The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003/08/04 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA August 4, 2003 7:30 p.m. ***7:20 p.m. – Economic Development Authority*** 1. Call to Order a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll Call 2. Presentations a. Junior Naturalist Presentation b. Day 1 School Welcome Back Presentation c. Volunteer Presentation given by Sara Krzesowiak d. Presentation on Mediation Services 3. Approval of Minutes a. City Council Minutes of July 21, 2003 Document b. City Council Study Session Minutes of July 21, 2003 Document c. City Council Study Session Minutes of July 14, 2003 Document 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 a. Motion to reappoint Coleridge Doe and Steve Simon to the Community Education Advisory Council b. Motion to appoint a member to the Planning Commission 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing to consider granting an On-Sale Wine and Beer License for GranDoba Inc. a subsidiary of Aztonka, Inc.; DBA Qdoba Mexican Grill located at 4712 Excelsior Boulevard. Document Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve an on-sale wine and beer license. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Request of Quadion Corporation and the City of St. Louis Park for a Comprehensive Plan Map change from Industrial to Medium Density Residential, Office, and Mixed-Use and first reading of a zoning map amendment from IP – Industrial Park and IG – General Industrial to R4—Multi Family Residential, RC—Multi Family Residential, and MX—Mixed Use for property located at 3630 Wooddale Ave, 3601 Wooddale Avenue, 5810 37th Street W., 5957 37th Street W., 5951 37th Street W., 5912 Oxford Street, 5916 Oxford Street, 5920 Oxford Street, 5926 Oxford Street Case Nos. 03-31-CP and 03-32-Z Document Elmwood Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes for Quadion Property. Recommended Action: § Motion to approve resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan land use designation from Industrial to Medium Density Residential, Office, Commercial/Mixed Use, and Park as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission subject to adoption of Comprehensive Plan text amendments addressing redevelopment principles and guidelines and approval by the Metropolitan Council, approve summary, and authorize publication. § Motion to approve first reading of a zoning map amendment to change the zoning designation from IG –General Industrial and IP – Industrial Park to R4—Multi Family Residential, RC— Multi Family Residential, and MX—Mixed Use subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendments by the Metropolitan Council and set second reading for August 18, 2003. 8b. Comprehensive Plan text amendment to add the planning principles and concept map recommended in the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study to the Chapter P--Redevelopment and to add language to Chapter U—Plan By Neighborhood that references the Elmwood Study and Chapter P as guidance for future redevelopment. Document Case No. 03-40-CP Text amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020 to add planning principles for the Elmwood Area to the Chapter P – Redevelopment, and specific development guidelines for the Elmwood Neighborhood to Chapter U – Plan By Neighborhood. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolution amending text of Chapter P and Chapter U of Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020, subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council, approve summary resolution and authorize publication. 8c. Request of TOLD Development Company for Preliminary Plat approval for Park Commons East 2nd Addition and a Major Amendment to the Park Commons East Planned Unit Development granting Preliminary PUD approval for Phase NE (Excelsior & Grand Phase II). Document Case Nos. 03-19-PUD and 03-20-S Outlots D and E, Park Commons East (northeast corner of Park Commons Drive and Grand Way). Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolutions approving the Preliminary Plat for Park Commons East 2nd Addition and a Major Amendment to the Park Commons East PUD granting Preliminary PUD approval for Phase NE (Excelsior & Grand Phase II) subject to conditions included in the resolutions. 8d. 2nd Reading of an ordinance imposing a franchise fee on XCEL Energy, a Minnesota Corporation pursuant to Ordinance No. 2086-97 Section 9-610. Document The City’s franchise agreement with XCEL Energy requires that in order to impose a franchise fee, the City must adopt a separate ordinance. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the ordinance imposing a franchise fee on XCEL Energy effective January 1, 2004, and authorize publication of the ordinance in full. 8e. 2nd Reading of an ordinance imposing a franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation pursuant to Ordinance No. 2236-03 Section 7.1 Document The City’s franchise agreement with Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco requires that in order to impose a franchise fee, the City must adopt a separate ordinance. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the ordinance imposing a franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco effective January 1, 2004, and authorize publication of the ordinance in full. 8f. First Reading of proposed amendments to St. Louis Park Ordinance Code (Zoning) relating to creating consistency in standards relative to setbacks from residential districts, clarifying parking standards for restaurants in shopping centers, correcting retail and shopping center descriptions and approval categories, requiring conditional use permits for small schools in commercial districts, and clarifying motor vehicles sales accessory uses. Document Case Nos. 03-16-ZA Recommended Action: Motion to approve First Reading of proposed Ordinance Code text amendments related to zoning and set Second Reading for August 18, 2003. 8g. Secondhand Smoke Ordinance Document First reading of an ordinance amending Section 8-258 establishing a secondhand smoke awareness program including the public disclosure of possible secondhand tobacco smoke in restaurants. Recommended Action: Approve 1st reading of the ordinance amending Section 8-258 and set second reading for August 18th City Council meeting. 9. Communications 10. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department) at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF AUGUST 4, 2003 SECTION 4: CONSENT CALENDAR NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. 4a Motion to grant an extension of the cable tv franchise renewal to continue needs assessment activities Document 4b Motion to approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License - Holy Family Fall Festival, September 27 & 28, 2003, 5900 & 5925 West Lake Street, St. Louis Park Document 4c Motion to adopt a Resolution approving Temporary Parking Restrictions for the Holy Family Fall Festival - Lake Street between Zarthan and Alabama Avenues Document 4d Motion to adopt a resolution calling for a public hearing by the City Council on the proposed establishment of the Edgewood Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (A Soils Condition District) Document 4e Motion to approve the Annual Report on the City/School Volunteer Office Document 4f Motion to Approve the Annual Report on North Hennepin Mediation Program Document 4g Motion to approve the publication of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Flood Improvement Project at Lamplighter Pond, Area #4; Project No. 00-18 Document 4h Motion to accept for filing the Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of June 26, 2003 Document 4I Motion to accept for filing the Planning Commission Minutes of July 2, 2003 Document 4j Motion to accept Vendor Claims for filing (supplement) 4k Motion to approve final payment to Park Construction for the amount of $37,181.88 for storm sewer and utility improvements Document AGENDA SUPPLEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING August 4, 2003 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 Agenda Item: 080403 - 3a - Minutes CC July 21 Page 1 of 8 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA July 21, 2003 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. The following Councilmembers were present at roll call: John Basill, Jim Brimeyer, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Also present were the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Scott); Community Development Director (Mr. Harmening); Police Chief (Mr. Luse); PSAP Manager (Ms. Alex); Planning Coordinator (Ms. Erickson); Junior Leader Coordinator (Ms. Humphrey); and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). 2. Presentations 2a. Chris Nelson Recognition Jane Flanagan and Claudia Johnston-Madison thanked Chris Nelson for his service as Ward 2 Councilmember. Former St. Louis Park Mayor and current Hennepin County Commissioner Gail Dorfman recognized Chris Nelson for his service on the Council. Chris Nelson expressed his appreciation, and introduced his family. 2b. Junior Leader Recognition Nina Humphrey, Junior Leader Coordinator, assisted Mayor Jacobs with letters and certificates recognizing the Junior Leaders 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. Council Meeting Minutes of July 7, 2003 From Councilmember Basill: Item 8b, paragraph 4: Paul Roslind should be Paul Roslund. From Councilmember Sanger: She advised that her amendment to the motion for Item 8d was overlooked. Add the following amendment to the motion: The language in the PUD resolution be strengthened to mandate that descriptions of routes and maps be given to those who test drive vehicles. 3b. Study Session Minutes of May 19, 2003 The minutes were approved as presented. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3a - Minutes CC July 21 Page 2 of 8 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 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 2242-03 establishing the St. Louis Park Police Advisory Commission, approve the summary, and authorize summary publication 4b. Approve Westwind Apartments Private Activity Revenue Bonds 4c. Approve a 6 month extension of Shelard Homes (Lurie Apartments) Conditional Use Permit until March 3, 2004 Case No. 02-40 CUP (Approved September 3, 2002) 4d. Approve 2nd reading of Ordinance No. 2243-03 to vacate existing alley easement at 2701 Brunswick Avenue South, adopt ordinance, approve summary and authorization publication 4e. Motion to adopt Resolution No. 03-083 approving a minor amendment to an existing Special Permit to add an exterior stairway and a trade school for property at 5100 Gamble Drive 4f. Approve Resolution No. 03-084 for a minor amendment to an existing special permit to allow the demolition of the existing Pauline’s restaurant building at 450 Highway 169 03-46-CUP 4g. Approve Resolution No. 03-085 regarding Sidewalk and Lighting Improvement Project – Park Commons Drive, City Project No. 03-11, accepting report, establishing the improvement project, and holding information meetings with affected property owners and residents for the purposes of reviewing the proposed plans and soliciting input 4h. Approve Resolution No. 03-086 to enter into an agreement with Hennepin County for the improvement of the bridge over Trunk Highway 100 at Excelsior Boulevard, Project No. 98-04 4i. Designate Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $97,953.75 for Alley Improvement Project-2700 block between Raleigh & Salem Avenues, Project No. 03-09 and Alley Improvement Project-2900 block between Salem & Toledo Avenues, Project No. 03-10 4j. Approve Resolution No. 03-87 accepting report, establishing and ordering an improvement project, approving plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids. City Engineer’s Report for Storm Water Flood Improvement Area No. 1 – Runnymeade Lane - Project No. 00-03 4k. Approve Resolution No. 03-088 accepting report, establishing and ordering an improvement project, approving plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids. City Engineer’s Report for Storm Water Flood Improvement Area No. 9 – 5801 and 5737 W. 25 ½ Street – Project No. 03-05 4l. Approve authorization to advertise and receive bids for purchase of refuse carts 4m. Accept for filing the Housing Authority Minutes of June 11, 2003 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3a - Minutes CC July 21 Page 3 of 8 4n. Approve Resolution No. 03-089 final payment from Thomas & Sons Construction for 2002 Sidewalk Improvement Project No. 19990700 Contract No. 78-02 4o. Accept Vendor claims for filing (Supplement) In regard to Item 4i from the Consent Calendar, Anthony Geier, 2901 Toledo Avenue South, asked how the alley will be pave, and is this item just to approve a contractor. Mayor Jacobs said it is to approve a contractor. City Manager Charlie Meyer read a paragraph from the Staff report regarding this item, and Mr. Geier was satisfied. It was moved by Councilmember Omodt, seconded by Councilmember Santa, 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. Public Hearing - 1st Reading of an ordinance imposing a franchise fee on XCEL Energy, a Minnesota Corporation pursuant to Ordinance No. 2086-97 Section 9-610 Mr. Meyer said his remarks are directed to Items 6a and 6b. Mr. Meyer said the action before the Council tonight is to implement franchise fees. The fee for residential property would be $1.25 per month per utility, for small commercial it would be $4.00- $10.00 (depending on its classification), and for large industrial and commercial users the fee would be $65.00 per month. Mr. Meyer reported that the purpose of the fees is to use it for the pavement management program, and the funds from the utility franchise fees will be applied to the capital budget. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. Jim Rhodes, Xcel Energy, asked the City to consider a sunset clause or a periodic review clause, in order to review if such a fee is still needed. Al Swentek, Centerpoint Energy/Minnegasco, commented that Centerpoint would prefer a flat fee, and the need to maintain a competitive neutrality so as not to allow the fee to sway a competitive balance. Mr. Swentek said Centerpoint would like to make it clear that the fee must be paid by the customer and collected by Centerpoint in order for a fee to be paid to the City, i.e., no fees will be paid on uncollected revenue. Barb Obershaw, President Twin West Chamber of Commerce, said the Chamber opposes the imposition of a franchise fee simply as a revenue raising measure. Ms. Obershaw referenced a letter given to Mr. Meyer last June. She reported that Twin West has a position statement, which was sent to City officials. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3a - Minutes CC July 21 Page 4 of 8 Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. Mr. Meyer announced that Council has been provided an ordinance with revised language, (Clerk File No.08).mainly technicalities, and so the Council would be acting on that ordinance as amended. Councilmember Sanger said she thinks a sunset clause is unnecessary because the City reviews it finances at least annually. Councilmember Basill said the revenue must be collected before its associated fee can be collected, and he would like to work that into the motion. Mr. Meyer said the language for that concern will be reviewed between the first and second reading. Councilmember Brimeyer thinks a sunset clause might be misleading because this fee will be around for awhile. Mr. Meyer said the proposed rates are not indexed in any way; these rates were actually proposed in 1997. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to approve first reading of Ordinance imposing a franchise fee on XCEL Energy and setting second reading for August 4, 2003; and the revenue must be collected before its associated fee can be collected. The motion passed 7-0. 6b. Public Hearing - 1st Reading of an ordinance imposing a franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation pursuant to Ordinance No. 2236-03 Section 7.1 Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. See Item 6a for discussion from the City Manager and interested parties. See also Clerk File No. 09. Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to approve first reading of Ordinance imposing a franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco, Inc., and setting second reading for August 4, 2003; and the revenue must be collected before its associated fee can be collected. The motion passed 7-0. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public: None St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3a - Minutes CC July 21 Page 5 of 8 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Consideration of a Resolution to proceed with planning of an upgraded radio communication system for Public Safety. Resolution No. 03-090 Chief Luse reported on an upgraded radio communication system. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution No. 03-090 to proceed with planning for development of an upgraded radio communication system with the intention of participating in the regional system and that the Metropolitan Radio Board be notified of St. Louis Park's intention and request any state or federal financial incentives that may be offered to local jurisdictions. The motion passed 7-0. 8b. Request for a Major Amendment to an existing Special Permit for construction of a storage, parking and restroom addition to an existing office building at 500 Ford Road. Case Nos. 03-25-CUP, 500 Ford Road Resolution No. 03-091 Planning Coordinator Judie Erickson presented a Staff report. Ms. Erickson reported a correction to the language for recommended action on the agenda. It should read: Motion to adopt a Resolution approving an amendment to an existing special permit subject to conditions in the resolution. It was moved by Councilmember Velick, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No. 03-091 approving an amendment to an existing special permit subject to conditions in the resolution.. The motion passed 7-0. 8c. Request of Coach Homes of Shelard for a major amendment to an existing special permit to amend the exterior elevations for six-8-unit buildings in order to change exterior siding from stucco, cedar, and hardboard to vinyl and request for a variance from Section 36-36(d)(4) to allow an intensification of an existing non-conformity and to allow an amendment of a continued special permit that does not bring non-conformities into complete or greater compliance with current zoning codes for property located at 300, 310, 320, 330, 340, and 350 Ford Road. Case Nos. 03-33-CP and 03-34-VAR Resolution No. 03-092 Ms. Erickson presented a report regarding the proposal of Coach Homes of Shelard to remove existing stucco, hardboard covered with pre-finished metal, and cedar trim boards, repair rotted structural members, and re-side their buildings using vinyl siding. Scott Bailey, Bailey Enterprises, 484 Wabasha Street North, St. Paul, presented information regarding the request. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3a - Minutes CC July 21 Page 6 of 8 Councilmember Brimeyer inquired why vinyl siding is allowed on smaller buildings or single-family homes and not large buildings. Ms. Erickson listed reasons. Councilmember Velick asked Mr. Bailey about the condition of the brick that is currently on the townhomes. Mr. Bailey said the townhomes were built on very much of a wetland with a lot of peat and clay soils, but the shifting of the brick has been repaired. Mr. Bailey said they plan to leave the brick on. Councilmember Omodt commented that the stucco did not fail, the installation of the stucco failed—if no flash on stucco or vinyl, then failure occurs. Councilmember Sanger does not support the request of Coach Homes because it would bring the property farther away from compliance, and to grant a variance due to financial hardship would be an inappropriate precedent for Council to set. She said Council may want to consider amending the Architectural Code in the future. She thinks Council does not have the legal grounds to grant what is being requested. Councilmember Velick said the request does not meet all of the criteria required for a variance. It has been her hope that the residents would have talked to City Staff in greater detail about loans, and she suggested using other materials. Mr. Bailey said Coach Homes approached the City on this matter. He said the code in St. Louis Park is 13 years old, and it does not address state-of-the-art building materials. City Attorney Tom Scott said it is within the Council’s discretion whether or not to grant the variance. Mayor Jacobs said part of the problem tonight is definitional in terms of trying to define what is Class I material and what is not. Councilmember Basill asked what the price differential would be between stucco and vinyl. Mr. Bailey was unable to give a precise answer. Councilmember Basill stated that it would be about an additional $1,000 per resident to comply with Class I, and Mr. Bailey responded yes. Planning Commissioner Phillip Finkelstein said the Planning Commission decided, on a 5-0 vote, to approve the variance, and he referenced Pages 4-6 of the Staff report. He said the variance was based on the unique nature of the land and on the fact that the stucco is not visible in normal observation (see Page 25); the decision to grant a variance was not based on financial hardships. Councilmember Velick commented that she was hopeful the stucco would remain. Councilmember Brimeyer said a $1,000 cost per resident is no justification to set a precedent. John Russo, President of Construction Consultant, is not aware of any other community with an ordinance regarding vinyl siding like the ordinance in St. Louis Park. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3a - Minutes CC July 21 Page 7 of 8 Sue Davis, 310 Ford Road, serves on the board of Coach Homes of Shelard, said vinyl siding has been greatly improved. Councilmember Sanger asked if it would make sense to table the variance request due to the question being raised tonight which is: Should the Code be changed to allow vinyl as a Class I material? Mayor Jacobs agreed with Councilmember Sanger, and he would like to know more about how vinyl siding has changed. Councilmember Sanger suggested a motion up or down on the variance request. Mr. Scott said if a motion is made that will be a denial, the motion must be framed as direction to Staff to prepare findings consistent with a denial because we do not have findings in tonight’s packets for a denial; so the motion would be to direct Staff to prepare findings consistent with the denial which would then return to Council at the next meeting. Councilmember Velick said she would like to make a motion to deny the request for a variance and direct the Staff to present findings consistent with denial of the motion. Councilmember Sanger seconded the motion. Sandra Huber, 330 Ford Road, said she is very upset with how this request is proceeding. Ms. Huber said the residents are not getting the information they need. She said their property is unique, and the increased cost would be a hardship—they have a lot at stake if their request is denied. Councilmember Brimeyer said he does not support Councilmember Velick’s motion, it is unfair. Councilmember Omodt agreed with Councilmember Brimeyer. Councilmember Omodt said we should move forward and grant the variance. Councilmember Basill is concerned about setting a precedent. Councilmember Sanger asked Councilmember Velick if when she made her motion to seek the Staff to write findings for denial, did she mean that the variance would be to deny that there would be an increase in the amount of non-Class I materials greater than the current percentage so that current nonconforming materials could still be replaced by vinyl, which is nonconforming? Councilmember Velick responded that is correct. With that understanding, Councilmember Sanger still seconds the motion. Mayor Jacobs said we have a motion on the variance motion only, correct? Councilmember Omodt asked that the motion be re-read. Councilmember Velick said the motion would be directions for Staff for findings consistent with denial of the variance. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3a - Minutes CC July 21 Page 8 of 8 A poll vote was taken: Councilmembers Sanger, Santa, and Velick in favor; Councilmembers Basill, Brimeyer, Omodt, and Mayor Jacobs opposed. The motion failed 3-4. Mayor Jacobs said the motion to deny the variance fails on a 3-4 vote. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to approve Resolution No. 03-092 granting the proposed variance based upon findings indicated in the resolution.. The motion passed 4-3. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to approve Resolution No. 03-093 granting amendment to existing special permit with conditions indicated in the resolution. Councilmember Sanger asked how many votes are needed to an amendment for a special permit. Mr. Scott said a simple majority. A poll vote was taken: Councilmembers Basill, Brimeyer, Omodt, and Mayor Jacobs in favor; Councilmembers Sanger, Santa, and Velick opposed. The motion passed 4-3. 9. Communications: None 10. Adjournment Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 9:50 p.m. ___________________________________ ___________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3b - Minutes SS July 21 Page 1 of 1 General Fund UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION July 21, 2003 The meeting convened at 10:01 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers John Basill, Jim Brimeyer, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). 1. Dangerous Weapon Ordinance Mr. Scott listed and discussed options for Council’s consideration. The Council directed Mr. Scott to return to the City Council meeting of August 18, 2003 with an ordinance banning handguns on City property. 2. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:37 p.m. City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3c - Minutes SS July 14 Page 1 of 4 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA July 14, 2003 The meeting convened at 7:03 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Jim Brimeyer, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Councilmember John Basill was absent. Staff present: Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin); City Engineer (Ms. Hagen); Public Works Coordinator (Mr. Merkley); Public Works Administrative Specialist (Ms. Helleckson); and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). Others present: P. J. Andersen City Manager Charlie Meyer arrived at 7:20 p.m. 1. Bassett Creek Water Management Organization Joint Powers Agreement and Budget Mr. Rardin spoke about the Bassett Creek Water Management Organization. Mr. Rardin listed two concerns: The development of the CIP and how to finance it, and the potential for dissatisfaction among member cities. Mr. Andersen provided background information on funding and finance; he stated an assessment was made against each city. Mayor Jacobs said he spoke to Linda Loomis, Mayor of Golden Valley. Councilmember Brimeyer asked how are votes determined? Is it based on amount of water in a city? Councilmember Sanger said she spoke to John O’Toole, BCWMC Chairman, regarding financing and assessment. Mayor Jacobs would like to send Mr. Andersen back with an ad valorem. Councilmember Brimeyer stated that every city should get a vote, and Council agreed. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3c - Minutes SS July 14 Page 2 of 4 2. Discussion of Flood Improvement Project: Lamplighter Pond, Area #4 Mr. Meyer arrived at 7:20 p.m. Ms. Hagen discuss the Lamplighter Pond Flood Improvement Project. Ms. Hagen said protection is inadequate. Ms. Hagen reported that Staff is recommending the Figure 2 project and, still, protection coverage would be imprecise. Staff recommends increasing the area to the north of the existing ponds, engage an enlarged pump with lowered water, and then construct a swale. She said over-excavation would be required in order to reduce the water level by three to four feet. Ms. Hagen said either recommended project, Figure 1 or Figure 2, would require the flood proofing of some homes. Councilmember Sanger asked if the homes can be purchased by the City. Ms. Hagen responded that is an option. Councilmember Sanger is concerned about the resale of these homes. It was noted that flood proofing would not be for groundwater flooding, it would only be for surface water flooding. Council agreed they must take care of surface water flooding for the residents. Mr. Merkley said the City can try for better drainage but that will not totally eliminate the problem. Mr. Merkley said the pond must be dug deeper. Councilmember Velick requested Staff meet with the residents (seven of whom were at tonight’s meeting). Mr. Meyer said the City has the funds available and a plan; the surface water will be moved quicker than it is now. It was stated that the City has a 1.2 million dollar match from the State at this time. We move forward on the 1.2 million dollar project. Mayor Jacobs advised that the project get started as soon as possible. Council would like to meet with the City Attorney regarding the City’s obligation to residents (e.g., restitution). Residents cited their concerns regarding the City’s obligation to them and possible restitution. Ms. Hagen said an EAW must be completed, and the project could start as soon as this winter. Mr. Meyer stated a meeting with residents will be held soon. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3c - Minutes SS July 14 Page 3 of 4 3. Proposed Changes to Solid Waste Rates, Program and Ordinance and Cart Purchase To begin this discussion, it was noted that the 30-gallon carts have a narrow base and easily tip. Mr. Merkley discussed proposed changes, and the 18 ordinance changes listed in the Staff report for tonight’s meeting. Councilmember Sanger suggested publicizing the fact that people can have more than one recycling bin. Mayor Jacobs would like the City to take a soft and friendly approach to recycling as opposed to mandatory recycling. Mr. Merkley discussed rates, and proposed rates will not reflect sales tax. Mr. Merkley also discussed carts. Councilmember Brimeyer inquired about carts with schemes, designs, and colors in line with public art. Mr. Merkley said there are plenty of colors from which to choose. Perhaps, Councilmember Brimeyer added, we could use stickers or stencils on carts. Council requested Staff to explore art options for carts. Council requested just a report of art options at a Study Session prior to first reading. 