as a check on how much of a reduction should be given. Chair Carper asked about overflow parking. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 16 Ms. Erickson said given the number of spaces provided, staff did not think there would be a problem with overflow parking. Commissioner Timian said the project has the same issue as the existing project to the east, in that it has no green space. He went on to say that when that developer made his presentation he said there would be no need for any green space because no children would be living in the building. Commissioner Timian said that building does have many children living in it with no recreational area. He said he assumes Meadowbrook Lofts is being marketed for 55+. He said that many of these developments do end up having children and they end up playing in the parking lot. He concluded by saying that once again a development is proposed with no green space for children or adults. Chair Carper opened the public hearing. Barry Berg, marketing representative for the development team, said that he has represented a number of condominium projects in Minneapolis and the western suburbs. It has been his observation that there are very few young children living in the projects. He gave the example that often a couple with an infant or toddler will move before the child would be old enough to be playing outdoors. Commissioner Timian said his concern didn’t regard the next 5-10 years of the project, but the next 40 years. He said the developer of the adjacent property had made the same remarks as Mr. Berg and there are many children living there. He said the reality of this project is that the building is totally isolated with no connecting point to a park or other amenities. Daniel Le, attorney for the development team, said the lack of green space is an issue they have considered, but the majority of the property is wetland. They are constantly exploring ways to create more of a recreational area. He said they aren’t short sighted and haven’t stopped thinking of how to improve the project. They are trying to satisfy all the criteria of the PUD process. He said there is potential in the future to address Commissioner Timian’s concerns. Commissioner Timian acknowledged that the developer cares about the future and has a very difficult piece of property. But the development is not meeting the needs of the City in what has been proposed so far. Mr. Le said that the team will meet the needs of the City in working with the landscape architects as long as the development can do something on the wetland area that is in compliance with Watershed District regulations. Commissioner Morris asked about future plans and his understanding that the land would be encumbered as a conservation easement. He asked where expansion would occur. Mr. Le said the project absolutely would not go into the wetland area that has been set aside. There are adjacent properties that may one day open up for development. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 17 Scott Nelson, project architect, said they were asked by the Council at a study session how the project helped family housing in St. Louis Park. Mr. Nelson said they explained at that session that the project isn’t about providing family housing. It is providing opportunities for empty nesters and freeing up approximately 107 homes in St. Louis Park for families. Commissioner Timian said he had no disagreement with that, but wondered who is going to end up living in the building. He said at this point very few amenities are provided. Ms. McMonigal said that it is mentioned in the report that staff recommends passive seating and picnic areas around the immediate building. Mr. Nelson illustrated where a picnic area or gazebo could be added. He mentioned that along the back of the building a very large deck for picnics and observation has been provided. He said the proposed gateway/public art area at the west could be screened off and used as a recreation area, but originally the development team felt it wouldn’t get that much use. Mr. Nelson and Commissioner Timian talked about possibilities for recreational space near the wetland edge at the northwest side of the building. Mr. Nelson commented that the property presents itself as a natural area of views and walkways and the developer is trying to maximize that. Laura Ricker, building owner, 3965 Meadowbrook Rd., asked for details regarding floodplain mitigation on the property located at 3985 Meadowbrook Rd. She also asked about average estimated cost per unit. Barry Berg, marketing consultant, said pricing has not yet been finalized. Ms. Ricker asked if the project would receive any tax deferment or perks from the City. Ms. Erickson said the project would not receive any tax deferment or perks from the City. Ms. Ricker was given a copy of the staff report. Ms. Ricker said that the path along the creek runs parallel to her building’s driveway. She said she wanted the Commission and Council to know what the driveway was like. Large industrial trucks use the driveway hourly so the idea that this area be used for public recreation is questionable to her. She mentioned that when she bought the property there was a history of contamination in the area. Her property has several wells which have been capped. She believes that many of those wells lie in the area planned for floodplain mitigation. Chair Carper asked what kind of business is located in her building. Ms. Ricker said the building, located just north of Appliance Mart, houses a manufacturing company called Electric Wire Products. It is 75,000 sq. ft. with 200 employees and two manufacturing shifts. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 18 As no one else was present wishing to speak, Chair Carper closed the public hearing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said the property is difficult. She suggested that one of the reasons an office building hasn’t been built on the site is because it is a difficult property, especially as regards parking for office. She said she believes the amount of traffic that will be generated by this project will not be as great as that produced by an office building, but right now this particular project will have a big impact on Excelsior Blvd. She said this fits into some of the previous discussions the Commission has had regarding the continuation of projects for medium to high density in the area and areas east of this location. She said the City can’t continue to put additional cars on the road. She believes this project will be spectacular but she has concerns about the site, parking, and public access to the trail Commissioner Robertson said the project was well designed. Buildable space is maximized but much open space remains available. It may not provide the amenities found in a single family home, but hopefully other things are being done in the City which address that. He said it would be a choice to live here and people with children wouldn’t necessarily be stuck living there. Commissioner Timian said we don’t know how the building will operate in 30 years. He added that sometimes people don’t have choices. Commissioner Morris asked about the compensatory storage area being provided outside the boundary lines of the developed property. Ms. Erickson stated that the compensating storage is on the Appliance Smart property. Appliance Smart is a co-signer of the application for the PUD and they will have to provide a legal framework for the storage to happen. It is a condition of approval in the resolution. Commissioner Morris said he envisions problems in the future between residents and the public walking right adjacent to the property. There may be conflicts over the use of the parking lot, crowding boardwalks, and activities or behavior that the residents don’t enjoy or encourage. He said he is concerned about residents having no control over an area in which they want to do recreation. He has always envisioned the 12% open space as space on one’s property that is exclusive to the use of the residents and owners. Ms. Erickson said in a PUD the open space often isn’t on the same lot. The condominium association will not be giving up ownership. The City will not take ownership of the conservation easement. The willingness of the development team to make the area open and accessible to the public was a request of the City Council. Commissioner Morris said he understood. He said his concern was that the buyers may not like that idea when conflicts start arising. He said he isn’t opposed to the concept but he is uncomfortable with its workability. He recommended that a provision be brought forward that public access is not permanent but has a trial period. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 19 Commissioner Robertson agreed that the City shouldn’t force that issue on the condo association, but that they should have the right to change the provision. Chair Carper said some of the concessions he is willing to give the developer for height and setbacks are contingent upon the public access being provided. Commissioner Kramer said he is worried about a path that goes nowhere. He thinks the idea of a shared common space is a great idea. As space becomes more and more precious residents should be open to new ideas about sharing some space. He said he isn’t worried about parking. He said it is an attractive project and people will want to buy there. It will free up other houses in the City. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if there was any discussion about a smaller footprint and higher building. Mr. Nelson said at various times they studied building up to 10 stories. The proposed size is a compromise between the available land, the amount of units, and cost of construction. Commissioner Johnston-Madison said she would support a recommendation for a provision regarding a trial period for the public access. Ms. Erickson pointed out possible future trial connections. She showed the park on the other side of the creek which has a canoe landing. Commissioner Johnston-Madison asked if the recommendation for a trial period isn’t made, is there another way to recommend that the Council take another look at the idea of public access. Ms. McMonigal said the conservation easement would be dedicated to the City so the City is the party that could lift it, not the developer. Ms. Erickson added that the conservation easement isn’t an easement for public access. It is an easement for protection of the wetland. There would have to be a separate easement for a trail on the property to be accessible to the public. That easement would also be dedicated to the City. Ms. Erickson explained that the conservation easement needs to cover certain things such as the ability to restore the meanders in the creek. There are a lot of reasons to have the legal mechanism of the conservation easement. It is separate from public access. Commissioner Morris asked if Ms. Erickson’s explanation was covered by Condition No. 3c, with the correction that the easement shall be dedicated to the City. Ms. Erickson replied that was correct. St. Louis Park City Council Meeting Item: 091905 - 8f - Meadowbrook Lofts Prelim and Final PUD and Plat Page 20 Commissioner Morris said that gives any future property owner the right to make an application to vacate an easement. He said that satisfies the citizen input as to whether that is a functional easement or not. He said he is agreeable to that condition. Jim Benshoof, traffic consultant, showed an illustration of peak hour trip generation projections, which shows the effects of traffic on Excelsior Blvd. to be minor in nature. Commissioner Johnston-Madison thanked Mr. Benshoof for his comments. Commissioner Morris made a motion to recommend approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat for MODA of St. Louis Park and Preliminary and Final PUD for Meadowbrook Lofts subject to conditions recommended by staff. Commissioner Robertson seconded the motion. The motion passed on a vote of 5-1 (Timian opposed). Commissioner Morris left the meeting at 7:30 p.m.