4. Recreational Fires Councilmember Sanger requested recreational fires be discussed by the Council. She invited Dawn Gillette, a St. Louis Park resident, to join the discussion. Councilmember Sanger asked: Why are recreational fires, such as bonfires and campfires, allowed in St. Louis Park? Councilmember Sanger said it is a health issue and a public health issue. Mr. Meyer said fires in containers, such as in a Weber, are allowed, however, if campfires are a nuisance, they can be squashed. Councilmember Brimeyer said the City is hard pressed to eliminate recreational fires. Ms. Gillette asked why such fires are allowed? Ms. Gillette said she and her children have been “smoked out” of their home due to such fires. Mayor Jacobs said don’t change the recreational fire policy but do a better job of enforcement. Mr. Meyer commented that it is a quality of life issue. Councilmember Omodt reinforced what Ms. Gillette had been told to do, and that is to call 911; Council agreed. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 3c - Minutes SS July 14 Page 4 of 4 Council recognized the need to educate residents about recreational fires. 5. Rank Ballot Cumulative Voting Councilmember Brimeyer raised this topic, and he asked about the voting mechanisms of rank ballot cumulative. He inquired of Council what to do. He said the Secretary of State is resisting rank ballot cumulative voting. Councilmember Omodt said he is not interested in rank ballot cumulative voting. Councilmember Santa wants all available information on it before doing anything. 6. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:34 p.m. ___________________________________ ___________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4a - Cable TV Franchise Renewal Schedule Page 1 of 1 4a. Motion to grant an extension of the cable tv franchise renewal to continue needs assessment activities Background: The City received a May 24, 2002 letter from TWC requesting renewal of the franchise. Federal law requires the start of a renewal proceeding within six months after a cable company’s request. The 36-month period preceding the expiration of a cable tv franchise is used to evaluate the legal, technical and financial qualifications of the current cable system operator and evaluate the current and anticipated needs of different communities within the City. The City Clerk’s Office gave public notice of the commencement of the cable tv franchise renewal proceeding on November 14, 2002. At that time, the first Council meeting in August 2003 was selected for the proceeding conclusion or extension. At the close of the Renewal Proceeding, a Request for Proposal for the renewal of a cable tv franchise is given to Time Warner by City Council. Negotiations usually follow, ending with a Company proposal. That proposal must be accepted, or denied with cause, within 40 days, related to the standards stated at top. Data has or is being collected in a variety of ways to help assess current use and needs of cable tv services. In the spring of 2000, Decision Resources, Limited (DRL) conducted a survey for the City. Among the topics surveyed were the growing telecommunications use and needs of residents, and subscribers’ opinion of the local channels exclusive to our City. Our local channels were well valued by subscribers. In October 2002, an informal questionnaire was designed by city staff and circulated in the business community through contact with the TwinWest Chamber of Commerce and Sunrise Rotary. Results indicated a variety of current telecommunications uses and needs. In May 2003, a Business Telecommunications Needs Assessment Survey was conducted. The results, along with results from the above data collection efforts, will be presented at a future City Council Study Session. Concurrently, staff is soliciting comment from St. Louis Park educational, faith and service communities, and other municipalities served by TWC-MN. Public hearings will be scheduled and publicized, some with Telecommunications Advisory Commission participation. Staff is requesting an extension of the renewal proceeding date to provide adequate opportunity to continue and complete this information-gathering phase. Recommendation Motion to extend the cable tv franchise renewal proceeding to the City Council meeting of April 5, 2004. At that meeting the renewal proceeding will close or be extended, based on the status of the franchise renewal process at that time. Prepared by: John McHugh, TV Coordinator Through: Clint Pires, Director of Technology and Support Services Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4b - Holy Family Tempory Liquor License Page 1 of 1 4b. Motion to approve a Temporary On-Sale Intoxicating Liquor License - Holy Family Fall Festival, September 27 & 28, 2003, 5900 & 5925 West Lake Street, St. Louis Park Background: The Holy Family Fall Festival is an annual event sponsored by the Holy Family Church, at 5900 & 5925 West Lake Street. Staff has administratively approved all required permits for the event, with the exception of the Liquor License which must be approved by Council. Police Investigation The principals were investigated and no record or warrants were found. Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, Deputy City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4c - Holy Family Tempory Parking Restrictions Page 1 of 1 4c. Motion to adopt a Resolution approving Temporary Parking Restrictions for the Holy Family Fall Festival - Lake Street between Zarthan and Alabama Avenues September 27 & 28, 2003. Background: The Holy Family Church will conduct its annual Fall Festival on September 27 and 28th and has applied for a temporary parking restriction on Lake Street between Zarthan and Alabama Avenues. The Festival is an annual event sponsored by the Holy Family Church, at 5900 West Lake Street. Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, Deputy City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 03 - ________ A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING TEMPORARY PARKING RESTRICTIONS ALONG LAKE STREET BETWEEN ZARTHAN AND ALABAMA AVENUES DURING THE HOLY FAMILY FALL FESTIVAL BE IS RESOLVED by the City of St. Louis Park City Council that the Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to install the following controls: To restrict along both sides of Lake Street between Zarthan and Alabama Avenues on September 27 and September 28, 2002 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4d - Authorize Edgewood TIF District Page 1 of 4 4d. Motion to adopt a resolution calling for a public hearing by the City Council on the proposed establishment of the Edgewood Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 (A Soils Condition District). Background: Real Estate Recycling wishes to cleanup and redevelop 5.78 acres at 2401 Edgewood Avenue South. Plans call for the demolition of the existing 105,336 square foot industrial building and replacing it with a single-story, 79,000 square foot office/warehouse building. The name of the proposed multi-tenant building is St. Louis Park Business Center. It is estimated that approximately 15,800 square feet of the building would be used for office space and the remaining 63,200 square feet would be used for light manufacturing and warehouse. The developer has a lease commitment with a promotion fulfillment company for 50,000 – 60,000 square feet of space. In order to secure this tenant, the building must be completed early in 2004. The developer also has strong interest from several other prospective tenants for the remainder of the space. The EDA/Council reviewed the developer’s preliminary TIF application at the July 28, 2003 study session where it was favorably received. Staff is continuing to work with the developer to facilitate the development process. Calling for the public hearing will allow the EDA/Council to take the appropriate steps to establish a new TIF district for this project. In addition, staff will proceed in negotiating a development agreement with Real Estate Recycling. The TIF hearing is scheduled to be held on September 15, 2003. Attachments: Resolution TIF Schedule Site Plan Prepared by: Greg Hunt, Economic Development Coordinator Reviewed by: Tom Harmening, Community Development Director Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4d - Authorize Edgewood TIF District Page 2 of 4 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY STATE OF MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 03-099 RESOLUTION CALLING FOR A PUBLIC HEARING BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON THE PROPOSED ADOPTION OF A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1, THE PROPOSED ESTABLISHMENT OF THE EDGEWOOD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT, AND THE ADOPTION OF A TAX INCREMENT FINANCING PLAN THEREFOR. BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council (the "Council") for the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota (the "City"), as follows: Section 1. Public Hearing. This Council shall meet on September 15, 2003, at approximately 7:30 P.M., to hold a public hearing on the proposed adoption of a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 (the "Redevelopment Plan Modification"), the proposed establishment of the Edgewood Tax Increment Financing District (a soils condition district), and the proposed adoption of a Tax Increment Financing Plan (the "TIF Plan") therefor (the Redevelopment Plan Modification, and TIF Plan are referred to collectively herein as the "Plan"), all pursuant to and in accordance with Minnesota Statutes, Sections 469.124 to 469.134, and Sections 469.174 to 469.1799, inclusive, as amended, in an effort to encourage the development and redevelopment of certain designated areas within the City; and Section 2. Notice of Public Hearing, Filing of the Plans. City staff is authorized and directed to work with Ehlers & Associates, Inc., to prepare the Plan and to forward documents to the appropriate taxing jurisdictions including Hennepin County and St. Louis Park School District No. 283. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to cause notice of the hearing, together with an appropriate map as required by law, to be published at least once in the official newspaper of the City not later than 10, nor more than 30, days prior to September 15, 2003, and to place a copy of the Plan on file in the City Clerk's office at City Hall and to make such copy available for inspection by the public. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by City Council August 4, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4d - Authorize Edgewood TIF District Page 3 of 4 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE EDGEWOOD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT (a soils condition district) As of July 17, 2003 July 28, 2003 Project information, property identification numbers, and maps sent to Ehlers & Associates for drafting documentation. August 4, 2003 EDA requests that the City Council call for a public hearing on a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the establishment of the Edgewood Tax Increment Financing District. August 4, 2003 City Council calls for a public hearing on a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the establishment of the Edgewood Tax Increment Financing District. August 6, 2003 or August 20, 2003 Planning Commission reviews Plans to determine if they are in compliance with City's comprehensive plan and adopts a resolution approving the Modifications. August 15, 2003 Fiscal/economic implications received by School Board Clerk and County Auditor (at least 30 days prior to public hearing). [Ehlers & Associates to fax and mail on August 13] August 25, 2003 Ehlers & Associates confirms with the City whether building permits have been issued on the property to be included in the TIF District. September 4, 2003 Date of publication of hearing notice and map (at least 10 days but not more than 30 days prior to hearing). [Sun Sailor publication deadline August 29, 2003] St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4d - Authorize Edgewood TIF District Page 4 of 4 SCHEDULE OF EVENTS – PAGE 2 ST. LOUIS PARK ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT NO. 1 AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE EDGEWOOD TAX INCREMENT FINANCING DISTRICT (a soils condition district) September 15, 2003 EDA adopts a resolution approving a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the establishment of the Edgewood Tax Increment Financing District. September 15, 2003 City Council holds public hearing at 7:30 p.m. on a Modification to the Redevelopment Plan for Redevelopment Project No. 1 and the establishment of the Edgewood Tax Increment Financing District and passes resolution approving the Plans. [Ehlers & Associates will mail final Plan information to the City by September 8, 2003] By December 30, 2003 Ehlers & Associates files Plans with the MN Department of Revenue and requests certification of the TIF District from Hennepin County. *Because the City staff believes that the proposed tax increment district will not require unplanned county road improvements, the TIF Plan was not forwarded to the County Board 45 days prior to the public hearing. The County Board, by law, has 45 days to review the plan to determine if any county roads will be impacted by the development. Please be aware that the County Board could claim that tax increment should be used for county roads, even after the public hearing. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4e - Volunteer Office Annual Report Page 1 of 6 4e. Motion to approve the Annual Report on the City/School Volunteer Office Background: The City of St. Louis Park partners with St. Louis Park School District’s Community Education to provide volunteer program coordination. The volunteer office, located at the High School, offers a centralized location where city residents of all ages may connect to volunteer opportunities. The City shares the staffing and operation cost of the volunteer office with Community Education by providing approximately $30,000 in funding each year. In addition to coordinating city & school volunteer programs, volunteer office staff also refer residents with other community interests to opportunities available at local nonprofits. All new residents moving into St. Louis Park houses and apartments receive a listing of volunteer opportunities throughout the city. The following report highlights city volunteerism. The Mission The mission of the Volunteers in the Park, (V.I.P.) program is to promote quality volunteerism in the City of St. Louis Park and in the St. Louis Park School District. Program Summary The program is responsible for the recruitment of hundreds of volunteers for the City and the Schools of St. Louis Park. It also ensures that the volunteers are appropriately screened, placed, and trained. Before a volunteer is placed in a position through the volunteer office a risk management process is put into place. Volunteers are required to complete an application and list two references. Both references are checked and city volunteers also go through a BCA check.. The only volunteers who are not required to complete any application are parents who are working directly in their child’s classroom and people doing one time supervised activities. The Volunteer Office staff is dedicated to making sure that the volunteers it recruits and places are given all the information and training they need to be successful at their volunteer positions. It conducts regular evaluations and makes adjustments to program materials, training and operation based on feedback from volunteers. Recognition of volunteers is also an important job of the V.I.P. office. It works with staff to insure that volunteers are thanked and recognized in a variety of ways. The dollar value for volunteer service was recently increased to $16.54 per hour by the Independent Sector. This rate is based on the hourly earnings for private non-agricultural workers as determined by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. This figure is then increased by 12% to estimate fringe benefits. The estimated value of volunteer services channeled through the V.I.P. Office is $235,389.00. However, the value of volunteerism in St. Louis Park goes far beyond any monetary assessment; the benefits of volunteer time and commitment to our community and our schools is immeasurable. Via the V.I.P. Program, volunteers gain first hand knowledge about the city and schools, giving them an appreciation for the dedicated staff and the excellent work they do on behalf of the students and the community. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4e - Volunteer Office Annual Report Page 2 of 6 Volunteer Programs 2002 – 2003 Adopt a Hydrant Because of the lack of snow this winter, we did not need to contact the Adopt a Hydrant volunteers. Adopt a Park/Garden 2002 Volunteers in this program are assigned to their neighborhood park and/or garden. Their job duties include patrolling and cleaning their park, weeding and tending the garden and reporting any damaged equipment, vandalism etc. to the park staff. # of volunteers – 40 # of parks – 26 # of gardens –17 # of hours - 840 Adult ELL and GED programs The goal of these dedicated volunteers is to provide extra one to one help and extra language practice for students in Community Education’s adult classes. # of volunteers - 11 # of hours – 525 Art Appreciation Volunteers are trained to teach six lessons in art appreciation to children in grades K-6. Famous Artists was the theme of this year’s curriculum. # of volunteers - 59 # of classrooms - 95 # of students - 2375 # of presentations - 569 # of hours - 1600 Band Volunteers at Jr. High Community members join the band class for regular practice. # of volunteers -3 # of students - 25 # of hours -100 BookNook This program is designed to celebrate the best of children’s literature. Volunteers bring several collections of books to the classroom throughout the year and read these books to students on a regular basis. # of volunteers - 577 # of students – 1225 # of classes - 49 # of hours – 2490 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4e - Volunteer Office Annual Report Page 3 of 6 Bonus Readers Volunteers from the Sunrise Rotary spend one hour each week with students at Aquila providing extra reading practice. # of volunteers – 5 # of hours – 100 BRAVO! Classical music is the focus of the BRAVO! Program for grades 1-3 at Peter Hobart and Aquila. A music background is a requirement for BRAVO! volunteers. They are trained to teach six lessons that focused on classical music and composers. # of volunteers - 22 # of classrooms - 30 # of students - 750 # of presentations - 180 # of hours – 606 Bus with Us Volunteers rode school buses during the first three days of school for the kindergarteners. # of volunteers - 19 # of hours - 70 Classroom VIPs By working in the classroom these volunteers provide enrichment or reinforcement of the classroom curriculum. Most volunteers are in the school once a week helping students in the areas of reading, writing or math. # of volunteers - 67 # of students -1375 # of classes - 55 # of hours - 2819 ELL (English Language Learners) Volunteers Volunteers help students practice their English verbal and written skills. They also assist students in learning about American culture and customs. # of volunteers - 19 # of students - 36 # of hours – 460 E-Mentoring The volunteer office worked with the Police Department, St. David’s School, Martha McDonell, and the Junior High Community Ed staff to develop an e-mentoring program between SLP students who attend St. David’s and the police department staff. The program began in January and continued through May. Each week the police staff and students exchanged e-mail messages. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4e - Volunteer Office Annual Report Page 4 of 6 # of volunteers – 8 # of students - 8 # of hours – 76 Event Judges Volunteers play a key role in several High School programs by serving as judges or interviewers for DECA, Business Professionals Day, History Day and other Senior High programs. # of volunteers - 36 # of hours - 162 Halloween Party 2002 Volunteers work before, during and after the annual Halloween Party. They help with set-up, work the nights of the party and help with clean-up. The V.I.P. office works to recruit, place, schedule and thank the party volunteers. # of volunteers – 70 per night for 2 nights 27 volunteers for set up help 10 volunteers for clean up help 177 # of hours – 153 for set up help 490 for the party 58 for clean up 701 Literacy 1st Volunteers are trained by 1st grade teachers to help beginning readers and writers. Each volunteer spent about two hours one morning a week helping in a 1st grade classroom. # of volunteers – 25 # of hours – 810 Media Center Inventory – High School In May, volunteers helped the High School Media Center staff by conducting an inventory of over 26,000 items. # of volunteers - 8 # of hour - 60 Mentorships Volunteers meet with students individually or in a group serving as positive adult role models and listeners as they explore a variety of interests and issues important to the students. # of volunteers - 52 # of students - 85 # of hours - 714 Mock Interviews In December and May volunteers conducted mock job interviews with high school business students. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4e - Volunteer Office Annual Report Page 5 of 6 # of volunteers – 14 # of hours – 54 Parktacular - 2002 Volunteers were recruited to work at Parktacular, manning the Parktacular Booth and helping with the Royalty event. # of volunteers – 13 # of hours - 27 Pick up the Park 2003 Volunteers are recruited from local service groups, schools and individuals in the Adopt a Park Program. The goal of Pick up the Park is to get as much public space cleaned as possible before mid May. # of volunteers – 755 # of parks cleaned – 30 along with all the school playgrounds and surrounding areas # of bags of trash – 93 # of hours – 377.5 Project Respect Volunteers are trained to present four lessons designed to teach students to value themselves and others. The program was at Peter Hobart School. (Aquila has the ACT program.) # of volunteers – 6 # of classrooms – 6 # of presentations – 24 # of students – 150 # of hours – 48 Westwood Hills Nature Center Regular Adult Volunteers 2002 Adult volunteers at Westwood Hills Nature Center assist the staff by helping with classes, working on maintenance projects, studying wildlife, maintaining the computer web site, and staffing the front desk between 11 and 1 almost every day so the staff can have lunch and run errands for the Center. # of volunteers – 21 # of hours – 1432 Resource Speakers Volunteers enriched the classroom curriculum by sharing their hobby, career or special interest with students. # of volunteers – 26 # of presentations – 80 # of hours – 160 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4e - Volunteer Office Annual Report Page 6 of 6 Other Activities - High School Community Service Students - Volunteer Coordinators assisted the teacher in placing 50 students who worked in the elementary schools through the Community Service program. - Student Volunteer Intern for Community Outreach Program – a high school student was recruited and placed in the Community Outreach program for summer 2002. Another student has volunteered for 2003. - Water Testing Volunteers for Jim Vaughn – volunteers were recruited to collect water samples from area lakes. Three volunteers will be working with Jim Vaughn this summer. They are each responsible for taking samples from an area lake every two weeks. - Assist with Recruiting Students for City Commissions – worked with the Community Outreach Coordinator to recruit high school students for city commissions. - Teach Work Place Learning - work with Bridget Gothberg to teach the Work Place Learning classes for city staff. - The volunteer coordinator served on the Empty Bowls Committee representing the city and schools. - Additional volunteers are involved in parent teacher organizations, district advisory councils and Youth Development Committee. Hours listed in the above report include training, preparation and volunteer time. Some of the hours were estimated. Prepared By: Sara Krzesowiak, Volunteer Programs Coordinator Martha McDonell, Outreach Coordinator Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4f - Mediation Annual Report Page 1 of 3 4f. Motion to Approve the Annual Report on North Hennepin Mediation Program Background: North Hennepin Mediation Program Inc. receives funding from the City of Saint Louis Park in the amount of $4000 per year. The services they provide are then offered free to citizens residing or working in our city. In 2002, NHMP handled 86 St. Louis Park cases, involving at least 143 residents. In addition to providing mediation services, North Hennepin Mediation Program works with a variety of community partners and the media in order to teach children, families and residents of St. Louis Park about basic skills and available resources for preventing and managing conflict. Mediation services in Saint Louis Park are promoted through local agencies and by city staff including inspections, police, housing and outreach staff. Mediation Cases by Type in Saint Louis Park 2002 Full Year 2003 January – June Only Business – Consumer 57 31 Employer / Employee 1 Citizen / Agency 2 Neighborhood 9 2 Post Decree/Relationship 4 1 Landlord / Tenant 13 5 Juvenile 1 Interpersonal 1 Broad Based Funding NHMP seeks to secure a broad base of funding. They are able to leverage local and private funding through matching grants from State and Foundation sources. In addition to private and municipal funding and client fees, NHMP currently receives funding from the Fourth Judicial District Court, MN Supreme Court, MN Center for Crime Victims, Department of Corrections, McKnight Foundation, Community Action for Suburban Hennepin (CASH), Minnesota Bar Foundation, West Foundation, and the Builder's Association of the Twin Cities. The funding provided by Saint Louis Park accounts for approximately 2.5% of the organizations annual budget. NHMP will be requesting a renewal of funding for 2004 in order to provide services in Saint Louis Park. New and Expanded Areas NHMP recently launched new Harassment Mediation Services in response to the growing number of neighbors, classmates, employees, and family members seeking restraining orders to address conflict. While restraining orders are an appropriate response to some situations, we believe that opportunities for improved communication better serve many of these situations. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4f - Mediation Annual Report Page 2 of 3 Staffing NHMP is currently staffed by a full time Executive Director, a .75 Program Manager, a .75 Community Liaison, and a .75 Program/Technical Assistant. The vast majority of work is complemented by volunteers. Volunteers Volunteers continue to be the backbone of the organization. They serve as mediators, Board of Directors, Committee members, fundraisers, trainers, technical assistants, and outreach presenters. Not only so they make each dollar stretch farther, they also help maintain close connection to the communities served. In 2002, NHMP volunteers contributed over 4,000 hours. With recent expansions to the volunteer mediator roster, NHMP now offers the diverse skills of 73 mediators to our communities including Saint Louis Park. Attachments: Mediations Service Chart for Saint Louis Park Prepared By: Martha McDonell, Outreach Coordinator Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4f - Mediation Annual Report Page 3 of 3 St. Louis Park, 2002 Mediation Cases by Type 571 13 9 4 1 Business/ Consumer Employer/ Employee Landlord/ Tenant Neighborhood Post-decree Juvenile St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4g - Lamplighter EAW Page 1 of 2 4g. Motion to approve the publication of an Environmental Assessment Worksheet for the Flood Improvement Project at Lamplighter Pond, Area #4; Project No. 00-18 Background: The Lamplighter Pond project is proposed to provide relief from flooding by lowering the normal water level and expanding the storage area of Lamplighter Pond through excavation of the basin and shoreline, and by installing a supplemental lift station. An Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is required for this project pursuant to Minnesota Rules 4410.4300 subp. 27. This rule requires an EAW for projects that alter one or more acres of a Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR) public water or wetland. Lamplighter Pond is a DNR public water/wetland. An EAW provides information about a project that may have the potential for significant environmental effects. The EAW is prepared by the Responsible Governmental Unit (RGU) to determine whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) should be prepared. The EAW is published in the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) publication as notice to affected parties. Discussion: Staff could not proceed with the development of an EAW until the project scope was approved by the Council. At the July 14, 2003, Council Study Session, the Council expressed a desire to move forward with the recommended project that would enlarge the pond to the north, install a new lift station, and over-excavate the basin. The Council also expressed a desire to move forward with the project as expediently as possible. Staff has prepared a preliminary timeline for the project that anticipates beginning some excavation work in the late-Fall/early-Winter of 2003. This is desirable because a lower water elevation in the Winter allows for more efficient excavation. This also minimizes the amount of noise and dust experienced by adjacent property owners. If digging does not begin this Winter, no excavation work will likely begin until spring road restrictions are lifted, (typically sometime in mid-May). In order to try to achieve this time frame, staff has submitted the EAW for publication beginning August 4, 2003. The deadline for comments is September 3, 2003. Staff intends to compile the comments and report back to the Council at their Sept. 15 meeting with a determination of the need for an EIS or “no further action necessary” response, based on the comments and information compiled. If the need for an EIS is determined or if permits cannot be readily obtained from the DNR and Watershed District, the overall project timeline will increase. Public Communication: Staff is discussing what process is necessary to notify the neighborhood that an EAW is available for review. At a minimum, a notice will be published in the Sun Sailor and, staff will hold an informational meeting with the entire neighborhood in mid- August, to discuss the project scope and timing. Staff will also give a presentation to the Planning Commission at their August 20th meeting. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4g - Lamplighter EAW Page 2 of 2 Recommendation: Approve the publication of the EAW for the Lamplighter Pond Flood Improvement Project, Project No. 00-18, as prepared by WSB and Associates, Inc. beginning August 4, 2003. Attachment: EAW & Permit Timeline (Supplemental) Prepared By: Maria A. Hagen, City Engineer Reviewed By: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 1 of 12 MINUTES JUNE 26, 2003 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals Committee conducted a regular meeting on Thursday, June 26, 2003, at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Members Present: Chair James Gainsley Vice Chair Susan Bloyer Commissioner Ryan Burt Commissioner Tom Powers Members Absent: Commissioner Paul Roberts Staff Present: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Tara Olson, Community Development Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL Chair Gainsley called the regular meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. APPROVE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMITTEE MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Burt, to approve the following minutes as presented. 1) Board of Zoning Appeals Committee public hearing and regular meeting minutes dated April 24, 2003. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer, Burt and Powers. Voting No: None. 3. CONSENT AGENDA None 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMITTEE BUSINESS A. Case No. 03-30-VAR – The request of Charles & Leesha Reineke and Richard & Mary Atkins to appeal staff's interpretation of Section 36-74(f)(1) that the finished side of a fence constructed at 7312 & 7314 Minnetonka Blvd. is facing toward the neighbor's property. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 2 of 12 Mr. Morrison stated this public hearing is a result of an appeal of staff’s decision for the finished side of a fence. For some time there has been ongoing discussions between these two neighbors’ about various zoning issues. Recently, both property owners and staff were able to attend mediation to discuss the situation and agree on a solution that cannot be implemented until late July. At this time staff has received a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Reineke and Mr. and Mrs. Atkins requesting a continuation of the public hearing until August 28, 2003. Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that Mr. and Mrs. Reineke and Mr. and Mrs. Atkins continue the public hearing until August 28, 2003. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer, Burt and Powers. Voting No: None. B. Case No. 03-22-VAR - The request of Joan and David Guenzel for variances from the requirements of Section 36-164(f)(5) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to allow an attached garage within the required rear yard for property located in the “R-2” Single Family Residential District at 1452 Nevada Avenue South. Mr. Morrison presented the report and concluded that 6 of the 7 criterion have not been satisfied, staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution denying a 13-foot variance to the required 25-foot rear yard for the existing two-car garage which is proposed to be made attached to the house by the construction of a 16 foot by 20 foot breezeway. Commissioner Powers asked staff what the side yard setback would be in an R-2 district if it were not a corner lot? Mr. Morrison stated that a side yard setback in an R-2 district is 5 feet and 7 feet on either side but in this case of an attached garage the side yard setback is 5 feet on both sides of the yard. Chair Gainsley asked staff if in the past the entrance into the home was once facing the side yard? Mr. Morrison stated that the home did have its original entry onto Nevada Avenue which is the front yard and the home is actually oriented to 16th Street West. Commissioner Burt asked staff to explain the purpose of the setback in terms to the ordinance, what is it designed to prevent? Mr. Morrison asked if he was questioning the rear yard setback. Commissioner Burt stated that was correct. Mr. Morrison stated that it is designed to preserve an area in the rear yard for useable recreation space and to maintain open space in the rear yard between the homes. If this property weren’t a corner lot there would be open space on the side and in the rear. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 3 of 12 Commissioner Powers asked staff if this property weren’t a corner lot would it still require a variance? Mr. Morrison responded that if this weren’t a corner lot its side yard setback would be 5 feet. Chair Gainsley stated that the sole determination of front yard that then determines the side yard and the back yard is the narrowest dimension of the lot. Mr. Morrison stated that was correct. Chair Gainsley asked staff if the position of the home matters? Mr. Morrison responded that the home position doesn’t matter. With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing. Joan & David Guenzel, applicants of 1452 Nevada Avenue South, presented to the Commissioners and staff a letter prepared by neighbor, Susan Scully of 7448 West 16th Street (labeled Exhibit A) and a prepared booklet of pictures of the home and property (labeled Exhibit B). Mrs. Guenzel asked the Commissioners to turn to page 1 of Exhibit B to view photographs of the home from both Nevada Avenue South and 16th Street West. She wanted to point out that the front of the home is definitely on 16th Street West despite the shorter dimensions being on Nevada Avenue South. Also, the front door entrance, mailbox, garage and driveway have been located on 16th Street West for the past 18 years. She feels that there is a hardship due to a natural slope/grade that prevents the addition of a first floor structure to the north, which was an alternative suggested by city staff. A two-story addition could only be added for the cost of about $70,000, which is twice as much as the addition for the breezeway/family room. Also, by adding an addition to the north that would reduce the amount of useable open space in the rear yard whereas building between the garage and the house that would maximize an unusable space. By constructing an addition from the garage to the home it will allow us to have a breezeway, family room and provide access to a future deck. Mr. Guenzel stated that he feels that there is a hardship due to the lot grade in the rear of the yard. Also, if they were to construct an addition north of the home that would reduce the amount of usable space in the yard and also reconfigure the interior house plan which you can see on page 9, 10 and 11 of Exhibit B. Mrs. Guenzel stated that by allowing the breezeway/family room to be constructed it would not only be a convenience but it will serve as safety since working late into the evenings is common. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 4 of 12 Robin and Ted Kline, 7440 16th Street West, stated they have lived in their home for 18 years and have always known Mr. and Mrs. Guenzel’s front door to be located on 16th Street West. Also, there are five homes in a row on 16th Street that have their front doors oriented to 16th Street and the back yards are north. She feels that allowing the Guenzel’s to attach the garage to the home would add improvements to the home and would like the Board to consider granting the variance. Geraldine Butler, 1415 Nevada Avenue South, stated she lives directly north of Mr. and Mrs. Guenzel and would like to see the variance be granted to allow the addition onto their home. Also, she informed the Commissioners that long ago there was once a stream that once ran through the Guenzel’s back yard but was replaced with a large storm sewer drain. Chair Gainsley asked Ms. Butler to explain the location of where the storm water drain is located. Ms. Butler stated the storm drain is located on the west side of the property and the pipes run east to west. Chair Gainsley asked staff if there could be a possibility of an easement on the property? Mr. Morrison stated that could be a possibility but he had brought this application to the Development Review Committee, which is a weekly meeting with staff from each department, and the public works department didn’t mention the possibility of an easement. Mr. Morrison stated that if there is a man hole cover located on the property there must be an easement. With no more questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing. Commissioner Burt stated that staff has done a great job on preparing this report but he needs to disagree with staff’s findings. He feels that the seven findings have been met and doesn’t believe that approving this variance will be contrary to the Comprehensive Plan or the Ordinance because there is an opportunity to preserve open space which is to allow the applicant to attach the breezeway/family room. Also, he feels that this lot is peculiar because it is a corner lot with or without a front door on the front side also this property has a large rear yard slope and now with the possibility of a easement located in the back yard and will like to make a motion to grant this variance. Motion by Commissioner Burt, seconded by Commissioner Powers, to permit a 13-foot variance to the required 25-foot rear yard for the existing two-car garage which is proposed to be made attached to the house by the construction of a 16 foot by 20 foot breezeway with the following condition that the applicant submit a new survey confirming the 12 foot rear yard setback. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 5 of 12 Commissioner Powers stated he feels that denying this variance goes contrary to the purpose of the ordinance in protecting the adjoining property rights and the purpose of providing useable open space and of the visions and mission values of the city in creating practical move up housing. Commission Bloyer stated she feels that a corner lot can be confusing but feels that the applicants have created this situation when they built the garage. Although, the option of building to the north is not necessary feasible and is unsure of granting the variance. Chair Gainsley stated that the grade of the rear yard is a hardship along with the impossibility of relocating the garage and is in favor of granting this variance. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Burt and Powers. Voting No: Bloyer. C. Case No. 03-28-VAR – The request of Tom Sheldon for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-74(d)(1) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to allow the construction of a 8-foot high fence along the rear property line for the property located in the “R-1” Single Family Residential District at 3874 Brookview Drive. Mr. Morrison presented the report and concluded that five of the seven criteria have not been satisfied, staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution denying the construction of an 8- foot high fence in the “R-1” Single Family Residential District at 3874 Brookview Drive. With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing. Tom Sheldon, applicant of 3874 Brookview Drive stated that his home is elevated higher than the parking lot behind his home. Also, there is a mature tree line dividing his property and the parking lot but majority of those trees are scrub trees that are trimmed by the power line company each spring and/or loose their leafs each fall which gives us full view of the parking lot. Mr. Sheldon also stated that there is a significant drop in elevation from the parking lot into his yard and the fence will be positioned partially on the slope so the total height of the fence will not reach a full 8-feet in height. In addition, he mentioned that a neighboring property owner has an existing 8-foot fence and on weekly bases he is cleaning up the back yard which is debris from the apartment such as beer bottles, pop cans and paper and feels that having an 8-foot fence will prohibit debris coming into the yard. Commissioner Powers stated to Mr. Sheldon that he does notice a decrease in elevation in the photograph and would like to know how far down the slope will he install the fence? Mr. Sheldon stated he has brought a more detailed color photo for the Commissioner to review (labeled as Exhibit A). Mr. Sheldon stated he would install the fence 2-feet from the parking lot. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 6 of 12 Commissioner Powers asked Mr. Sheldon if that would probably decrease the fence an estimated 1-foot? Mr. Sheldon stated that would decrease the fence height to 1 to 1 ½ feet which would make it in line with the neighbors fence. Commissioner Burt asked Mr. Sheldon to explain the significance to 2 additional feet in height? Is it because the property elevation is lower where you will be placing the fence and then essentially the fence will be around 6 feet? Mr. Sheldon responded that the significance is that the fence will be set down on the slope in addition to making it uniform with the neighbor’s fence and also because his home is higher in elevation he would like to block the view of cars, noise and debris. Mr. Sheldon stated that the ordinance does allow churches, schools and other commercial properties to build fences higher than 6 feet in height and he feels that even though apartment buildings are considered residential he feels that with people coming and going all hours of the night when churches and schools generally have set hours and feels that this interferes with the main objective of the ordinance. Chair Gainsley asked Mr. Sheldon if he was aware that maybe his neighbors have installed an unlawful fence? Also, they could lose that fence. In addition, when the Planning Commission and City Council set forth the current Comprehensive Plan which said that in some cases there could be a 8 foot fence and did not say in other cases that in doing so they gave careful consideration to all the conditions where a additional fence height would be allowed. With no more questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing. Commissioner Bloyer stated that unfortunately there are not exceptions for apartment buildings but we should take the asphalt into account since it is 1 to 2 feet above the level to which the fence is going to be positioned and feels that the glass debris can become a safety hazard and would be in favor of supporting the variance. Commissioner Powers stated that in the photograph provided by the applicant (Exhibit A) the apartment parking lot has a large volume of cars which is a lot of coming and going and feels there is a hardship just on the nature of the property. Commissioner Burt asked staff if the city of Hopkins has 8-foot fence height regulations for apartment complexes? Mr. Morrison stated that he was not sure but 6-feet is generally standard, although they may have exceptions for apartment complexes. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 7 of 12 Commissioner Burt stated that he is having a difficult time finding a hardship but also he is having a hard time understanding that a school, church or other public building is allowed but a busy public apartment complex isn’t aloud, especially after reviewing the applicants photograph (Exhibit A). Chair Gainsley stated that he feels an 8-foot fence isn’t justified because it wouldn’t do anything for the applicant and feels there’s not a hardship so he is opposed on granting the variance. Commissioner Powers stated he feels the applicant has a unique situation due to the elevation of the home and the rear property and would like to make a motion to grant the variance for an 8- foot fence. Motion by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Bloyer, to deny staff’s recommendation and to approve the variance to allow the construction of an 8-foot high fence along the rear property line at 3874 Brookview Drive. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Bloyer, Burt and Powers. Voting No: Gainsley Chair Gainsley stated that he feels the Board of Zoning Appeals will be setting precedents by allowing fences to be at uninformed height and were promoting a “walled city”, which is what the Comprehensive Plan is trying to prevent, and therefore he agrees with staff’s decision to deny the variance. Commissioner Bloyer stated she agrees with Chair Gainsley but she feels that there is a hardship due to the approximate 2-foot rear yard grade difference between the asphalt level and placement of where the fence will be installed which will actually make the fence 6 feet in height. Chair Gainsley pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan states that we work from grade level when we discuss fences. Commissioner Burt stated that he agrees with Chair Gainsley in not allowing a “walled city” and feels this is not a situation where we’re trying to prevent neighbors from chatting over the fence, this is a situation where the property does have a different grade. D. Case No. 03-29-VAR – The request of Kevin and Elizabeth Kelsey for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-162(c)(7)b.1.i and Section 36-163(f)(12) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to allow the construction of a detached, two-car garage which exceeds the 25% of the area between the house and the rear lot line and does not meet the required 600 square feet of useable open area in the rear yard, both for the property located in the “R-1” Single Family Residential District at 2717 Webster Avenue South. Mr. Morrison presented the report and concluded that all seven criteria have been satisfied for the proposed variance to the required 600 square feet of usable open space in the rear yard; and in as St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 8 of 12 much as staff believes that only one of the seven criteria have been satisfied for the proposed variance to the required 25% maximum back yard coverage for accessory buildings, staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution denying the request for a variance to Section 36-163(f)(12) of the Ordinance Code relating to Zoning to allow the required 600 square feet of open space to be provided in the area between a line created by extending the rear face of the principal building and the rear lot line (back yard) rather than the rear yard, and to deny the request for a variance to Section 36-162(c)(7)b.1.i for a 31% back yard coverage instead of the required maximum of 25% back yard coverage for accessory buildings in the “R-1” Single Family Residential District at 2717 Webster Avenue South. Chair Gainsley asked staff to explain the total amount of area required for a R-1 District? Mr. Morrison replied that a total of 9,000 square feet minimum area in a R-1 District. Chair Gainsley asked staff if they felt this property is considered a small lot? Mr. Morrison replied that it is a small lot but it isn’t unique for the area. Commissioner Bloyer asked staff if the property to the east has received a variance since the aerial photo shows a small amount of open space. Mr. Morrison replied that he is unsure if that property received a variance, but would like to point out that the intent of the ordinance is to avoid situations where there is not a backyard such as that property. Commissioner Bloyer stated that if we require the applicants to reduce the size of the garage they would lose storage space. If they were to construct another shed how far does the shed need to be away from the garage? Mr. Morrison stated that 25% back yard coverage applies to all accessory buildings as a combined square footage so a 20 x 24-foot shed would bring the applicant’s total back yard to 480 square feet and they are allow 510 square feet so there is room for another detached shed for storage but it must be at least 6 feet from the principal dwelling. Commissioner Burt asked staff to clarify staff’s recommendation which was to construct a 20 x 24-foot garage rather than a 24 x 26-foot garage or the other option is to reduce the size of the addition in the back, how many feet will we actually reduce? Mr. Morrison stated that the proposed garage is 31% of the back yard which is 6% over, how many feet that translates into, the lot is 40 feet wide and for every 2 feet the applicant will probably gain 20 square feet of accessory building. Chair Gainsley asked staff if the applicants were to remove 2 feet from the addition then a variance would not be required? St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 9 of 12 Mr. Morrison stated a variance would still be required. Chair Gainsley asked staff if a variance was given to the property to the east, 2716 Vernon Avenue South? Mr. Morrison stated that he does not have any knowledge of that property. Chair Gainsley asked Mr. Phillip Hogland if he recalls receiving a variance for his property. Mr. Hogland stated he purchased the home in 1996 and the accessory structures were there when he moved in. Chair Gainsley pointed out that the aerial map attached to the staff report shows several properties in the area that does have excessive lot coverage. With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing. Brad McCumber, a representative and construction contractor for the property owners of 2717 Webster Avenue South, stated that Mr. and Mrs. Kelsey would like to convert their two bedroom home into a more livable and modern home. Also, they would like to build a garage that will accommodate both of their vehicles along with two motorcycles and lawn furniture for seasonal storage. Mr. McCumber stated that he would like to respond to Commissioner Bloyers previous question in regards to adding an additional storage shed on the property and that Mr. and Mrs. Kelsey would prefer not to store there expensive motorcycles in a non-secure storage building, presently they are storing their vehicles on the street so that their motorcycles can be stored in the existing garage. Also, they would prefer not to construct another storage shed, which would then clutter the yard. Chair Gainsley would like the record to be known that the applicants are present. Commissioner Bloyer asked Mr. McCumber to describe the interior layout of the home of where the addition will be added. Mr. McCumber presented to the Commissioners blue prints of the proposed interior and exterior of the home and existing home layout (labeled as Exhibit A). Commissioner Bloyer asked Mr. McCumber the existing size of the kitchen. Mr. McCumber stated that the existing kitchen is 9 x 10 feet. The existing layout of the whole home is very small and does not accommodate very many changes. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 10 of 12 Phillip Hogland, 2716 Vernon Avenue South, he stated that he owns the property to the east of Mr. and Mrs. Kelsey and would like to see this proposal be granted. Elizabeth Kelsey, applicant, stated she would like to construct a 24 x 26 foot garage to accommodate her needs for vehicle, motorcycle and lawn storage and would appreciate the Board of Zoning Appeals to approve the variance to construct the garage and allow the construction of a two-story addition onto the house. With no more questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing. Commissioner Powers agrees with staff and feels that the home addition would go against the intent of the zoning ordinance, which is to preserve green space. Commissioner Burt stated that the purpose of the ordinance is to keep the buildings and the structures on the property in proportion to the lot and since this is a very small lot he agrees with staffs recommendation. Commissioner Bloyer stated that the applicants do need storage space which they will not receive if we reduce the size of the garage. Also, during her site inspection she spoke with the applicants which informed her that they will be taking care of an elder parent soon and will need the home addition for more space. In addition, she feels that there is a hardship due to the substandard size of the lot. Also, she stated she would rather see the applicants store items in the garage rather than installing another storage shed or leaving items outside and is in favor of granting the variance. Chair Gainsley stated that evidence was not submitted by the applicant explaining that an elder parent will be living with Mr. and Mrs. Kelsey so he will not use that as a consideration. Chair Gainsley stated the lot is a substandard size lot and feels it is a hardship and would like to make a motion for granting the variance. Motion by Chair Gainsley, seconded by Commissioner Bloyer, to allow the construction of a detached two-car garage which occupies 31% of the area between the house and the rear lot line and does not meet the required 600 square feet of useable open space in the rear yard for the property of 2717 Webster Avenue South. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer and Burt. Voting No: Powers 5. Old Business None 6. New Business St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 11 of 12 a. Discuss Rear yard vs. Back yard The Board of Zoning Appeals was asked in BOZA Case No. 03-29-VAR to discuss amending the Ordinance to state “back yard” instead of “rear yard”, at least for properties on alley’s. Commissioner Bloyer stated she would support changing the definition in the Ordinance to “back yard” simply because she feels the “rear yard” is contained within the back yard which is the back 25 feet and feels it is not logical to be asking residents to have their recreation area be farther away from the home. Chair Gainsley stated that he feels the Ordinance should be changed to “back yard” because he feels open space is open space and doesn’t see how it serves a purpose to have a divided area. Commissioner Burt stated he agrees with Commissioner Bloyer and Chair Gainsley. Commissioner Powers agreed. b. Election of Officers Chair Gainsley nominated Commissioner Bloyer to be elected as Chairperson. Commissioner Powers nominated Commissioner Burt to be elected as Chairperson. Commissioner Bloyer received a 2 to 1 vote as Chairperson. Commissioner Burt received a 1 vote as Chairperson. Commissioner Bloyer accepts position of Chairperson. Motion by Commissioner Burt, seconded by Commissioner Gainsley, that Susan Bloyer be elected Chairperson. Commissioner Powers nominated Commissioner Burt to be elected as Vice Chairperson. Commissioner Burt accepts position of Vice Chairperson. Motion by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Gainsley, that Ryan Burt be elected Vice Chairperson. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyers, Burt and Powers. Voting No: None. 7. Communications None St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4h - BOZA Minutes of June 26, 2003 Page 12 of 12 8. Miscellaneous None 9. Adjournment Commissioner Bloyer moved and Commissioner Gainsley seconded the motion for adjournment. The regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals adjourned at 8:46 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Tara Olson Community Development Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4i - Planning Commission Minutes of 7-2-03 Page 1 of 8 OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA July 2, 2003 -- 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Phillip Finkelstein, Ken Gothberg, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian STAFF PRESENT: Judie Erickson, Janet Jeremiah, Nancy Sells 1. Call to order - Roll Call Chair Robertson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes of June 18, 2003 It was moved by Commissioner Gothberg to approve the minutes of June 18, 2003 as presented. The motion passed 5-0-1. (Commissioner Bissonnette abstained). 3. Hearings: A. Case Nos. 03-19-PUD and 03-20-S--Public hearing on request of TOLD Development Company for Preliminary Plat approval for Park Commons East 2nd Addition and a Major Amendment to the Park Commons East Planned Unit Development granting Preliminary PUD approval for Phase NE (Excelsior & Grand Phase II) (continued from 6/4) Planning and Zoning Supervisor Janet Jeremiah presented a staff report. Ms. Jeremiah said TOLD will meet the parking requirements, and she added that 200 additional spaces are required for events and general public use of the Town Green and Wolfe Park. Ms. Jeremiah reported that the City Attorney has reviewed the proposed plat and association documents. The City Attorney raised a concern with the underground parking spaces being proposed as separate “CIC” plats units because they could be sold separately in the future without City approval. From the staff report, Ms. Jeremiah noted that the City Attorney has also noted that the association documents should be revised to be consistent with the number of units currently proposed for Phase II, and the association documents should also reference and be consistent with maintenance agreements with the City concerning public spaces. Ms. Jeremiah distributed a handout regarding sidewalk easements. After checking the existing sidewalk easement language, staff found that it only covers Phase I. Also, as- built drawings of Phase I are required upon substantial completion of the Phase I improvements, therefore, staff recommends the following additional condition of approval: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4i - Planning Commission Minutes of 7-2-03 Page 2 of 8 13. A new sidewalk easement shall be recorded against the Phase II property, and as-built Phase I drawings shall be submitted and recorded per the executed Phase I sidewalk easement. Ms. Jeremiah said staff is recommending approval of the preliminary plat and major amendment to the PUD granting preliminary PUD approval for Park Commons East, Phase II, subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Ms. Jeremiah said in regard to the plat, it is now being proposed to be one lot because it is one building and a small out-lot will be dedicated as park. Bob Cunningham, TOLD Development Company, said the response to the condominium market has been overwhelming. Mr. Cunningham reported that the average size of the 120 condos is about 1,260 square feet and carries an average price of about $300,000— the range is just under $200,000 to just over $500,000. Because debt will be used for this project, Mr. Cunningham said the lender requires a level of 50% presale be achieved in order to build. Of the 120 units, 68 have been spoken for, and TOLD is anticipating an early September construction start. Mr. Cunningham stated that given the staff report as presented by Ms. Jeremiah this evening, TOLD has no issues with any of the staff recommendations. He introduced Dennis Sutliffe, project architect. Mr. Cunningham also stated that no full-service restaurants or any other restaurants will be located in the owner-occupied building because it would be an inappropriate use; TOLD intends to have smaller and quieter uses the farther away one goes from Excelsior Blvd. Mr. Cunningham said TOLD would be happy to accommodate Westmoreland Hills Condominium occupants’ request for a fence or landscaping, whichever their preference. Mr. Sutliffe, ESGR Architects, provided a brief report on the Phase II condominium building; elevations were submitted today, July 2nd. Chair Robertson suggested a bit more diversity be added to the design, including perhaps three brick colors. He noted that mixing up the design worked well in Phase I. Mr. Sutliffe said that Phase II design has similarities to Phase I, but differences as well. He said that balconies will be added to Phase II primary facades. The hearing was continued from June 4, 2003. No one spoke. Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Timian, to recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat for Park Commons East 2nd Addition and a Major Amendment to the Park Commons East PUD granting Preliminary PUD approval for Phase NE (Excelsior & Grand Phase II) subject to conditions recommended by staff and with the addition of Condition 13 from Ms. Jeremiah. The motion passed 5-0-1. (Commissioner Finkelstein abstained). B. Case Nos. 03-31-CP and 03-32-Z—Request of Quadion Corporation and the City of St. Louis Park for a Comprehensive Plan Map change from Industrial to Medium St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4i - Planning Commission Minutes of 7-2-03 Page 3 of 8 Density Residential, Office, and Mixed-Use and a zoning map change from IP – Industrial Park and IG – General Industrial to R4—Multi Family Residential, RC— Multi Family Residential, and MX—Mixed Use for property located at 3630 Wooddale Ave, 3601 Wooddale Avenue, 5810 37th Street W., 5957 37th Street W., 5951 37th Street W., 5912 Oxford Street, 5916 Oxford Street, 5920 Oxford Street, 5926 Oxford Planning Coordinator Judie Erickson presented a staff report. Ms. Erickson said that Quadion has marketed their property, and Rottlund Homes has entered into an agreement with Quadion to redevelop all of their property west of Wooddale Avenue. Ms. Erickson said zoning approvals need to be considered independent of the developer’s plan and so the merits of land use change will need to be determined. She said there will be subsequent Comprehensive Plan text amendments that will be presented to the Planning Commission which will include adopting the concept plan and planning principles recommended by the Elmwood Study. Chair Robertson inquired about losing more industrial land. Ms. Erickson said the Elmwood Study states that industrial is not the highest and best use for this area partly due to the residential land uses around it, the proximity to future transit, and financial feasibility concerns regarding land redevelopment. Staff will be studying industrial land uses in the second half of this year. Commissioner Gothberg said he is basically in favor of the Comp Plan and rezoning amendments, and the preliminary concept plans that accompanied the Commissioners’ packages. He stated his concerns which are: adequate parking for full utilization of the office building; visitor parking for the condos and senior housing appears to be lacking; amount of green space within the development; letter from the railroad regarding future complaints—new residents would need to be made aware of the railroad’s presence. He expects those things to be adequately covered in a future application. Chair Robertson said the issue for the Planning Commission tonight is the rezoning and Comprehensive Plan. Michael Noonan, Rottlund Company and David Bernard Builders, addressed the Commission. Mr. Noonan spoke about land use. He said a neighborhood meeting with about 50 individuals in attendance was held, and there was a frank and full discussion regarding Rottlund’s proposed plans. Mr. Noonan said they will partner with Sherman & Associates and United Properties. He said that Sherman and Associates will occupy the existing office building. Tim Whitten, Senior Vice President of David Bernard and architect, discussed the site plan. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4i - Planning Commission Minutes of 7-2-03 Page 4 of 8 Cate Ford, 6215 Oxford Street, is a boardmember of the Elmwood Neighborhood Association, stated she was present to discuss the southern edge of the Quadion property that borders Oxford Street, west of Wooddale. Ms. Ford said one of the biggest concerns of some residents is the possibility that medium to high density will encroach their properties. These residents purchased property in the area with the belief that the area would remain single-family residential. Ms. Ford asked: Can it be rezoned for such on that edge? Adell Said, owner of Luggage World, 5727 West 36th Street, suggested if there is no specific current plan for the area east of Wooddale he favors leaving it as it is. Brian Fortmeyer, 5818 Goodrich Avenue, agrees with Ms. Ford. He, too, is an association member. Mr. Fortmeyer is also concerned about the height of the buildings, he thought three stories was the recommendation of the Elmwood Study Committee. He added that when Council adopted the Elmwood Plan, he thought they put a limit on the number of units, i.e., the density. Sonja Almlie 3924 Webster Avenue, is concerned about planning in regard to the intensity of development and its impact on storm sewers, and she used Albertville and St. Michael as examples. Ms. Almlie said residents need protection in writing in regard to sufficient drainage. She stated that not all residents support the land use plan and there was no discussion about continuing it as an industrial area. Ms. Almlie said four-story buildings are not acceptable to residents in her area, and owner-occupied is most desirable. Leo Zaback, 4910 Dupont Avenue South, Minneapolis, owns a property on the site, and he is concerned about parking on Oxford Street. Mr. Zaback said some of the homes have historical value. Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. Ms. Erickson responded to the residents’ concerns. She said the study looked at redevelopment with single family, and the numbers did not work. A large subsidy would be required, and enough tax increment could never be collected to cover the expense of land and demolition costs. The study proposed to do the next best thing. She stated that Quadion has stated they want to be a good corporate neighbor. She added that the proposed development probably will not generate as much traffic as would single family housing. Ms. Erickson explained that sewer capacities will have to retain a 100 year storm water event. Drainage ultimately goes to Bass Lake. She added that every development has to meet these requirements. Utilities will be worked out at the PUD stage, not at the rezoning stage. Ms. Jeremiah referenced the City Council resolution adopting the Elmwood Study, and it speaks to the Council’s preference for a lower- to medium density development on this property but it is clear from the resolution that they are not held to any specific density and will look carefully at additional studies that will be done. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4i - Planning Commission Minutes of 7-2-03 Page 5 of 8 Commissioner Morris said the City has enough designated park land. He is concerned about a large office building in the middle of a new residential plaza, leaving the office open to future uses that can't be controlled. He said the vision of the study was to guide towards mixed use and residential. Commissioner Morris is not in favor of guiding for an office. Chair Robertson said residential next to an office is somewhat of a mixed use, although not a vertical mixed use, and he did not oppose it. Commissioner Gothberg sees a benefit in the pocket park, and mixed use is the right direction for the property, which would lend flexibility to the developers Ms. Jeremiah offered to discuss why there was not more discussion of retaining the office during the Elmwood Study. Ms. Erickson said the proposal is to guide it toward office but rezone to RC, which is a residential zoning and that it could not be redeveloped as another office use. She said the RC District allows offices, provided they were in existence as of some date in 1999, but it prohibits new office. She added also that retaining the office building made the project more economically feasible. It was moved by Commissioner Gothberg, seconded by Chair Robertson, to recommend approval of the Comprehensive Plan Map amendments to change the land use designation from Industrial to Medium Density Residential, Office, Mixed Use, and Park as recommended by staff subject to adoption of Comprehensive Plan text amendments addressing redevelopment principles and guidelines and approval by the Metropolitan Council; and to recommend approval of a zoning map amendment to change the zoning designation from IG—General Industrial and IP—Industrial Park to R4—Multi-Family Residential, RC—Multi-Family Residential, and MX—Mixed Use subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendments by the City Council and Metropolitan Council. The motion passed 5-1. (Commissioner Morris opposed). Chair Robertson announced that a five-minute break would take place. Commissioner Bissonnette departed at 8:30 p.m. C. Case Nos. 03-33-CUP and 03-34-VAR--Request of Coach Homes of Shelard for a major amendment to an existing special permit to amend the exterior elevations in order to change exterior siding from stucco and hardboard to vinyl and request for a variance from Section 36-36(d)(4) to allow an intensification of an existing non- conformity and to allow an amendment of a continued special permit that does not bring non-conformities into complete or greater compliance with current zoning codes for property located at 300, 310, 320, 330, 340, and 350 Ford Road. Ms. Erickson presented a staff report. Commissioner Gothberg asked if stucco is a Class I material, and why is Coach Homes requesting to use vinyl siding? St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4i - Planning Commission Minutes of 7-2-03 Page 6 of 8 Ms. Erickson said that the applicant has had a problem with the stucco, but if stucco is properly applied, there are no problems with it. Scott Bailey, Coach Homes property manager, said all stucco must be removed, and the residents cannot afford to continue to allow their buildings to deteriorate nor can they afford some of the Class I materials that the City has proposed for this particular area. Mr. Bailey said each unit has been assessed for $12,000 and that money is in the bank. Mr. Bailey said stucco would cost an additional $50,000-60,000 more for these 48 homes, i.e., to put 900 square feet of stucco on each of the six, 8-unit buildings. John Russo, construction consultant from CCI, discussed various materials in general, and vinyl siding and stucco in particular. Michael Selbitschka, Reynold’s Building Products, discussed vinyl siding, stating it was warranted. Commissioner Morris inquired that the warranty is only for material and not improper installation, and Mr. Selbitschka responded that is correct. Barbara Fishman, 340 Ford Road, #8, said stucco is expensive, and Coach Homes is ready to go forward with the vinyl. When polled by Commissioner Finkelstein, no resident present at the meeting voiced opposition to the use of the vinyl siding. Ms. Fishman said the cost of the stucco would be a hardship, and they would like a new look. The Chair acknowledged that Commissioners did receive copies of an e-mail from Sue Davis, resident and a board member of Coach Homes, expressing her desire for approval of vinyl siding. Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Gothberg suggested granting a variance for purposes of a trial run on the 050 vinyl material relative to durability, performance, and aesthetics. He said that would allow for a trial on 050 and 040 to determine their suitability. Also, Commissioner Gothberg recommended taking a close look at the entire stucco issue relative to it being allowed as a Class I material; vinyl has improved and stucco problems have increased. Chair Robertson said that a review of the Architectural Code relative to vinyl may be warranted. Commissioner Morris spoke about the City's vision to retain and improve existing housing stock. He stated that the problem here was defective workmanship when this project was developed and that has become a hardship to the current owners. The Comp Plan goals are to improve and maintain housing stock. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4i - Planning Commission Minutes of 7-2-03 Page 7 of 8 Ms. Jeremiah said to run a variance on a trial basis would require staff to consult with the City Attorney. She explained that variance findings need to be tied to the land; which is staff's difficulty in recommending the variance. Commissioner Finkelstein would like to make a motion to approve the variance given the unique nature to the land that much of the stucco was not visible and the background of this subject property and structures on it. Chair Robertson said recommendation for variance approval needed more substantiation. He does not agree that stucco is a bad product. Commissioner Gothberg moved to approve the major amendment and the variance based on the fact that the stucco portion is not visible in normal observation and, therefore, with the brick remaining, the stucco can be replaced with vinyl; and moved that staff recommend that vinyl can replace the original hardboard designation. Commissioner Finkelstein withdrew his motion, and seconded Commissioner Gothberg’s motion. The motion passed 5-0. D. Case Nos. 03-24-ZA--Proposed Amendments to St. Louis Park Ordinance Code (Zoning) relating to creating consistency, clarifying and amending standards for permanent, temporary and canopy/awning signs, sign permitting requirements, and approved sign plans. (continued from 6/18) Commissioner Finkelstein referenced a resident concern from the June 18 meeting regarding real estate signs and enforcement. Mr. Morrison responded that he has spoken with the resident about her concerns. Mr. Morrison outlined enforcement procedures. There was a discussion about real estate signs as well as "temporary" sign banners which remain on complexes for a lengthy time. Mr. Morrison said the temporary banners were a policy issue and didn't fit into these amendments. He will meet with property owners regarding banners. Commissioner Finkelstein asked about signage related to the conceal and carry law. Ms. Jeremiah said staff would ask the City Attorney to review these signage issues. There was a discussion about "snipe" advertising and right-of-way, off-site advertising. Ms. Jeremiah said the City confiscates right-of-way signs. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. With no one wishing to speak, Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Finkelstein, to recommend approval of Ordinance Code text amendments (Zoning) relating to sign standards. The motion passed 5-0. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4i - Planning Commission Minutes of 7-2-03 Page 8 of 8 4. Unfinished Business 5. New Business A. Consent Agenda B. Other New Business Ms. Jeremiah reported that the City Council unanimously voted to uphold the Belt Line PUD to the higher standard of the building design in accordance with the staff recommendations. 6. Communications A. Board of Zoning Appeals Agenda – June 26, 2003 B. Other 7. Miscellaneous 8. Adjournment Chair Robertson adjourned the meeting at 10:00 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Respectfully submitted by: Linda Samson Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Administrative Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 4k - Park Const Final Pymt Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. 03 - 100 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENTS W. 36TH STREET & WYOMING AVENUE CITY PROJECT NO. 20010700 CONTRACT NO. 36-02 PARK CONSTRUCTION COMPANY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, as follows: 1. Pursuant to a written contract with the City dated April 15, 2002, Park Construction Company has satisfactorily completed the storm sewer and utility improvements at W. 36th Street and Wyoming Avenue, as per Contract No. 36-02. 2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the work. 3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 6a - Qdoba wine license Page 1 of 1 6a. Public Hearing to consider granting an On-Sale Wine and Beer License for GranDoba Inc. a subsidiary of Aztonka, Inc.; DBA Qdoba Mexican Grill located at 4712 Excelsior Boulevard. Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve an on-sale wine and beer license. Background: In May of 2003, the City received a request from Aztonka, Inc. and its officers for a wine and beer license at Qdoba Mexican Grill to be located at 4712 Excelsior Boulevard. Qdoba Mexican Grill will be a casual Mexican grill and have seating for 60 - 80 people with some outdoor tables on the sidewalk. The public hearing notice published on July 24, 2003 indicated the liquor license application was for a full on-sale intoxicating liquor license. Qdoba is actually applying for only a wine and beer license, and stated they will be selling beer only . The hours of operation will be 10:30 am to 10:00 p.m. and they are expected to open in September 2003. Application: The Police Department has conducted a full investigation of the Aztonka/GranDoba Corporation and its officers, James Christopherson, President, and Susan Christopherson, Secretary and have found nothing in the course of their investigation that would warrant denial of the license. The application and Police report are on file in the Office of the City Clerk should Councilmembers wish to review the information prior to the public hearing. Recommendation: The applicant has met all requirements for issuance of the license and staff is recommending approval. Prepared by: Nancy Stroth, Deputy City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 1 of 16 8a. Request of Quadion Corporation and the City of St. Louis Park for a Comprehensive Plan Map change from Industrial to Medium Density Residential, Office, and Mixed-Use and first reading of a zoning map amendment from IP – Industrial Park and IG – General Industrial to R4—Multi Family Residential, RC—Multi Family Residential, and MX—Mixed Use for property located at 3630 Wooddale Ave, 3601 Wooddale Avenue, 5810 37th Street W., 5957 37th Street W., 5951 37th Street W., 5912 Oxford Street, 5916 Oxford Street, 5920 Oxford Street, 5926 Oxford Street Case Nos. 03-31-CP and 03-32-Z Elmwood Area Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes for Quadion Property. Recommended Action: § Motion to approve resolution amending the Comprehensive Plan land use designation from Industrial to Medium Density Residential, Office, Commercial/Mixed Use, and Park as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission subject to adoption of Comprehensive Plan text amendments addressing redevelopment principles and guidelines and approval by the Metropolitan Council, approve summary, and authorize publication. § Motion to approve first reading of a zoning map amendment to change the zoning designation from IG –General Industrial and IP – Industrial Park to R4—Multi Family Residential, RC— Multi Family Residential, and MX—Mixed Use subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendments by the Metropolitan Council and set second reading for August 18, 2003. Current Zoning (See attached map in supplement): 3630 Wooddale Avenue IG –General Industrial 3601 Wooddale Avenue IP – Industrial Park 5810 37th Street W. IP – Industrial Park 5957 37th Street W. IG –General Industrial 5951 37th Street W. IG –General Industrial 5912 Oxford St IG –General Industrial 5916 Oxford Street IG –General Industrial 5920 Oxford Street IG –General Industrial 5926 Oxford Street IG –General Industrial Current Comprehensive Plan Designation: Industrial (See attached map in supplement) Total Area: 9.5 acres Current Land Use Vacant Industrial Building, Office St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 2 of 16 Other required City approvals: CUP or PUD, Subdivision, Vacation of 37th Street W. between Wooddale and Alabama Background: In 2001 Quadion Corp. closed their manufacturing facility at 3630 Wooddale Avenue. Quadion continues to occupy the four-story administrative office building at 5957 37th Street and the research facilities on the east side of Wooddale Avenue. Quadion did approach the City stating that their ultimate goal was to combine all of their employees within one building, either by expansion of the office building or by leasing space outside of the study area. Currently, Quadion Corp. employs over 100 people in this location. About this same time, early 2002, the City and Hennepin County undertook a study of the Elmwood Area that encompasses this site. Quadion agreed to allow the study to be completed before they made further decisions about whether to consider expanding the 3- story office building. During the study, Quadion indicated that they were pursuing a new office location and would be selling all of their St. Louis Park properties. The study was completed in January 2003. The Study recommendation for the Quadion property west of Wooddale Avenue was for residential land uses designed in a manner where densities transitioned from lower in the southern part of the site to higher in the northern part of the site. The recommendation for the property east of Wooddale Avenue was for mixed-use and park (see detailed analysis below). Subsequent to completion of the Elmwood Study, Quadion has entered into an agreement with Rottlund Homes to redevelop all of their property in the Elmwood area. Rottlund is considering partnering with other development companies to develop senior rental on a portion of the western side of Wooddale and mixed use on the eastern side. This proposal is the first step toward that end. Subsequent to this proposal, other applications will include both a replat and PUD. Quadion Corporation does not own the single family home at 5912 Oxford or the duplex at 5920 Oxford Street and has asked the City to initiate the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning amendments for those properties. Both property owners are aware of the request, and both have been approached by Rottlund Homes and know about their desire to redevelop the area. Quadion owns all of the remaining properties that are the subject of this request. On June 26, 2003, the developer conducted a neighborhood meeting to review the concept plan and answer questions regarding the proposal. Generally, the neighborhood seemed supportive of the plan indicating that although the neighborhood would prefer single family redevelopment, the proposal was a good compromise containing owner- occupied and senior housing options. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 3 of 16 The Planning Commission reviewed the applications at a public hearing on July 2, 2003, and recommended approval of both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map amendments on a vote of 5-1. The opposing vote objected to preserving the existing office building. Proposal: The developer is proposing to retain the 4-story office building on Alabama Avenue and to redevelop the remaining properties west of Wooddale Avenue with townhouses, condos, and senior apartments. The property east of Wooddale Avenue would be redeveloped with commercial mixed use and a small pocket park/plaza on the corner of Wooddale and 36th Street. Several additional processes are required prior to any new construction including a vacation of 37th Street between Wooddale Avenue and Alabama, a subdivision, and PUD. The Elmwood study anticipated the need for additional right of way on Wooddale Avenue in order to expand it to a 4-lane divided boulevard. Traffic studies are currently in process that will identify the new right of way cross section. The identified right of way needs will be asked to be accommodated in the future replat of the property. Even though the developer has submitted a conceptual redevelopment plan, which is included with this report, the merits of the current proposed amendments must be viewed separately. Additional approvals: If the applicant receives approval of the proposed Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map amendments, several other approvals will also be required. § The Metropolitan Council must approve the Comprehensive Plan, and any approval of a rezoning is contingent upon this approval. § 37th Street West will need to be vacated between Wooddale Avenue and Alabama Avenue to accommodate the concept plan. This requires Planning Commission and City Council action. § The property will need a replat to recombine the various parcels within the proposed area. The City would look for additional dedication of right-of-way on Wooddale Avenue and the vacated 37th Street would be included in the plat. § The development will require a CUP/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. The developer has stated that the intent is to begin construction early summer 2004. Issues: § What does the adopted Comprehensive Plan say? St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 4 of 16 § Is the proposal consistent with the Elmwood Study Recommendations? § What are the implications of rezoning property not owned by Quadion? § What are traffic implications for this change in land use? § Is the proposal consistent with future Comprehensive Plan amendments? § Will the pertinent text amendments be in place prior to any CUP or PUD consideration? Issue Analysis: § What does the adopted Comprehensive Plan say? Chapter U of the Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020 (adopted 5-17-99) states that “A land use study is recommended for the area bounded by TH7, TH 100, and Wooddale Avenue. This area is subject to redevelopment, and uses compatible with the future transit potential of the CP Rail Bass Lake Corridor are encouraged. This may include a transit station, and a mixture of residential work place, and retail/service uses. One desirable result of a land use study would be to precisely locate the most favorable site for a transit station. Land use designation changes will follow based on the study results.” When the land use study was undertaken early in 2002, all of the industrial property located west of Wooddale Avenue was also included in the study area. The reason for this addition was the closing of the Quadion manufacturing plant along with their interest in disposing of the site. Since a major goal of Chapter O, Economic Growth and Employment of the Comprehensive Plan is to retain a diverse base of industry, this area was not originally identified as part of the study area. The manufacturing building is reported to be functionally obsolete for reuse for another manufacturing use. At the time the Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020 was being drafted, the Southwest Transit Corridor (referred to above as the Bass Lake Corridor) was being studied for a busway. That busway study was terminated due to action by the State Legislature that prohibited the study of a busway in Minneapolis, Minnetonka, and Eden Prairie. Subsequently, Hennepin County embarked upon a rail transit (light rail or other commuter) feasibility study for this corridor between the Multi-modal transit station in downtown Minneapolis and Eden Prairie. This study is now complete and is the first step to make application for “new starts” Federal construction funds. Transit potential within the Southwest Transit Corridor influenced the study results relative to transit station location, access, and related land use. § Is the proposal consistent with the Elmwood Study Recommendations? The Elmwood Study land use recommendations and development guidelines are attached. The Study recommends residential land uses for the Quadion property west of Wooddale and mixed use and park for properties east of Wooddale Avenue. The City Council passed a resolution accepting the Elmwood Study on March 3, 2003. The resolution responded to the Elmwood Neighborhood concerns about increased traffic in the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 5 of 16 neighborhood that could result from high-density development. Attached is a copy of the resolution. The Elmwood Study also recommends planning principles to address neighborhood concerns related to new development west of Wooddale Avenue. A copy of the planning principles is also attached. It is recommended that these be incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Redevelopment chapter. West Side of Wooddale The study recommendation for the Quadion property was for residential land uses on the west side of Wooddale Avenue. The study guidelines indicated that the residential densities should transition from low medium on the south end to higher density on the north end, across the street from the proposed transit station. The consultant for the Elmwood study also examined single family residential as an alternative for the land west of Wooddale Avenue, but found this was not economically feasible without large public subsidies that could not be fulfilled with tax increment from a single family residential development. The study did not anticipate ultimately retaining any existing buildings or land uses on the Quadion property. However, that recommendation was based on Quadion’s indication that they were no longer interested in using the office building and anticipated a total residential redevelopment west of Wooddale. Also, the study is long range in its vision, with much of the anticipated redevelopment occurring in the 20 or more year range. The request is to reguide the existing office building to an O -- Office designation and to change the zoning to RC – High Density Residential. Office in existence prior to March 1, 1999, is a permitted land use in the RC, so this proposal would allow the office use to continue as a conforming land use while restricting the type of land use that could occur if the property were redeveloped in the future. A future residential redevelopment of the property would require an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and the property could not under the current zoning be redeveloped as an office use. Any future office expansion or redevelopment would require rezoning. Staff would also propose adding language to the Comprehensive Plan that any redevelopment of the site would have to meet the design and density guidelines of the Elmwood study. (This text amendment is being proposed concurrently with the Quadion proposal.) An alternative to the applicant’s proposal that would retain the office as a conforming land use would be to maintain the existing industrial guiding and zoning. Office that occupies over 50% of a building is permitted in the IG—General Industrial District by CUP. This alternative could also allow the property to convert to some other industrial use and is not recommended for that reason. The request to reguide the remaining properties to Residential Medium Density and to rezone to R4—Multi-Family Residential is consistent with the recommendations of the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 6 of 16 Elmwood Study and would accommodate the development proposal as presented. Single Family detached is also a permitted land use in the R4 zoning district. East Side of Wooddale The study recommendation for the Quadion property was for mixed use on the east side of Wooddale Avenue with a small park (plaza) at the corner of Wooddale and 36th Street. The proposal is to reguide the property to Commercial Mixed Use and to rezone to MX – Mixed Use. This proposal is consistent with the study, except it does not include the park designation on the corner, although the concept plan for the site does show a park. Staff and the Planning Commission propose that the corner area be designated as park. § What are the implications of rezoning property not owned by Quadion? Quadion Corporation has asked to the City to initiate the Comprehensive Plan map amendment and zoning map amendments for two properties north of Oxford Street that it does not own. One of these properties is a single family home and the other a duplex. Both properties are non-conforming under the current IG—General Industrial zoning. The requested change would make both properties conforming land uses. The owners of both properties have been approached by the developer with an offer to negotiate a sale of the property. The developer has designed the project so that even if a successful sale is not negotiated, the project can work without removing the existing homes. Staff has contacted both property owners, and both are supportive of changing the zoning so that their properties would become conforming land uses. § What are traffic implications for this change in land use? Currently the City and Park Nicollet are engaged in a traffic study that examines future planned expansions of Park Nicollet and Methodist Hospital as well as additional development east of TH 100 and the land use recommendations for the Elmwood area. This traffic study is currently in process and the final document is not expected until later this summer. Preliminary traffic information and the Elmwood Study indicate a need to expand the Wooddale Avenue right-of-way to accommodate adequate traffic lanes, a recommended center median, boulevards and sidewalks. This should be ultimately be addressed in the text of the Comprehensive Plan. Typically, residential development has less impact on peak hour traffic than other uses such as office. This is because the trip generation is spread over a longer period of time. However, the existing office would be maintained and industrial redeveloped to residential. The traffic study is considering an entirely residential redevelopment of 300 units, including the Pechiney Plastics site. The proposed land use designations would allow the existing 20,000 square foot office building to remain and up to 240 new units of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 7 of 16 housing to be considered (the current proposal is for 220 units). The traffic study should be revisited, at the developer’s expense, to ensure it portrays a worst-case scenario compared to the current proposal. The Comprehensive Plan should address mitigation of any traffic impacts and future CUP/PUD applications would be required to demonstrate traffic impacts and conformance to the Comprehensive Plan. The study will determine the cross section needed for Wooddale Avenue between 36th Street and Oxford. The City will require that the additional needed right of way be dedicated on the future replat of the Quadion property. It is expected that the developer will request a vacation of 37th Street between Wooddale and Alabama. Design elements of the project including access points will influence how future development will impact traffic. These details will be worked out as part of the replat and CUP/PUD processes. § Is the Quadion proposal consistent with future Comprehensive Plan amendments? The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider proposed text amendments to the Redevelopment Chapter and the Plan By Neighborhood Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan on July 16 and recommended approval of the same. These proposed amendments would adopt the land use and transportation principles recommended in Section 6.0 of the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study along with the illustrative plan into the Redevelopment Chapter. Also, text requiring any redevelopment within the Elmwood study area to be consistent with the recommended principles is proposed for the Plan By Neighborhood chapter. The City Council will consider these on August 4. Other Comprehensive Plan amendments listed below will be brought to public hearings at the Planning Commission over the next few meetings. COMMUNITY BACKGROUND AND HOUSING CHAPTERS: Modify tables and text to reflect proposed land use changes from industrial to housing in the Elmwood area. TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER (provided these are found feasible by the subsequent traffic studies): 1. Amend language to more specifically reflect the proposed relocated TH 7 south frontage road. 2. Insert language and drawings describing the proposed new bridge over TH 100, if any. 3. Insert language and drawings showing the proposed changes to access to and from southbound TH 100, if any. 4. Insert language referring to the proposed extension of Xenwood Avenue south of 36th Street and north of the rail corridor via a grade separated underpass. 5. Show the proposed changes to the alignment and street cross-sections for Wooddale Avenue. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 8 of 16 6. Add language to the sidewalks and trails section about maintaining a walkable area and connections to the regional trail on SW Corridor and the Park Commons area. 7. Modify the language referencing the SW Corridor to include all possible modes of transit, including bus and rail. Locate the transit station by description and map. Map Amendments: 1. Change the land use designation for the Dworsky Property from Civic-Mixed Use to Mixed Use, if their traffic study indicates the peak hour traffic generation for their proposed mixed use would be equal to or less than a 20,000 square foot office development. 2. Amend the land use designation for the future transit location site from commercial to civic and change the zoning to Mixed-Use. 3. Amend the Comprehensive Plan land use designation on that portion of the freight rail corridor west of Wooddale Avenue and east of the CP Rail north/south corridor along with some adjacent street rights of way and a portion of the east Quadion property to “Park”. Staff finds the proposed amendments are consistent with the proposed future Comprehensive Plan amendments subject to a portion of the east Quadion property being designated “Park” in the Comprehensive Plan. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of Comprehensive Plan Map amendments to change the land use designation from Industrial to Medium Density Residential, Office, Mixed Use, and Park, subject to adoption of Comprehensive Plan text amendments addressing redevelopment principles and guidelines and approval by the Metropolitan Council. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of zoning map amendments to change the zoning designation from IG –General Industrial and IP – Industrial Park to R4—Multi Family Residential, RC—Multi Family Residential, and MX—Mixed Use subject to approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendments by the Metropolitan Council. (See attached exhibits.) Attachments: Resolution adopting Comprehensive Plan map amendments Ordinance adopting zoning ordinance map amendments Concept of Proposed Development Existing and Proposed Comprehensive Plan Existing and Proposed Zoning Letter from Canadian Pacific RR Prepared by: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 9 of 16 RESOLUTION NO. 03-094 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 TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THE FOLLOWING PROPERTIES: 3630 Wooddale Ave. 3601 Wooddale Ave. 5810 37th St. W. 5957 37th St. W. 5951 37th St. W. 5912 Oxford St. 5916 Oxford St. 5920 Oxford St. 5926 Oxford St. 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 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 10 of 16 WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change, thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified according to procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan, and 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 3630 Wooddale Ave., 3601 Wooddale Ave., 5810 37th St. W., 5957 37th St. W., 5951 37th St. W., 5916 Oxford St., and 5926 Oxford St. petitioned the City to change the Comprehensive Plan land use designation from Industrial to Medium Density Residential (3630 Wooddale Ave., 5951 37th St. W., 5916 Oxford St., and 5926 Oxford St.); Industrial to Commercial/Mixed Use (3601 Wooddale Ave. and 5810 37th St. W.); and Industrial to Office (5957 37th St. W.), and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director initiated a land use designation amendment for properties at 5912 Oxford St. and 5920 Oxford St. from Industrial to Medium Density Residential, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended adoption of a map amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 on July 2, 2003, based on statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, extensive research and analyses involving the interests of citizens and public agencies; 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 map below from Industrial to RM-- Medium Density Residential, CMX--Commercial/Mixed Use, OFC--Office, and PRK— Park. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 11 of 16 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 contingent upon approval of related text amendments by the City Council (Case 03-04- CP) and approval by the Metropolitan Council City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk RM OFC CMXPRK Oxford St. 36th St W 37th St W Wo o d d ale A v eAlabama Ave SS outh w e st L R T C orrid or St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 12 of 16 SUMMARY RESOLUTION NO. 03-094 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 3630 Wooddale Ave. 3601 Wooddale Ave. 5810 37th St. W. 5957 37th St. W. 5951 37th St. W. 5912 Oxford St. 5916 Oxford St. 5920 Oxford St. 5926 Oxford St. This resolution states that land use designations will be changed as follows: from Industrial to Medium Density Residential (3630 Wooddale Ave., 5951 37th St. W., 5912 Oxford St., 5916 Oxford St., 5920 Oxford St., and 5926 Oxford St.); Industrial to Commercial/Mixed Use (3601 Wooddale Ave. and 5810 37th St. W.); and Industrial to Office (5957 37th St. W.). Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 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: August 14, 2003 03-31-CPsum:res-ord SUMMARY St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 13 of 16 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 3630 Wooddale Ave. 3601 Wooddale Ave. 5810 37th St. W. 5957 37th St. W. 5951 37th St. W. 5912 Oxford St. 5916 Oxford St. 5920 Oxford St. 5926 Oxford St. This resolution states that land use designations will be changed as follows: from Industrial to Medium Density Residential (3630 Wooddale Ave., 5951 37th St. W., 5912 Oxford St., 5916 Oxford St., 5920 Oxford St., and 5926 Oxford St.); Industrial to Commercial/Mixed Use (3601 Wooddale Ave. and 5810 37th St. W.); and Industrial to Office (5957 37th St. W.). Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 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: August 14, 2003 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 14 of 16 ORDINANCE NO.__________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE CHANGING BOUNDARIES OF ZONING DISTRICTS 3630 Wooddale Ave. 3601 Wooddale Ave. 5810 37th St. W. 5957 37th St. W. 5951 37th St. W. 5912 Oxford St. 5916 Oxford St. 5920 Oxford St. 5926 Oxford St. THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. The St. Louis Park Zoning Ordinance adopted December 28, 1959, Ordinance No. 730; amended December 31, 1992, Ordinance No. 1902-93, amended December 17, 2001, Ordinance No. 2216-01, as heretofore amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zoning district boundaries by reclassifying the lands as shown below from their existing land use district classification to the new land use district classifications as indicated on the map below: R4 MX RC37TH ST W 36TH ST W OXFORD ST WO O D D A L E A V E S TH 7 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 15 of 16 From To 3630 Wooddale Ave. IG Gen Industrial R4 Multi Family Residential 3601 Wooddale Ave. IP Industrial Park MX Mixed Use 5810 37th St. W. IP Industrial Park MX Mixed Use 5957 37th St. W. IG Gen Industrial RC Multi Family Residential 5951 37th St. W. IG Gen Industrial R4 Multi Family Residential 5912 Oxford St. IG Gen Industrial R4 Multi Family Residential 5916 Oxford St. IG Gen Industrial R4 Multi Family Residential 5920 Oxford St. IG Gen Industrial R4 Multi Family Residential 5926 Oxford St. IG Gen Industrial R4 Multi Family Residential Section 2. The ordinance shall take effect upon Metropolitan Council approval of associated Comprehensive Plan amendments. Adopted by the City Council August 18, 2003 Reviewed for Administration City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney 03-32-Z:res/ord St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8a - Quadion Comp Plan change Page 16 of 16 Concept Plan St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 1 of 13 8b. Comprehensive Plan text amendment to add the planning principles and concept map recommended in the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study to the Chapter P--Redevelopment and to add language to Chapter U—Plan By Neighborhood that references the Elmwood Study and Chapter P as guidance for future redevelopment. Case No. 03-40-CP Text amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020 to add planning principles for the Elmwood Area to the Chapter P – Redevelopment, and specific development guidelines for the Elmwood Neighborhood to Chapter U – Plan By Neighborhood. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolution amending text of Chapter P and Chapter U of Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020, subject to approval by the Metropolitan Council, approve summary resolution and authorize publication. Background: On July 16, 2003, the Planning Commission on a vote of 4-0 recommended approval of text amendments to the Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020 that would incorporate the planning principles and conceptual redevelopment plan recommended by the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study and add text to Chapter U—Plan By Neighborhood that references the Elmwood Study and Chapter P as guidance for future redevelopment. The Comprehensive Plan 2000 – 2020, adopted in 1999, describes the Elmwood Area as highly complex, and according to the Comprehensive Plan, “The reuse of this area is inevitable and will likely occur within the same time frame of this Comprehensive Plan”. A Comprehensive Plan goal for the area recommended a study be undertaken to review issues related to land use, potential transit in the Hennepin County Regional Railroad Authority (HCRRA) corridor (also known as the Southwest LRT Corridor), trails, proximity to Park Commons, access, possibility of changes in railroad services, etc. In March of 2002 the City Council, in collaboration with Hennepin County, authorized the study of the Elmwood area that was completed in early 2003. The study recommendations address changes to the Elmwood area that are expected to occur over the next 30 years. Even though short-term changes to the area are imminent, such as the Quadion proposal that the City Council is reviewing on August 4, most changes in the area are expected to occur over a longer time frame. The intent of the study was to produce a document that could be used to evaluate and guide amendments to the Comprehensive Plan that address changes to the area over time. Neighborhood concerns: During the study process, a number of concerns were identified by the Elmwood Neighborhood. The primary concerns were related to increased traffic St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 2 of 13 volumes that might be generated by redevelopment on the west side of Wooddale, and how this traffic might impact their neighborhood. The second major concern was the perceived need to develop more single family housing. There was concern expressed that when families grow in size they cannot find larger houses in St. Louis Park. Financial implications: In order to address the City Council’s desire for feasible land use recommendations, a financial feasibility component was added to the study. This component did consider the neighborhood suggestion to add more single family detached housing. The financial feasibility component found that single family detached housing was not a financially feasible option, given the added land costs associated with redevelopment that are not found with vacant land. Those costs include the price of existing structures and buildings, costs associated with demolition and site clean up. The study assumed the existing office would be redeveloped. While some cost savings are realized by retaining the office, the savings are not great enough to cover the gap for single family redevelopment. However, the cost savings have helped fill the gap identified for medium-density redevelopment. Elmwood Study conclusions: The Elmwood Study included both land use recommendations and planning principles. The planning principles were developed as a way to evaluate future proposals for land use changes and redevelopment scenarios, especially if they are inconsistent with the specific land use recommendations . Also developed was a conceptual plan to show an example of how the planning principles and land use and transportation recommendations could be implemented. City Council Acceptance: The City Council accepted the Elmwood Study on March 3, 2003. There was expressed concern about the redevelopment density recommendations for the Quadion properties west of Wooddale Avenue. This concern was incorporated into the resolution accepting the study. Quadion Proposal: The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Quadion proposal to reguide their property in St. Louis Park on July 2. The action included a recommendation to reguide the existing office building to “Office” and rezone the same to RC—Multi-family residential, since the Rottlund proposal is to retain the office building. As part of the analysis, staff did recommend that text be added to the Comprehensive Plan that would guide any future redevelopment of that building. Analysis: Chapter P—Redevelopment Chapter P of the Comprehensive Plan contains concept plans and design guidelines for various redevelopment areas of the City. Examples include Oak Park Village, Excelsior Boulevard (Park Commons), and Park Center Housing. The chapter also identifies the Elmwood Area as a potential future redevelopment district. The boundaries identified in the Comprehensive Plan (TH 100, Wooddale Avenue, and CP Rail corridor) were St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 3 of 13 expanded for the Elmwood Study to include all of the industrially guided property west of Wooddale Avenue and the area north to TH 7. This proposal is to amend the text of the Comprehensive Plan to include the conceptual plan and planning principles in the Redevelopment chapter, similar to those listed for Oak Park Village. The planning principles will provide evaluation criteria by which to analyze future development proposals. The proposed language is offered in the attached resolution. Chapter U—Plan By Neighborhood This chapter of the Comprehensive Plan addresses individual neighborhood development and redevelopment as well as neighborhood concerns and recommended improvements. It is in this chapter that staff recommends language that would require any redevelopment within the Elmwood study to comply with the study recommendations and planning principles. For instance, the Quadion proposal to reguide the existing office building to an “Office” designation can be addressed here. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend adding language that would require that any future redevelopment of this building would require a reuse as medium density residential in accordance with the Study’s recommended land use plan. Study inconsistencies: The Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study provided a recommended land use map as well as planning principles. The planning principles identified for the Quadion property west of Wooddale are somewhat inconsistent with the Rottlund proposal, the proposed land use map in the reference to density, and the City council resolution accepting the study. The study states, “Residential density should transition from low to high, increasing from south to north. Staff is proposing to amend this sentence to read, “Residential density should transition from low-medium to medium, increasing from south to north.” Future Steps: § Amendments to Transportation Chapter. Staff is proposing to recommend changes to this chapter after the traffic studies associated with Methodist Hospital and Park Nicollet Clinic are completed. § Amendments to Housing Chapter. Staff is proposing changes to the tables and charts related to housing production to coincide with the study recommendations and Quadion map amendments. § Amendments to Community Background chapter land use tables, housing forecasts, etc. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 4 of 13 Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of proposed text changes to the Comprehensive Plan as included in the attached resolution. Attachments: Resolution adopting proposed text changes Summary Resolution Existing Land Use Plan Prepared by: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator (952) 924-2574 Email: jerickson@stlouispark.org Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 5 of 13 RESOLUTION NO. 03-095 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 TEXT CHANGES CHAPTER P REDEVELOPMENT CHAPTER U PLAN BY NEIGHBORHOOD WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 was adopted by the City Council on May 17, 1999 (effective September 1, 1999) and provides the following: 1. An official statement serving as the basic guide in making land use, transportation and community facilities and service decisions affecting the City. 2. A framework for policies and actions leading to the improvement of the physical, financial, and social environment of the City, thereby providing a good place to live and work and a setting conducive for new development. 3. A promotion of the public interest in establishing a more functional, healthful, interesting, and efficient community by serving the interests of the community at large rather than the interests of individual or special groups within the community if their interests are at variance with the public interest. 4. An effective framework for direction and coordination of activities affecting the development and preservation of the community. 5. Treatment of the entire community as one ecosystem and to inject long range considerations into determinations affecting short-range action, and WHEREAS, the use of such Comprehensive Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change, thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 6 of 13 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 July 16, 2003, based on statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, extensive research and analyses involving the interests of citizens and public agencies; 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: Chapter P: the following text is inserted into the section entitled “City Redevelopment Framework”. Elmwood Area The 30-year vision for the Elmwood Area was developed for land use, transit and circulation and is contained within the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study completed in 2003. The long-range planning principles, established by the study process, provide the framework to direct and evaluate land use and transportation decisions as the Elmwood area evolves and changes. The planning principles also provide direction and focus for reinvestment in the public realm, and help affirm land development and infrastructure priorities, sequencing and phasing. They also establish a common expectation amongst decision makers, property owners, tenants, and others. PLANNING PRINCIPLES A. LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT Although each development parcel has specific challenges, the following principles respond to specific neighborhood issues regarding future land use changes. Figure P10 Existing Land Use (see attachment) Quadion (west of Wooddale Avenue) • Residential density should transition from low-medium to medium, increasing from south to north. Owner-occupied housing should be encouraged. • Irregular land use patterns between single family and other land uses should have clear distinct edges. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 7 of 13 • Lower medium-density residential on the north side of Oxford Street should have an architectural character and scale that complements the residential neighborhood's scale and character. • Residential density should capitalize upon future transit oriented development (TOD) principles, such as pedestrian access to a transit station and greater density development. • Primary multi-family vehicle access should be from Wooddale Avenue to reduce traffic conflicts with the Elmwood residential neighborhood. • Development in the southwest quadrant of Wooddale Avenue and West 36th Street could incorporate complementary retail/service on the building's first floor edge, adjacent to Wooddale. • Age-restricted housing should be considered as a development component, responding to neighborhood and community needs. • "Green" space should be integrated into residential uses. • High quality landscaping should be integral to any residential uses. Pechiney Plastics • Development configuration should complement Jorvig Park. • Primary vehicle access should be to West 36th Street. • Interior green space should be strived for. • Medium-density residential should complement the neighborhood scale and architectural character. West 36th Street Multi Use • Building character should embrace the street right-of-way edge to provide a traditional "Main Street". • Buildings should accommodate a vertical mix of land uses with neighborhood retail/services on the first floor with residential within the upper floors. Professional office space could be considered on upper floors within select locations. • Resident vehicle parking and access should occur from the building rear. Short-term parking should occur on West 36th Street. Long-term plan should include structured parking. Dworsky/Soomek Rug • Land use should focus on low-density office or other low-traffic generation uses. • Tenant mix should desire high visibility with convenient access and low traffic generation. Parking for residents and customers should occur on this site. • Architectural style and massing should provide a neighborhood gateway. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 8 of 13 • Extensive landscaping should be a mandatory project element. • Redevelopment should accommodate the realignment of the TH 7 Frontage Road. Burlington Coat Factory/Micro Center • Parcel use should be high-density office seeking regional image and access. • Structured parking should be integrated into the building complex, preferably below grade. • Urban plaza or civic space should occur as a motor court, entrance plaza or similar. • Building material and design quality should be emphasized. B. CIRCULATION The following principles provide guidance to motorized and non-motorized circulation elements and their implementation. TH 100 Access • Focus improved TH 100 access at Wooddale Avenue extended Prudent alternatives should be examined and evaluated for geometrics or inbound and outbound ramp revisions, traffic control at Xenwood Avenue and related traffic measures. • Examine viable geometric alternatives for a new Wooddale Bridge crossing TH100 § Evaluate options to minimize neighborhood impact and intrusion to Methodist Church § Identify means to mitigate physical impacts to the neighborhood through berming, landscaping or architectural separation § Evaluate roadway connections into Park Nicollet Campus and related traffic network. § Include pedestrian accommodations. TH 7 Frontage Road Revisions • Frontage Roads should be realigned to run parallel to rail corridor near its crossing of Wooddale Avenue. • Frontage Roads should define development parcels and clarify parcel access. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 9 of 13 Rail Corridor Crossing • Crossing of the rail corridor at Xenwood Avenue extended should occur as a sub-surface (grade-separated) connection. • Bicycle/pedestrian accommodations should be included. Bicycle/Pedestrian Accommodations • Sidewalks should be incorporated to all street and roadway improvements. • Multi-use trails should make logical connections consistent with the City's comprehensive trail and sidewalk plan. • Connections should be made to the Southwest LRT Regional Trail, the new Wooddale Avenue bridge, and Xenwood Avenue extended. Transit • Land use planning and circulation should anticipate implementation of LRT within the rail corridor. § Planning should assume a center-loaded transit patron platform east of Wooddale Avenue • A multi-modal transit station should be sited within the northeast quadrant of Wooddale Avenue and West 36th Street. § The transit station should accommodate patron connections to the rail corridor, bus circulator systems and walk to traffic. • Parking related to transit patrons should be limited to specific parcels or structures § Parking impacts to adjacent neighborhoods should be limited by strict enforcement and management procedures. • Transit-oriented development, land use patterns and building configurations, should be considered within a five-minute walk of LRT loading platforms. West 36th Street • Corridor should serve as the neighborhood's "Main Street". • Pedestrian provisions and walkability should be strived for. • Streetscaping should include lighting, landscaping, furniture and identity elements. • On-street parking should be accommodated. Wooddale Avenue St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 10 of 13 • Corridor should be reconstructed with landscaped median and streetscape features. • Vehicle access should occur to adjacent development parcels. • Sidewalk areas should include lighting, landscaping and identity elements. • On-street parking should be accommodated. Xenwood Avenue • Extend Xenwood as north-south spine; flexibility should exist as to exact alignment. • Promote pedestrian use through lighting, landscaping and sidewalk areas. • Promote as a major access to area. Parking • Provide structured parking to support new development; avoid single-story buildings with surface parking. • Manage neighborhood parking on a district basis including both on-street and off-street spaces. • Integrate district-parking provisions into parking structures where development allows. • Promote shared use of parking between compatible land uses. • Manage transit related parking to minimize the impact on adjacent land uses and residential areas. • Provide for a hierarchy of parking needs including short term, long term and resident. Freight Rail Right-of-Way (CP Freight Rail) The future of the rail space committed to freight railroad use is subject to change with additional study. • Current freight rail right-of-way should continue to accommodate freight railroad use until such time that public policy determines otherwise. • If freight rail is eliminated, right-of-way east of Wooddale Avenue should be used initially for transit-related surface parking. At such time that land use can intensify, the right-of-way should be used for transit station structured parking, mixed land use structured parking, or mixed land use development. • If freight rail is eliminated west of Wooddale Avenue, the right-of-way should be considered to increase open space by expanding Jorvig Park and/or implementing linear open space. C. OPEN SPACE/STORMWATER St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 11 of 13 Planning principles should help guide provisions for park, open space and storm water provisions. Park and Open Space • Evaluate park and open space needs as residential densities increase and community demographics evolve. • Preserve and augment existing public open space including Jorvig Park through the redevelopment process. • Supplement public open space with private development green space. • Establish new civic space, such as pocket parks or plazas, through the redevelopment process. § Identify specific locations in close proximity to the transit station. • Seek additional green space at or near Southwest Corridor as a complement to regional trails and greenways by vacating streets or reusing rail corridor. Regional Greenways/Stormwater • Meet or surpass watershed district and City criteria for rate control and water quality. • Enforce best management practices (BMP) for both public realm and private development areas. • Pursue low-impact development (LID) principles for stormwater management and treatment. • Employ remnant right-of-way, as available, for stormwater purposes. • Reduce stormwater runoff with impervious surface concepts. • Located stormwater and treatment areas in close proximity to runoff sources. • Preserve and strengthen neighborhood resources including Jorvig Park. Figure P11 Concept Redevelopment Plan (See attachment) Chapter U: Elmwood Neighborhood: Text modifications as follows: Specific Development Guidelines: The Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit, and Transportation Study was completed for the area bounded by TH7, TH. 100, Wooddale Avenue, Oxford Street, Alabama Avenue, 37th Street and Brunswick Avenue early in 2003. The study was initiated due to a number of change factors impacting the area and the existing redevelopment interest. The Study identified a future transit station location at the northeast corner of West 36th Street and Wooddale Avenue to accommodate future transit on the Southwest LRT Corridor. This corridor is parallel and south of TH 7 within the study area. The study also made land St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 12 of 13 use and transportation recommendations for the entire study area as indicated in the study document and Chapter P of this document. In addition, the study identified planning principles to be used to evaluate any private sector development initiatives. Future land use and transportation changes within the area are to be evaluated according to the planning principles listed in Chapter P. A number of land use designation changes will follow the study. All redevelopment within the study area west of Wooddale Avenue and south of the Southwest LRT Corridor shall be with residential and park land uses and shall comply with the planning principles listed in Chapter P. Other land use and transportation changes within the study area shall be evaluated based upon the recommendations and principles of the study. A land use study is recommended for the area bounded by TH7, TH. 100, and Wooddale Avenue. This area is subject to redevelopment, and uses compatible with the future transit potential of the CP Rail Bass Lake Corridor are encouraged. This may include a transit station, and a mixture of residential, work place, and retail/service uses. One desirable result of a land use study would be to precisely locate the most favorable site for a transit station. Land use designation changes will follow based on the study results. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8b - Comp Plan text amendments Page 13 of 13 SUMMARY RESOLUTION NO. 03-095 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 TEXT CHANGES CHAPTER P REDEVELOPMENT CHAPTER U PLAN BY NEIGHBORHOOD This resolution modifies Chapter P Redevelopment by Neighborhood by incorporating design principles recommended by the Elmwood Area Land Use, Transit and Transportation Study and Chapter U Plan by modifying Specific Development Guidelines for the Elmwood Neighborhood. Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 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: August 14, 2003 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 1 of 16 8c. Request of TOLD Development Company for Preliminary Plat approval for Park Commons East 2nd Addition and a Major Amendment to the Park Commons East Planned Unit Development granting Preliminary PUD approval for Phase NE (Excelsior & Grand Phase II). Case Nos. 03-19-PUD and 03-20-S Outlots D and E, Park Commons East (northeast corner of Park Commons Drive and Grand Way). Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolutions approving the Preliminary Plat for Park Commons East 2nd Addition and a Major Amendment to the Park Commons East PUD granting Preliminary PUD approval for Phase NE (Excelsior & Grand Phase II) subject to conditions included in the resolutions. Comprehensive Plan: Commercial Mixed Use and High-Density Residential Zoning: “M-X” Mixed Use and “R-C” High-Density Residential BACKGROUND In July of 2001, the City Council approved the Final PUD and plat for Phase I, which is currently nearing completion. Phase I will have 338 rental units and approximately 63,000 sq. ft. of retail. When Phase I was approved, the overall “Excelsior and Grand” (Park Commons East) project was expected to have approximately 660 housing units, of which at least 35 were to be owner occupied, approximately 82,000 sq. ft. of retail and approximately 37,500 sq. ft. of office. However, the overall development was approved in concept only, and future phases were to obtain preliminary and final PUD and plat approval prior to construction. Phase II was initially expected to have 79 units of rental housing, approximately 35 units of owner occupied housing (stacked townhome format—some of the 35 units were also allowed to be provided on Phase E) and approximately 6,000 sq. ft. of retail space in two buildings. The Phase II buildings were expected to be four stories in height with underground resident parking. The Phase II property is currently owned by the St. Louis Park EDA and will be transferred to TOLD based upon satisfaction of requirements outlined in the approved Redevelopment Agreement. CURRENT PROPOSAL TOLD is now proposing 120 units of owner-occupied housing, no rental housing, and approximately 4,500 sq. ft. of retail space in Phase II. The proposal includes one four-story building with approximately 177 below-ground residential parking stalls. The change from two buildings in the concept PUD approval to one building has resulted in a Preliminary Plat change from two buildable lots to one large buildable lot. A small outlot is also proposed in the northwest corner, which includes a small portion of existing parking along “Wolfe Parkway”. This outlot is proposed to be dedicated as additional park (much of “Wolfe Parkway, including St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 2 of 16 the 90 degree parking east of the amphitheater is currently dedicated as park, not street right-of- way). PROCESS: A neighborhood Open House to informally review a slightly earlier Phase II concept (including 114 condominium units) was held at the Excelsior & Grand Community Room on March 11, 2003. Feedback was generally very positive. On March 19, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and recommended Comprehensive Plan and zoning amendments to address a shallower depth to the proposed retail space along Grand Way compared to concept PUD approval. Those changes were subsequently adopted by the City Council and Metropolitan Council and are currently in effect. A marketing event was held on April 29, 2003 to determine interest in the northern 55 Phase II condominium units. Interest was strong and TOLD decided to pursue building both the northern and the southern portions of the condominium building as one seamless construction process. Based upon market feedback, they are also requesting an adjustment in the overall number of condominium units compared to what was discussed during the neighborhood Open House and Comprehensive Plan/Zoning public hearings. The current request is for 120 units rather than 114. The higher number reflects a reduction in the size of some of the units to accommodate higher market interest in mid-priced units. The attached submittal by TOLD provides additional details regarding the current proposal. The current request is for Preliminary Plat and Preliminary PUD approval for Phase II (Phase NE) only. This requires a Major amendment to the Final PUD for Park Commons East, which covers all of the phases on the 15-acre site. Changes to Phase I that were administratively approved during construction will also be incorporated into the new PUD official exhibits. Construction staging on future phase properties and construction limits/hauling routes will also be handled via these amendments. On June 4, 2003 the Planning Commission opened a public hearing on the current request and continued the public hearing to allow more time for TOLD to submit required information. On July 2, 2003, the Planning Commission held the continued public hearing. No one from the public commented. Staff noted that a condition should be added to address the need for new sidewalk easements for Phase II and compliance with a Phase I sidewalk easement condition for as-built drawings. The Chair noted that he would like the Final PUD plans to show greater differentiation of materials and façade changes on the west side facing the town green. The project architect agreed to work on revisions for final consideration. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary Plat and PUD request on a vote of 5-0-1 subject to the conditions recommended by staff including the sidewalk easement condition. Final Plat and PUD requests will be reviewed by the Planning Commission subsequent to Preliminary Plat/PUD approval by the City Council. If all requirements can be met, Final PUD consideration by the Planning Commission could take place as early as August 20th. If substantial changes are not required at that time, Final City Council approval could take place as St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 3 of 16 early as September 2nd, with Building Permit approval and construction commencing later in September or October, 2003. Issues: Ø Are the Preliminary Plat and PUD proposals in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, adopted PUD, and applicable ordinances and policies? Ø What are the likely impacts on adjacent Westmoreland condominiums and other nearby residential? Ø What are the likely construction impacts on use of the town green, Wolfe Park amphitheater, streets and nearby parking? Ø Will any amendments be necessary to the Planning and Redevelopment Contracts? Analysis of Issues: Ø Are the Preliminary Plat and PUD proposals in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, adopted PUD, and applicable ordinances and policies? Density and Housing Mix: The proposed residential density for Phase II has increased by 6 units compared to adopted PUD concept approval. However, the number of rental apartment units in Phase I actually decreased by 12 units (from 350 approved to 338 actually constructed due to expansion of some adjacent units and reconfiguration of building space eliminating units that were not marketable due to inferior location, mechanical impacts, etc). Therefore, the overall density has not increased for Phase I and II as a whole. Staff and the Planning Commission believe the proposed Phase II change from a mix of rental and owner-occupied housing to all owner-occupied housing is in keeping with the goal of maintaining a healthy balance between the two and providing a diversity of housing opportunities. There has been a substantial demand for owner-occupied condominiums in this area. Since all Phase I units are rental, staff believes the proposed change for Phase II is consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies. Due to the change to all condominiums, one contiguous Phase II building is now proposed. The building is still proposed to be four stories in height, but the massing is somewhat greater than previously proposed. Staff and the Planning Commission believe it is still in scale and appropriate for the Park Commons area provided adequate sidewalk widths and amenities are maintained and the building provides superior architectural interest at grade and from all public views. The Chair of the Planning Commission recommended some additional interest on the west façade. The adopted PUD requires Phase II to include at least 35 owner-occupied units in a “stacked townhome” format. Staff and the Planning Commission believe the intent of the “stacked townhome” language is to provide individual street-level entrances with stoops as well as some two-story units. The stoops help provide a sense of neighborhood, and the two-level units help St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 4 of 16 accommodate a variety of housing desires. Although the two-level units appeal to some prospective buyers, there is also a substantial demand for one-level living, due in large part to the aging population. As long as individual entrance stoops and some two-level units are accommodated, staff and the Planning Commission believe the proposal is consistent with the adopted PUD. The preliminary proposal includes individual entrance stoops along Park Commons Drive and Grand Way. Only four two-level units are now proposed. Retail Density and Location: The retail along the town green has been reduced from concept approval of 6,000 square feet to approximately 4,500 square feet. This is due primarily to the reduction of the retail bay depth, which was reviewed and approved as a Comprehensive Plan land use amendment. The “M-X” District requirement for at least 50% of the ground floor to be retail/service or similar customer- oriented uses will be met as long as the 4,500 square feet is leased as retail/service. The developer is not proposing any additional full-service restaurants for Phase II. The ground level space along Grand Way closest to Wolfe Parkway would be condominium amenity space and the lobby/guest entrance. Staff believes it would be preferable if this space was more flexible and could accommodate a more active customer-oriented use as a future option. However, the current proposal meets the minimum requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and “M-X” District. Setbacks and Pedestrian/Bicycle/Streetscape Amenities: Most of the attached proposed Phase II Preliminary Plat and PUD exhibits show a reduced sidewalk width along Grand Way (the town green) compared to the approved PUD and what has been constructed along Grand Way in Phase I. Staff has discussed this issue with the developer, who responded by submitting full scale revisions to the Site Development Plans on July 21, 2003. The revisions show the same sidewalk width along Grand Way that was approved for Phase I by moving the building to the east. The revised plans retain adequate sidewalk width on the east side by eliminating three proposed on-street parking spaces. Residents of Westmoreland Hills Condominiums have expressed concerns with retaining adequate on-street parking in the area for residents and guests. Therefore, staff contacted a representative of the condominiunms to discuss this issue. Bob Cunningham also discussed this with Westmoreland residents during a recent association meeting. Staff understands that the residents are still concerned about adequate on-street parking, but they are willing to consider allowing TOLD to add more parking on their side of the street. This would require replacing some existing trees. A proposed condition of approval requires TOLD to work this out with Westmoreland and submit plans for Final PUD consideration. Staff and the Planning Commission recommended revising all of the Preliminary PUD exhibits to show building setbacks and resultant sidewalks/boulevards meeting the following minimum requirements prior to Council consideration: a. meet minimum width requirements along the “M-X” District border for commercial boulevard/sidewalks as portrayed in the Subdivision Ordinance; b. meet minimum width requirements along the “R-C” District border for residential boulevards/sidewalks as portrayed in the Subdivision Ordinance St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 5 of 16 c. accommodate adequate space for vehicle overhangs, matching streetscape amenities with Phase I, adequate regulatory/directional signage, adequate bicycle parking in appropriate places, adequate outdoor seating areas, planters, and minimum clear sidewalk widths of 8 feet along the “M-X” borders and 6 feet along the “R-C” borders. The July 21st Site Development Plans appear to meet the minimum requirements, but some additional details need to be reviewed and all of the proposed exhibits have not yet been amended. Staff recommends amending all of the official exhibits to reflect the minimum setbacks. Also the revised Site Development Plans do not show the setback of proposed private building stairs from the public property line along the north side. The stairs cannot encroach on public property and it is not clear that they meet this requirement. Therefore, staff has included a condition to that effect. On July 14th, TOLD submitted a revised Landscape Plan, which is attached. The Landscape Plan reflects the greater sidewalk widths but does not show all of the necessary streetscape elements, including adequate lighting. It also shows a minimal number of additional bike bollards, which are restricted to the east side of the site. Finally, it appears to show private wrought iron fencing on public park and just north of the Phase II site but still south of Wolfe Parkway. Staff is recommending revisions to the exhibits to address these concerns and ensure adequate clear sidewalk space is retained. Architecture: The proposed architecture is similar to Phase One with a somewhat reduced palette of materials/colors compared to Phase One (for example, two different colors of brick rather than three). Staff and the Planning Commission believe this is acceptable for preliminary PUD approval subject to a more detailed review of proposed material/colors at Final PUD consideration. As noted, the Chair of the Planning Commission is recommending greater differentiation along the west façade, and the project architect has agreed to submit revisions for Final PUD consideration. Parking: TOLD has submitted a parking analysis (attached). They have also discussed with staff the proposed residential allocation in comparison to other local projects and their market feedback. Approximately one allocated below-ground parking space is proposed per condominium bedroom, which is in keeping with the market. The additional retail would use on-street parking and the existing ramps in Phase One. 200 additional spaces are required for events and general public use of the town green and Wolfe Park. Additional interim parking on future phase lots can be required if available public parking proves inadequate. During Phase I construction, on- street parking along the eastern leg of Wolfe Parkway was reduced compared to preliminary approval to save trees along the Westmoreland condominium property. The proposed solution to providing greater sidewalk widths on the Phase II property results in the loss of three parallel parking spaces near the northeast corner of the proposed Phase II building along Wolfe Parkway. Staff and the Planning Commission believe as much on-street parking as possible should be maintained provided pedestrian/bicycle amenities and significant trees are not sacrificed. As St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 6 of 16 noted earlier in the report, Westmoreland Hills condominium residents are aware of the situation and are working with the developer on an acceptable solution. It may involve replacing some of the existing trees on their side of Wolfe Parkway to accommodate additional on-street parking. Staff has modified a proposed condition of approval since Planning Commission to reflect this option. Public Works and Attorney Comments: Public Works staff has made several comments on the plans and has recommended certain changes, including changes to the utility plans, and adherence to standard City policies. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend addressing those comments in the revised Preliminary PUD/Plat exhibits and subsequent Final PUD/Plat submittals and conditions of approval. The City Attorney has also reviewed the proposed plat and association documents. The condominium “CIC” plat is not recorded until after the units are constructed and the final units boundaries are known. However, the City Attorney has raised some concerns with the association documents and underground parking spaces being proposed as separate “CIC” plat units, since they could be sold separately in the future without City approval. The City Attorney has discussed this with TOLD’s attorney and is awaiting some revisions to the association documents. Revisions to the Planning Contract will also likely include language preventing separate sale of the garages to non-residents. What are the likely impacts on adjacent Westmoreland condominiums and other nearby residential? The proposed entrance and exit from the underground resident parking is directly across from Westmoreland Hills Condominiums, which have exterior patios/decks at grade on this side of their building. The developer has previously discussed paying for a fence on their property to screen headlights from cars exiting the ramps. However, staff understands that the residents currently prefer a landscaping solution. Staff concurs that landscaping would be more in keeping with the streetscape amenities provided elsewhere. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that a final proposal for buffering Westmoreland Hills be provided with the Final PUD submittal. As noted earlier, staff further recommends that the plans reflect any proposed changes to on-street parking and potential tree replacement. Westmoreland Hills will obviously be impacted by Phase II construction. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend that excavation and other construction vehicles use the southeast corner of the site to enter and exit from Park Commons Drive so that the vehicles impact the least length of street and adjacent Westmoreland units. The construction site should remain fenced as long as feasible. Construction hours, at a minimum, would need to comply with Code, and the crews have been generally quitting by late afternoon. A few early morning starts were documented for Phase One and the contractors were put on notice that no construction activity can occur prior to 7:00 am on weekdays and 9:00 am on weekends and holidays. Ø What are the likely construction impacts on use of the town green, Wolfe Park amphitheater, streets and nearby parking? St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 7 of 16 During Planning Commission review, much of the construction staging was expected to occur on the vacant future phase site at the northwest corner of Grand Way and Park Commons Drive (Phase NW). However, subsequent discussions with the developer and Park & Rec. staff have led to the option of staging on the surface parking just north of the Phase II site. Interim parking for construction workers and park users could be provided on the future Phase NW site. This is expected to result in less disruption, since construction vehicles would not have to cross the town green/amphitheater area. Staff is continuing to work with the developer to determine specific criteria for construction limits, allowable street and on-street parking closures, and allowable impacts on use of adjacent Wolfe Park amenities. It is hoped that the majority of heavy construction can be completed prior to active use of the park between Memorial Day and Labor Day 2004. However, depending upon the ultimate solution, more severe limits on Summer weeknight and weekend construction may be necessary to ensure that the park amenities are available during prime use times. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend adoption of final construction conditions as part of the Final Plat and PUD approvals for Phase II. Ø Will any amendments be necessary to the Planning and Redevelopment Contracts? The Planning Contract and EDA Redevelopment Contract will need to be amended. The Planning Contract should reflect approved number of units, construction staging, required completion of improvements prior to occupancy, allowable administrative amendments to the Phase II approvals, and prohibition of sale of garage units to non-residents. The EDA contract currently requires construction of Phase II to commence in July, 2003. At a minimum, the construction commencement and completion dates will need to be amended and the number and mix of units updated. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Preliminary Plat and Major Amendment to the PUD granting Preliminary PUD approval for Park Commons East (Excelsior & Grand) Phase II subject to the conditions included in the attached resolutions. Attachments: Ø Proposed Resolutions Ø TOLD’s application submittal and parking analysis Ø Proposed Preliminary Plat/PUD Exhibits (to be revised) Prepared By: Janet Jeremiah, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 8 of 16 RESOLUTION NO. 03-096 Amends and Restates Resolutions No. 01-065, 01-091, and 01-146 A RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION 01-146 ADOPTED ON DECEMBER 17, 2001 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED “M-X” MIXED USE AND “R-C” HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL GRANTING PRELIMINARY PUD APPROVAL FOR PHASE NE (EXCELSIOR AND GRAND PHASE II) WHEREAS, Excelsior & Grand II, LLC, and the St. Louis Park EDA have made application to the City Council for a major amendment to a Final Planned Unit Development (Final PUD) under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code to grant preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for Phase NE (Excelsior and Grand Phase II) within a M-X Mixed Use and R-C High Density Residential Zoning District having the following legal description: Outlot D and Outlot E, Park Commons East, Hennepin County, Minnesota WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the information related to Planning Case No. 03-19-PUD and the effect of the proposed preliminary PUD approval to permit 4500 square feet of retail/service and up to 120 units of owner-occupied housing in a 4-story building with underground parking on the health, safety, and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions and the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area. 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) and 36-266(16). WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Preliminary PUD for the overall Park Commons East redevelopment on June 4, 2001, Resolution No. 01-049; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Final PUD for Park Commons East on July 23, 2001, Resolution 01-065, and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 01-091 on September 4, 2001 approving an amendment to the approved Final PUD to change the name of the north-south Town Green streets to Grand Way and separate the plat and PUD resolutions, and St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 9 of 16 WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 01-146 on December 17, 2001 approving an amendment to the approved Final PUD to allow issuance of building permits for work through January 15, 2002 prior to recording of the Park Commons East plat, easement and planning contract, and WHEREAS, the Final PUD approval for Park Commons East granted concept approval only for future phases, requiring such phases to obtain subsequent Preliminary and Final PUD approval, and WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Preliminary Planned Unit Development (PUD) for Phase NE (Excelsior and Grand Phase II) was received on May 28, 2003 (accepted as complete on June 16, 2003) from the applicant, and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was mailed to all owners of property within 350 feet of the subject property plus other affected property owners in the vicinity, and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on May 22, 2003, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the meeting of June 4, 2003 and continued that hearing to allow the applicant more time to submit required information, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held the continued public hearing on July 2, 2003 and recommended approval of the Preliminary PUD on a 5-0-1 vote, 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, and WHEREAS, it is the intent of this resolution to continue and restate the conditions of the permit granted by Resolution Nos. 01-065, 01-091, and 01-146, to add the amendments now required, and to consolidate all conditions applicable to the subject property in this resolution, and WHEREAS, the contents of Planning Case Files 01-07-PUD and 03-19-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing and the record of decision for this case. CONCLUSION NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution No. 01-146 (document not filed) is hereby restated and amended by this resolution which continues and amends a Final Planned Unit Development to the subject property for the purpose of granting Preliminary PUD approval for Phase NE (Excelsior & Grand Phase II) permitting 4500 square feet of retail/service St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 10 of 16 and up to 120 units of owner-occupied housing in a 4-story building with underground parking within a M-X Mixed Use and R-C High Density Residential Zoning District at the location described above based on the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used, and maintained in conformance with the Final PUD official exhibits, which may be amended according to the provisions of the planning contract between TOLD and the City of St. Louis Park and to meet the conditions of Final PUD approval. a. to address the recommendations of the Public Works Department dated 7/3/01. b. to address the Plumbing Inspector’s comments dated 7/2/01. c. to preserve the trees on the north side of 38th Street (proposed Grand Place) in front of Westmoreland Hills condominiums. (38th Street changed to Park Commons Drive by Ordinance No. 2211-01 adopted on October 3, 2001.) d. to increase the length of the median at Market Avenue and Excelsior Boulevard per the recommendation of the traffic consultant. (Market Avenue changed to Grand Way per Final Plat and Condition No. 1, adopted on September 4, 2001.) e. to meet minimum tree replacement ordinance requirements (that are not related to a cash in lieu payment). f. to coordinate town green and public streetscape improvements with Excelsior Boulevard streetscape plans and input from the selected artist consultant. g. to coordinate park edge improvements with amphitheater plans. h. to address comments from Metro Transit regarding transit locations and improvements. i. to address conditions of required permits from the Watershed District, MPCA, and City. j. to show the names of streets as approved on the Final Plat and current names of 38th/39th Street, which may be changed later by ordinance. (38th/39th Street changed to Park Commons Drive by Ordinance No. 2211-01 adopted on October 3, 2001.) 2. The Park Commons East Phase 1 Final PUD approval includes code deviations to allow daycare as a retail/service use, right-of-way and street designs, open space, FAR/GFAR, building setbacks, bufferyards, and off-street parking as shown on the official exhibits based upon a finding of general consistency with the approved Redevelopment Plan and subject to any other conditions of final approval. 3. Outdoor seating is permitted in association with restaurants and food service uses subject to any conditions of Final PUD approval for that phase, easement provisions, health codes, and approval of specific outdoor seating plans by the Zoning Administrator. 4. All parking shall be open to the general public at all times except as follows: on-street parking may be restricted by the City, below-ground parking may be restricted to building residents, and a plan for valet parking may be approved by the City. 5. If parking is deemed inadequate by the City based upon evidence of parking in fire lanes, drive aisles or other inappropriate areas, the developer shall be required to rectify the situation in accordance with the provisions of the planning contract. 6. Proposed “Grand Place” north of 38th/39th may be closed for events as approved by the City. (Street names changed to Grand Way and Park Commons Drive per Final Plat and Condition No. 1 adopted on September 4, 2001.) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 11 of 16 7. The developer is required to comply with all provisions of the planning contract, development agreement with the EDA, Metropolitan Council LCDA grant agreement(s), MPCA and Watershed District approvals. 8. Specific responsibility for financing and construction of the following required Phase 1 improvements shall be addressed by the Planning Contract: a. construction of all streets, on-street parking, and utilities, within the entire PUD area. b. completion of streetscape improvements, including bicycle and transit amenities, adjacent to all Phase 1 properties and Wolfe Park. c. construction of temporary bituminous sidewalks in accordance with a plan approved by the Zoning Administrator. d. regrading of the southern portion of Wolfe Park, relocation/reconstruction of the existing trail, and construction of the park edge road, parking, approved hard surface sidewalk between parking and trail, plantings and streetscape subject to approved final plans. e. construction of the entire town green from Excelsior Boulevard to Wolfe Park in accordance with approved final town green plans with temporary sidewalks north of 38th/39th until permanent sidewalks/streetscape are completed during construction of each future phase. (38th/39th Street changed to Park Commons Drive per Ordinance No. 2211-01 adopted on October 3, 2001.) f. construction of the Phase 1 public parking ramps in accordance with approved final plans. g. construction of the police substation and public restrooms in accordance with approved final plans. h. construction of traffic improvements and installation of traffic control and directional signage in accordance with approved final plans. i. construction of 18 project-based two-bedroom Section 8 units in accordance with public housing agreements. 9. Prior to any site work other than demolition for Park Commons East Phase One: a. the Final Plat and PUD for Phase 1 shall be approved. b. final construction documents for public infrastructure (street, underground utilities; not streetscape) improvements shall be approved by the Public Works Director. c. required erosion control permits, utility permits, and other required permits shall be obtained from the City, Hennepin County, Watershed District and any other required agencies. d. the MPCA shall be informed of the plans to regrade the southern portion of Wolfe Park and approval shall be received prior to regrading the park, if needed. e. a final tree preservation plan shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator and any necessary construction fencing shall be in place. f. plans for maintaining access to existing private condominium parking during construction shall be approved by Public Works and the affected property owners, if temporary construction easements are necessary. 10. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional conditions: a. Evidence of recording the final plat, easements, and planning contract shall be submitted to the City ,except that Section 14.912F of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code and the recording requirements are waived to allow, prior to recording of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 12 of 16 the plat, easement and planning contract, the issuance of building permits authorizing work through and including January 15, 2002. b. the Indirect Source Permit shall be approved by the MPCA, if necessary. c. A lighting and photometric plan shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator. d. An irrigation plan shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator. e. Exterior building material/colors shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator. f. Final plans for a police substation and adjacent public restrooms shall be approved by the Police Chief and Community Development Director. 11. Prior to installation of any private signage, sign permits shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator. 12. Future phases of the Final Plat and PUD are approved in general concept only and subject to the following conditions of approval: a. All future phases are required to apply for subsequent Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD approval for those phases; such Preliminary and Final approval may be considered concurrently subject to Code and any pertinent provisions of the development agreements. b. Curb cuts, permanent sidewalks and streetscape adjacent to future phases shall be completed during construction of each future phase. c. A minimum of 35 stacked townhomes for owner-occupants shall be included in Future Phase E and/or Future Phase NE; additional condominiums and changes to proposed building height may be approved for Future Phase NE based upon recommendations of a market study. (Amended by Condition No. 14 on August 4, 2003.) d. The City may consider proposals for permanent use of Future Phase W, subject to the provisions in the existing development contract between TOLD, EDA and City, either on its own or combined with potential redevelopment of the property to the west. However, the City may retain the Future Phase W property indefinitely and use it for such uses as the City may deem appropriate, including potential transit and parking uses. e. Variances to the 80 feet minimum lot width of the “R-C” District may be approved subject to Preliminary and Final Plat and PUD approvals. f. Allowable Code deviations are subject to the approved Redevelopment Plan and future Preliminary and Final PUD approvals. g. Approval for construction of future phases is contingent upon provision of adequate parking, which may include interim parking as approved by the City, and must include 75 weekday and 200 evening/weekend parking spaces, in excess of other needs of the development, for town green and Wolfe Park uses. 13. Prior to execution of the Final Plat for each subsequent phase: a. preliminary and final plat/PUD approval shall be obtained for that phase. b. the existing development agreement shall be amended as necessary and a new planning contract shall be executed between the developer and City/EDA. c. public sidewalk easements shall be approved by the City Attorney for those areas of private development lots between the public street and building setback. 14. The Planned Unit Development shall be amended on August 4, 2003 to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and to grant Preliminary PUD approval to Park Commons East Phase NE (Excelsior and Grand Phase II) subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed official exhibits shall be amended prior to signing to meet the following conditions: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 13 of 16 i. to show building setbacks on all plans consistent with the Site Development Plans stamped as received by the City on July 21, 2003 and further clarifying that there will not be any steps or other permanent building improvements on public property. ii. to show streetscape amenities matching Phase I including adequate street lighting using black poles on Grand Way and green poles elsewhere, adequate space for regulatory/directional signage, adequate bicycle parking in appropriate places, adequate outdoor seating and planter areas, and to show minimum clear sidewalk widths of 8 feet along the “M-X” borders and 6 feet along the “R-C” borders. iii. to eliminate fencing from public lands. iv. to address utility comments of the Public Works Department. b. As-built exhibits of Phase One showing administrative and other changes to the approved official exhibits shall be submitted prior to Planning Commission consideration of the Phase II Final Plat/PUD. c. Final PUD/Plat, association documents, and the future “CIC” plat shall meet all requirements of the City Attorney. d. Construction staging, limits, hours, and impacts on use of adjacent and nearby streets, parking, sidewalks, and park space shall be subject to approval of the Public Works Director, Community Development Director, and Park & Recreation Director. A detailed schedule and staging plan shall be submitted prior to Final PUD consideration. e. There shall be a minimum of approximately 4,500 square feet of gross leasable ground floor retail/service space in the “M-X” District portion of Phase II. f. There shall be a maximum of 120 condominium units and such development shall include individual exterior entrances for ground floor units along Park Commons Drive and Wolfe Parkway and a minimum of four two-story units. g. There shall be a minimum of approximately 177 below-ground residential parking stalls in Phase II. Construction of interim parking on future phase lots or an alternate solution will be required if adequate public parking is not maintained in accordance with PUD and contract requirements. h. The proposed architecture is subject to meeting the requirements for plan revisions and submittal of all exterior materials/colors for Final PUD consideration. i. The proposed landscape plan is subject to meeting the requirements for plan revisions and submittal of all landscape and streetscape details for Final PUD consideration. j. The Final PUD landscape plan submittal shall include a proposed solution for screening Westmoreland Hills condominiums from the headlights of vehicles exiting the underground resident parking and plan for additional parking and tree replacement on the east side of Wolfe Parkway (old Natchez Ave.). k. The Planning and EDA Redevelopment Contracts shall be amended to reflect all changes as necessary to address the Phase II approvals and to address, at a minimum, changes in the approved number of condominium units, construction staging/routes/hours/duration, required completion of improvements prior to St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 14 of 16 occupancy and to address town green/park use, allowable administrative amendments, revised construction commencement/completion dates, prevention of garage space sales to non-residents, and consistency between documents as required by the City Attorney. l. A new sidewalk easement shall be recorded against the Phase II property, and as- built Phase I drawings shall be submitted and recorded per the executed Phase I sidewalk easement. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant (or applicant and owner if applicant is different from owner) prior to acceptance of Final PUD application as complete. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 03-19-PUDprelim:res-ord St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 15 of 16 RESOLUTION NO.03-097 RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF PARK COMMONS EAST 2ND ADDITION BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Excelsior & Grand II, LLC, and the City of St. Louis Park EDA, owners and subdividers of the land proposed to be platted as Park Commons East 2nd Addition have submitted an application for approval of preliminary 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 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: Outlot D and Outlot E, Park Commons East, Hennepin County, Minnesota Conclusion 1. The proposed preliminary plat of Park Commons East 2nd Addition is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: a. Outlot A of Park Commons East 2nd Addition shall be retained by the City for public purposes. b. Drainage and utility easements shall not be required around the lot perimeter per the variance granted for all Park Commons East lots via Resolution No. 01-090 approved on September 4, 2001. c. Approval of the Preliminary Plat is subject to the conditions of Park Commons East PUD approval, the planning contract, the development agreement with the EDA, the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8c - Excelsior & Grand Prelim PUD & Plat Page 16 of 16 Metropolitan Council LCDA grant agreement(s), and requirements of other agencies including the MPCA and Watershed District. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council August 4, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 03-20-S:res/ord St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8d - 2nd Reading Franchise Fee XCEL Energy Page 1 of 3 8d. 2nd Reading of an ordinance imposing a franchise fee on XCEL Energy, a Minnesota Corporation pursuant to Ordinance No. 2086-97 Section 9-610. The City’s franchise agreement with XCEL Energy requires that in order to impose a franchise fee, the City must adopt a separate ordinance. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the ordinance imposing a franchise fee on XCEL Energy effective January 1, 2004, and authorize publication of the ordinance in full. (NOTE: This report information also applies to Item 8e imposing a franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco) Background: At the meeting of July 21, 2004, Council held a public hearings to consider adopting ordinances implementing franchise fees for both gas and electric utility companies. The 2004 budget as currently proposed is contingent on utilization of franchise fees as a revenue source. Revenues: The purpose of franchise fee collection would be to partially fund the proposed $1.5 million annual pavement management program through the collection of an estimated revenue amount of $897,432 per year. The fees can be applied to the General Fund and would be a reliable funding source for routine pavement maintenance, pavement rehabilitation, and pavement reconstruction. Both CEM and Xcel Energy recommend that the method of applying a fixed monthly charge per- meter provides for a predictable revenue stream, and the City revised both the gas and electric franchise ordinances in 1997 to make that change. At the first reading of the ordinance Council was asked by a representative of the utilities to consider changing the ordinance to make the gas and electric utility companies responsible for paying to the City only those fees which were actually collected. The language of the ordinance has been changed for second reading to allow the utility franchisees to deduct from their payment to the City uncollectables and customer refunds. Xcel has estimated that the deductions could be about $2,000 per year. Since Centerpoint Minnegasco is collecting less overall franchise fees than Xcel it is reasonable to assume that their deducts could be less. Hence we estimate that total lost revenues to the City should not exceed $5,000 per year. Attachments: Ordinance Submitted By: Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8d - 2nd Reading Franchise Fee XCEL Energy Page 2 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. _____ - 03 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING A FRANCHISE FEE ON XCEL ENERGY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, PURSUANT TO FRANCHISE ORDINANCE NO. 2086-97 SECTION 9-610 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ORDAINS: WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park ("City") granted to Northern States Power Company, a Minnesota corporation, d/b/a Xcel Energy (“Company”) a franchise for the furnishing of electric energy to the City, its inhabitants, and others, and for the use of public ways and public grounds of the City for such purposes, pursuant to St. Louis Park Ordinance No. 2086-97; WHEREAS, Section 9-610 of Ordinance No. 2086-97 states that the City may impose on Company a franchise fee by separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council; WHEREAS, Section 9-610 of Ordinance No. 2086-97 limits the imposition of any franchise fee to an amount determined by collecting not more than the amounts indicated in Section 9-610 of Ordinance No. 2086-97 from each customer in the designated company customer classification for metered service at each and every customer location; WHEREAS, the City desires to impose a franchise fee in lieu of any permit or other fees imposed on the Company; WHEREAS, the collection as a franchise fee of the amounts indicated below from each customer in the designated company customer classification for metered service at each and every customer classification is authorized under Section 9-610 of Ordinance No. 2086-97 Metered Service-based Fee Schedule Customer Classification Amount per Month Residential $ 1.25 Small C & I and Municipal with no demand charge $ 4.00 Small C & I and Municipal with demand charge $10.00 Large C & I and Municipal $65.00 WHEREAS, at least 60 days have elapsed since service on the Company by certified mail of the written notice enclosing this proposed ordinance; St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8d - 2nd Reading Franchise Fee XCEL Energy Page 3 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that: 1. The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated into this Ordinance. 2. A franchise fee to be collected in the amounts indicated below from each customer in the designated company customer classification for metered service at each and every customer classification is hereby imposed on the Company commencing with its billing month of January 2004, and paid to City quarterly: Metered Service-based Fee Schedule Customer Classification Amount per Month Residential $ 1.25 Small C & I and Municipal with no demand charge $ 4.00 Small C & I and Municipal with demand charge $10.00 Large C & I and Municipal $65.00 3. The franchise fee shall be payable monthly and remitted to the City quarterly. The Company shall pay the fee based upon the amount billed its customers subject to subsequent reductions to account for uncollectibles or customer refunds. The Company agrees to make its billing and related records available for inspection by the City at reasonable times. This ordinance shall be effective 60 days after service on the Company by certified mail of written notice enclosing the ordinance as adopted. ADOPTED this 2nd day of August, 2003, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. Reviewed for Administration: City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8e - 2nd reading Franchise Fee CEM Page 1 of 3 8e. 2nd Reading of an ordinance imposing a franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation pursuant to Ordinance No. 2236-03 Section 7.1 The City’s franchise agreement with Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco requires that in order to impose a franchise fee, the City must adopt a separate ordinance. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the ordinance imposing a franchise fee on Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco effective January 1, 2004, and authorize publication of the ordinance in full. See report for Xcel Energy Franchise Fee, Item No. 8d (Document) Attachment: Ordinance Prepared by: Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8e - 2nd reading Franchise Fee CEM Page 2 of 3 ORDINANCE NO. 2245 - 03 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING A FRANCHISE FEE ON CENTERPOINT ENERGY MINNEGASCO, INC., A MINNESOTA CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS, PURSUANT TO FRANCHISE ORDINANCE NO. 2236-03, SECTION 7.1 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK ORDAINS: WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park ("City") granted to Centerpoint Energy Minnegasco, Inc. ("Company") a franchise for the transportation, distribution, manufacture and sale of gas energy for public and private use and to use the public ground of the City of St. Louis Park for such purposes, pursuant to St. Louis Park Ordinance No. 2236-03; WHEREAS, Section 7.1 of Ordinance No. 2236-03 states that the City may impose on Company a franchise fee by separate ordinance duly adopted by the City Council; WHEREAS, the City desires to impose a franchise fee in lieu of any permit or other fees imposed on the Company; WHEREAS, at least 60 days have elapsed since service on the Company by certified mail of the written notice enclosing this proposed ordinance; NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that: 1. The recitals set forth above are hereby incorporated into this Ordinance. 2. A franchise fee to be collected in the amounts indicated below from each customer in the designated company customer classification for metered service at each and every customer classification is hereby imposed on the Company: Metered Service-based Fee Schedule Customer Classification Fee Per Account Per Month Residential $1.25 Commercial - A $1.25 Commercial/Industrial - B $4.00 Commercial/Industrial - C $10.00 Small Dual Fuel A&B $10.00 Large Dual Fuel $65.00 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8e - 2nd reading Franchise Fee CEM Page 3 of 3 This ordinance shall be effective 60 days after service on the Company by certified mail of written notice enclosing the ordinance as adopted. ADOPTED this 4th day of August, 2003, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. Reviewed for Administration: City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 1 of 24 8f. First Reading of proposed amendments to St. Louis Park Ordinance Code (Zoning) relating to creating consistency in standards relative to setbacks from residential districts, clarifying parking standards for restaurants in shopping centers, correcting retail and shopping center descriptions and approval categories, requiring conditional use permits for small schools in commercial districts, and clarifying motor vehicles sales accessory uses. Case Nos. 03-16-ZA Recommended Action: Motion to approve First Reading of proposed Ordinance Code text amendments related to zoning and set Second Reading for August 18, 2003. Background: In the process of daily administering the zoning code, staff is required to analyze many diverse land use applications and answer numerous questions. During this process, issues arise where some areas of the code seem inconsistent or ambiguous. Whenever these issues arise, staff makes an effort to rectify or simplify the code language. The proposed code amendments deal with several sections of the code to clarify standards and simplify and unify language. On May 21, 2003 the Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered the zoning ordinance amendments. No one from the public attended.. The Planning Commission discussed the open space provisions for small schools and accessory uses for motor vehicle sales. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed ordinance amendments, on a vote of 4-1, requesting that staff review motor vehicle sales and include a maximum percentage for associated autobody/painting as an accessory use. The Assistant Zoning Administrator reviewed existing motor vehicle sales uses and found that autobody/painting generally encompasses approximately 25-30% of existing motor vehicle sales/service buildings. Therefore, staff is proposing that accessory autobody/painting be limited to no more than 30% of the gross floor area of the motor vehicle sales/service building. The use could not be placed in a stand-alone building, since it is not allowed as a principal use in the Commercial Districts. Other conditions for accessory autobody/painting, such as a minimum 300 feet setback from residential, would also have to be met. On June 16, 2003, the City Council deferred first reading to the July 28 study session to discuss the amendments related to shopping centers. That discussion is below St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 2 of 24 Proposed Amendments: Clarifying consistency in setbacks from residential districts: On February 5, 2001, the City Council approved miscellaneous zoning ordinance amendments including a change to the standard for applying extraordinary setbacks from residential districts. The change was in response to several variances that had been approved because the uses were across a road or railroad from an actual residential use, but the residential district included the right-of-way or railroad property. Thus, the setback was determined from the right-of-way or railroad rather than the use itself. The amended language states that the setback is “from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers.” This language was amended in 57 places in the Code. However, many other sections that should have been changed were missed. Those sections are included in the attached ordinance amendments as recommended by the Planning Commission. Clarifying parking standards for restaurants in shopping centers. There are two issues related to applying this code that staff and the Planning Commission are proposing to address. One is defining “less than full-service” restaurant, and the other is related to applying the definition of shopping center that states more than one building and property would be considered part of the shopping center if planned, developed and/or managed as a unit. This definition means there could be a single use in a stand alone building on a separate parcel that could still be considered part of the shopping center. If the property were sold, it would likely become non-conforming with parking requirements. Sharing parking between uses within a shopping center generally makes sense because often people tend to visit more than one business establishment per visit and often use a food service as part of a shopping trip. However, in those instances where a restaurant is located within a separate out-building people often make a separate trip to visit the restaurant. Examples include McDonald’s at Park Towers (Park Nicollet Campus) and Arby’s at Park Place Plaza (Home Depot Shopping Center). Restaurants with drive-throughs (in-vehicle sales/service) or intoxicating liquor licenses also tend to generate separate trips. In these instances, it is more reasonable to require the same parking standard as would be required for a stand-alone restaurant. These amendments were originally brought before the City Council for first reading on June 16, 2003. At that time the City Council deferred the item to the July 28 Study Session to discuss potential differences in parking requirements based upon the size of the shopping center and the percentage of restaurant space that would not bump up the parking requirement. The Study Session discussion centered around the concern that smaller shopping centers may not have the same percentage of trips where patrons visit several commercial business as do larger shopping centers. The Council also directed a lowering of the percentage of restaurant space that could take advantage of the same parking ratios as required for retail space. As a result, St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 3 of 24 additional language has been added to the ordinance amendment to address these concerns, i.e. the percentage was lowered from 50% to 25% and the reduced rate is only available for shopping centers over 20,000 square feet. Also, note the text was reorganized somewhat to simplify it. Section 36-142 (d)(30) Shopping Center Definition Shopping Center means a group of commercial uses planned, owned and managed as a unit that has common parking facilities. Shopping centers may include more than one building and more than one contiguous property and owner if approved under a single conditional use permit or planned unit development. Section 36-361 (d)(20) of the Ordinance Code requires the following parking standard for shopping centers. Staff and the Planning Commission are proposing to exclude stand-alone restaurants, restaurants with intoxicating liquor license, and restaurants with drive-throughs from qualifying for the lower parking standard via the following amendments. The amendments were further modified subsequent to the July 28, 2003, study session discussion, to exclude shopping centers under 20,000 square feet from parking reductions for restaurants. Shopping centers i. One space for each 220 gross square feet of floor area unless otherwise indicated in ii., iii., and iv. of this section. ii. Grocery stores within shopping centers would require one space for each 180 gross square feet of floor area. iii. Parking requirements for theaters within shopping centers shall be figured separately. iv. Parking requirements for full service restaurants and food service and theaters (including shared seating areas within malls), within shopping centers shall be figured separately unless the uses meet all of the following requirements: a. The shopping center floor area is over 20,000 gross square feet. b. The restaurant or food service does not have wait staff serving food directly to the customer while seated c. The restaurant or food service does not have an intoxicating liquor license d. The restaurant or food service does not have in-vehicle sales/service e. The combined total of all restaurants and food services constitute less than 25% of the gross floor area of the building and shopping center iv. Restaurants which provide less than full service and food services including designated seating areas located within shopping centers shall require one space per 220 square feet of gross floor area when restaurants constitute less than 50 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 4 of 24 percent of the gross floor area of the shopping center. If restaurants and food service constitute 50 percent or more of the gross floor area of the shopping center, the area exceeding 50 percent shall require one space for each 25 square feet of customer service area. Modifying how shopping centers are permitted in the C1 and C2 Zoning Districts: In June 2002, the City Council adopted amendments to Chapter 36 of the Municipal Code (Zoning) to change how retail shopping centers over 50,000 square feet are allowed in the C2 General Commercial district as follows: Shopping Centers less than 50,000 Sq. Ft. Permitted with Conditions Shopping Centers 50,000 to 200,000 Sq. Ft. Permitted by CUP Shopping Centers over 200,000 Sq. Ft. Permitted by PUD At the time, the shopping center size listed in “permitted with conditions” section was inadvertently overlooked. That section of the code still lists shopping centers up to 200,000 square feet as permitted with conditions. Staff and the Planning Commission are proposing the following amendment to Section 36-194(c)(19): (19) Shopping Center. The conditions are as follows: a. The shopping center development shall not exceed 200,000 shall be less than 50,000 square feet of gross floor area. Shopping centers are currently not permitted in the C1-Neighborhood Commercial district. The reason for this is that the old definition for a shopping center included a 50,000 square foot minimum size imbedded within it. The definition has since changed to drop the size descriptor. However, since uses permitted in the C1 district are restricted in size, the old definition exceeded the size permitted in the C1. Staff and the Planning Commission are proposing to add shopping centers as a use permitted with conditions in the C1. Section 36-193 (c) Uses permitted with conditions. (38) Shopping Centers. The condition for shopping centers is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4. This prevents the gross building area from exceeding 20,000 square feet. Table 36-115A of the Zoning Code would have to be amended to reflect this change as well. Description for Motor Vehicle Sales and Associated Accessory Uses Staff has found that the definition for motor vehicle sales does not include an indoor showroom facility, although one is required and some sales facilities are completely indoors. Also, the definition does not include autobody/painting, which is a typical accessory use. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 5 of 24 The following are proposed changes to the land use description for Motor Vehicle Sales (Section 36-142 (d)(18) as recommended by staff and the Planning Commission: (18) Motor vehicle sales means display, sale, and rental of automobiles, trucks and recreational vehicles from an indoor showroom facility and may include an outdoor sales lot; motor vehicle service and repair and autobody/painting often occur in conjunction with this use. Characteristics may include outdoor activity, banners and lights for promotion and advertising, outdoor sound systems, truck deliveries, night and weekend operating hours, and test driving on nearby streets. Autobody/painting is a use that is currently only permitted in the IG Industrial District. This use is often found as an accessory use to motor vehicles sales, which is only permitted in the C2- General Commercial District. The proposal is to add autobody/painting as an accessory use to motor vehicle sales in the C2 – General Commercial District with conditions similar to those in the IG except that inoperable vehicles could not be stored outside, since outdoor storage is not permitted in the C-2 District. The Planning Commission also recommended limiting the percentage of floor area that could be occupied by the autobody use based upon typical existing car dealerships. A 30% limit has been included in the proposed ordinance. Section 36-194 (f) Accessory uses. (9) Autobody/painting is permitted as an accessory use to motor vehicle sales if: a. Inoperable vehicles are stored indoors. b. The facility is located a minimum of 300 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions and community centers. c. A bufferyard F is installed and maintained adjacent to any public way. d. The use shall be incorporated into the motor vehicle sales/service building and shall not exceed 30% of the gross floor area of said building. Reclassifying Uses in C1 Neighborhood Commercial District All of the uses listed as “permitted” in the C1 District are, according to the Code, only permitted if the use does not exceed “intensity classification 4”. Thus, in actuality, all of the uses are “permitted with conditions”. Staff and the Planning Commission are proposing to eliminate the list of “permitted” uses, except for parks/open space, and change these to “permitted with conditions”. In this manner, it will be less likely to miss the condition limiting the intensity. The changes are included in the attached ordinance amendments. Table 36-115A of the Zoning Code would be amended to reflect these changes as well. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 6 of 24 Requiring conditional use permits for small schools in the Commercial Districts: On April 7, 2003, the City Council approved a zoning text amendment to allow small schools, under 20 students, located in an R4 district to be exempt from certain setbacks subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. This was prompted by Metropolitan Open Schools request. At this time the City Council also directed staff to initiate an ordinance amendment to require educational facilities to be considered as a conditional use in the C-1 Neighborhood Commercial and C-2 General Commercial Districts so that any potential safety and location issues could be addressed site by site. In 1997, Metropolitan Open School had requested an amendment to permit small schools in the commercial districts. Currently, small schools are permitted with conditions in both the C1 and C2 districts. Staff and the Planning Commission are proposing to change this to a conditional use. The proposed changes affect the land use table and C-1/C-2 text as shown in the attached ordinance. Attachment: Ø Proposed Ordinance (Please note that the proposed ordinance text changes are in order by subject, not in numerical order. The order will be changed for 2nd reading.) Prepared by: Julie Grove, Gary Morrison, Judie Erickson, and Janet Jeremiah, Planning Div. Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 7 of 24 ORDINANCE NO.______ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTIONS 36-115A, 36-142, 36-163 – 167, 36-193 – 194, 36-223, 36-242 – 244, and 36-361 RELATING TO CREATING CONSISTENCY IN STANDARDS RELATIVE TO SETBACKS FROM RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, CLARIFYING PARKING STANDARDS FOR RESTAURANTS IN SHOPPING CENTERS, CORRECTING RETAIL AND SHOPPING CENTER DESCRIPTIONS AND APPROVAL CATEGORIES, REQUIRING CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR SMALL SCHOOLS IN COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS, AND CLARIFYING THE MOTOR VEHICLES SALES ACCESSORY USES THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Findings Sec. 1. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 03-16-ZA). Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 36-115A, 36-142, 36-163 – 167, 36- 193 – 194, 36-223, 36-242 – 244, and 36-361 is hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language. Section breaks are represented by ***. R-1 Single Family Residence District. *** 36-163(c)(2)a. (Communication Centers) The building shall not be located within 50 feet of any lot line of any a lot in an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** Section 36-163(c)(2)c. (Communication Centers) Outdoor areas intended for group activities shall be located at least 25 feet from any lot in an R district, parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 8 of 24 and shall be buffered from any such residential lot with a bufferyard D. *** Section 36-163 (d)(2)b. (Public Service Structures) All structures shall be located a minimum of 15 feet from any lot in an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** Section 36-163 (d)(3) (Golf Courses) Golf courses. The condition for a golf course is that all structures on the golf course shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from any adjacent lot in an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. Section 36-163 (d)(4) (Country Clubs) Country clubs. The condition for country clubs is that all structures shall be located a minimum of 30 feet from any adjacent lot in an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** R-2 Single Family Residence District. *** Section 36-164 (d)(2)b. (Public Service Structures) All structures shall be located a minimum of 15 feet from any lot in an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** R-3 Two Family Residence District. *** 36-165(d)(2)b. (Public Service Structures) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 9 of 24 All structures shall be located a minimum of 15 feet from any lot in an R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** R-4 Multiple Family Residence District. *** 36-166(d)(2)b. (Public Service Structures) All structures shall be located a minimum of 15 feet from any lot in an R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-166(d)(7)f. (Office Less Than 2,500 Square Feet) The parking areas shall be set back at least five feet from any abutting lot located within an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, and shall conform with all provisions of section 36-361. *** 36-166(f)(13)a. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Use, Height) The height of any parking ramp located within 200 feet of any R-1, R-2 or R-3 district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers.may not penetrate the height of a line commencing at and perpendicular to the use district said parcel line and extending upward and away from the R-1, R-2 or R-3 district line said parcel at a slope of five horizontal feet for each vertical foot. 36-166(f)(13)b. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Use, Structure) The minimum required yard for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of an R district any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, shall be 50 feet. *** 36-166(f)(13)d. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Structures, Lighting) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 10 of 24 If the parking ramp is located within 400 feet of any property in an R district, parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, all light sources on the top deck of a parking ramp shall be below the sight lines drawn from a point one foot above the light source to any point within the R district said parcel ten feet lower than the maximum structure height of that use in the R district at a distance of 400 feet from the wall of the parking ramp nearest to the R district. said parcel. *** R-C High Density Multiple Family Residence District. *** 36-167(d)(3)b. (Public Service Structures) All structures shall be located a minimum of 15 feet from any lot in an R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-167(f)(12)a. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Use, Height) The height of any parking ramp located within 200 feet of any R-1, R-2 or R-3 district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers.may not penetrate the height of a line commencing at and perpendicular to the use district said parcel line and extending upward and away from the R-1, R-2 or R-3 district line said parcel at a slope of five horizontal feet for each vertical foot. 36-167(f)(12)b. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Use, Structure) The minimum required yard for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of an R district any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, shall be 50 feet. *** 36-167(f)(12)d. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Structures, Lighting) If the parking ramp is located within 400 feet of any property in an R district, parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, all light sources on the top deck of a parking ramp shall be below the sight lines drawn from a point one foot above the light source to any point within the R district said parcel ten feet lower than the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 11 of 24 maximum structure height of that use in the R district at a distance of 400 feet from the wall of the parking ramp nearest to the R district. said parcel. *** St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 12 of 24 C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District *** 36-193(d)(5)f. (Post Office Customer Service) Drive through and stacking areas shall not be within 100 feet of any lot in an "R" use district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, unless the entire facility and stacking areas are separated from said parcel the lot in an "R" use district by a building wall or bufferyard F. *** 36-193(d)(6)a. (In-vehicle Service & Sales) Drive-through facilities and stacking areas shall not be within 100 feet of any lot in an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, unless the entire facility and stacking areas are separated from said parcel the lot in an R district by a building wall. *** C-2 General Commercial District *** 36-194(c)(21)a. (Parking Ramps, Height) The height of any parking ramp located within 200 feet of any R-1, R-2 or R-3 district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers.may not penetrate the height of a line commencing at and perpendicular to the use district said parcel line and extending upward and away from the R-1, R-2 or R-3 district line said parcel at a slope of five horizontal feet for each vertical foot. 36-194(c)(21)b. (Parking Ramps, Structure) The minimum required yard for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of an R district a parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, shall be 50 feet. *** St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 13 of 24 36-194(c)(21)e. (Parking Ramps, Lighting) If the parking ramp is located within 400 feet of any property in an R district, parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, all light sources on the top deck of a parking ramp shall be below the sight lines drawn from a point one foot above the light source to any point within the R district said parcel ten feet lower than the maximum structure height of that use in the R district at a distance of 400 feet from the wall of the parking ramp nearest to the R district. said parcel. *** 36-194(d)(2)o. (Motor Vehicle Sales) The storage lot shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from an R district. any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-194(d)(3)e. (Motor Vehicle Service & Repair) The building housing the use shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any lot in an R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. In the case of an automatic carwash where the vehicular entrance and exit doors do not face said parcel the R district within 100 feet, the building shall be located a minimum of 95 feet from said the R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-194(d)(10)f. (Post Office Customer Service) Drive through and stacking areas shall not be within 100 feet of any lot in an "R" use district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, unless the entire facility and stacking areas are separated from said parcel the lot in an "R" use district by a building wall or bufferyard F. *** 36-194(d)(11)a. (In-vehicle Sales or Service) Drive-through facilities and stacking areas shall not be located within 100 feet of any lot in an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 14 of 24 community centers, unless the entire facility and stacking areas are separated from said parcel the lot in an R district by a building wall. *** 36-194(e)(1)c.1. (Shopping Centers, In-vehicle Sales or Service) Drive through facilities and stacking areas shall not be located within 100 feet of any lot in an R district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, unless the entire facility and stacking areas are separated from said parcel the lot in an R district by a building wall. *** 36-194(g)(1)a. (Dimensional Standards, Height) The building shall be at least 200 feet from any residentially zoned property. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** O Office District *** 36-223(d)(3)d. (Heliport) The helicopter pad shall not be located within 300 feet of any parcel in an R district that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-223(d)(9)a. (In-vehicle Sales or Service) Drive-through facilities and stacking areas shall not be located within 100 feet of any lot in an R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-223(f)(2)a. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Use, Height) The height of any parking ramp located within 200 feet of any R-1, R-2 or R-3 district parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers.may not penetrate the height of a line commencing at and perpendicular to the use district said parcel line and extending upward and away from the R-1, R-2 or R-3 district line said parcel at a slope of five horizontal feet for each vertical foot. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 15 of 24 36-223(f)(2)b. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Use, Structure) The minimum required yard for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of an R district any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, shall be 50 feet. *** 36-223(f)(2)e. (Parking Ramps, Accessory Structures, Lighting) If the parking ramp is located within 400 feet of any property in an R district, parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, all light sources on the top deck of a parking ramp shall be below the sight lines drawn from a point one foot above the light source to any point within the R district said parcel ten feet lower than the maximum structure height of that use in the R district at a distance of 400 feet from the wall of the parking ramp nearest to the R district. said parcel. *** Industrial restrictions and performance standards; general provisions *** 36-242(10)g. Employee parking during temporary operations shall be located on the site as far as possible from the abutting R district. any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** I-P Industrial Park District *** 36-243(d)(1)d. (Heliport) The helicopter pad shall not be located within 300 feet of any parcel in an R district. that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-243(g)(4) (Height Limitations) …For properties abutting an R district, any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, the building height limitations are St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 16 of 24 modified as follows: Within 100 feet of an R district, said parcel, the building heights shall not penetrate a line commencing at a point 15 feet above the ground level at the required yard depth and sloping upward at a rate of one vertical foot for each two feet of horizontal distance. Structures further than 100 feet from said parcel from an R district are subject to the general height limitations in this district. *** I-G General Industrial District *** 36-244(c)(2)a. (Public Service Structures) Outdoor storage areas shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from any property located in an R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-244(c)(5)b. (Animal Handling) Where animals are boarded, the facility shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from any abutting properties located within an R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-244(c)(10)e. (Motor Vehicle Service & Repair) No building shall be located within 100 feet of any lot in an R district. parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-244(d)(2)d. (Heliport) The helicopter pad shall not be located within 300 feet of any parcel in an R district. that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers. *** 36-244(f)(4) (Height Limitations) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 17 of 24 …For properties abutting an R district, any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, the building height limitations are modified as follows: Within 100 feet of an R district, said parcel, the building heights shall not penetrate a line commencing at a point 15 feet above the ground level at the required yard depth and sloping upward at a rate of one vertical foot for each two feet of horizontal distance. Structures further than 100 feet from said parcel are subject to the general height limitations in this district. *** Off-street parking areas, paved areas, and loading spaces *** 36-361(d)(2)b. Location. All loading berth curb cuts shall be located 25 feet or more from the intersection of two street rights-of-way. No loading berth shall be located less than 50 feet from an R district any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential use, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions, and community centers, unless it is entirely within a building. Loading facilities shall not occupy the required front yard. In situations where access to the loading berth is directly from the street and no other practicable means of access exist, this screening requirement shall not apply. *** Section 36-142 (d)(30) Shopping Center Definition Shopping Center means a group of commercial uses planned, owned and managed as a unit that has common parking facilities. Shopping centers may include more than one building and more than one contiguous property and owner if approved under a single conditional use permit or planned unit development. *** Section 36-361 (d)(20) Shopping Centers i. One space for each 220 gross square feet of floor area unless otherwise indicated in ii., iii., and iv. of this section. ii. Grocery stores within shopping centers would require one space for each 180 gross square feet of floor area. iii. Parking requirements for theaters within shopping centers shall be figured separately. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 18 of 24 iv. Parking requirements for full service restaurants and food service and theaters (including shared seating areas within malls), within shopping centers shall be figured separately unless the uses meet all of the following requirements: a. The shopping center floor area is over 20,000 gross square feet. b. The restaurant or food service does not have wait staff serving food directly to the customer while seated c. The restaurant or food service does not have an intoxicating liquor license d. The restaurant or food service does not have in-vehicle sales/service e. The combined total of all restaurants and food services constitute less than 25% of the gross floor area of the building and shopping center iv. Restaurants which provide less than full service and food services including designated seating areas located within shopping centers shall require one space per 220 square feet of gross floor area when restaurants constitute less than 50 percent of the gross floor area of the shopping center. If restaurants and food service constitute 50 percent or more of the gross floor area of the shopping center, the area exceeding 50 percent shall require one space for each 25 square feet of customer service area. *** Section 36-194(c)(19): (19) Shopping Center. The conditions are as follows: a. The shopping center development shall not exceed 200,000 shall be less than 50,000 square feet of gross floor area. *** Section 36-193 (c) Uses permitted with conditions. *** (38) Shopping Centers. The condition for shopping centers is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4. *** TABLE 36-115A Zoning Districts R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-C C-1 C-2 O I-P I-G M-X Commercial Uses St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 19 of 24 Shopping Center N N N N N N PC PC PUD N N N *** Section 36-142 (d)(18) Motor vehicle sales (18) Motor vehicle sales means display, sale, and rental of automobiles, trucks and recreational vehicles from an indoor showroom facility and may include an outdoor sales lot; motor vehicle service and repair and autobody/painting often occur in conjunction with this use. Characteristics may include outdoor activity, banners and lights for promotion and advertising, outdoor sound systems, truck deliveries, night and weekend operating hours, and test driving on nearby streets. *** Section 36-194 (f) Accessory uses. (9) Autobody/painting is permitted as an accessory use to motor vehicle sales if: a. Inoperable vehicles are stored indoors. b. The facility is located a minimum of 300 feet from any parcel that is zoned residential and used or subdivided for residential, or has an occupied institutional building, including but not limited to schools, religious institutions and community centers. c. A bufferyard F is installed and maintained adjacent to any public way. d. The use is incorporated into the motor vehicle sales/service building and does not exceed 30% of the gross floor area of said building. *** TABLE 36-115A Zoning Districts R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-C C-1 C-2 O I-P I-G M-X Industrial uses Auto body/paint PC N N N N N N A N N PC N *** Section 36-193. C-1 neighborhood commercial district (b) Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted in the C-1 district if the use complies with the commercial restrictions and performance standards of section 36-192 and does not exceed intensity classification 4: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 20 of 24 (1) Libraries. (2) Museums. (3)(1) Park/open space. (4) Police/fire stations. (5) Transit stations. (6) Parking business. (7) Parking lot. (8) Medical/dental office. (9) Funeral home. (10) Banks. (11) Business/trade schools. (12) Office. (13) Retail. (14) Large item retail. (c) Uses permitted with conditions. A structure or land in a C-1 district may be used for one or more of the following uses if its use complies with conditions stated in section 36-192, and those specified for the use in this subsection (c). None of the following uses shall exceed intensity classification 4, except by conditional use permit: (25) Libraries. The condition for libraries is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (26) Museums. The condition for museums is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (27) Police/fire stations. The condition for police/fire stations is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (28) Transit stations. The condition for transit stations is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (29) Parking business. The condition for parking business is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (30) Parking lot. The condition for parking lot is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (31) Medical/dental office. The condition for medical/dental office is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (32) Funeral home. The condition for funeral home is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (33) Banks. The condition for banks is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (34) Business/trade schools. The condition for business/trade schools is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (35) Office. The condition for office is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (36) Retail. The condition for retail is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4 (37) Large item retail. The condition for large item retail is that these cannot exceed intensity classification 4. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 21 of 24 TABLE 36-115A Zoning Districts R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-C C-1 C-2 O I-P I-G M-X Human care uses Medical/dental offices N N N N CU PC P PC N N PUD Funeral home N N N N N PC P N N N N Institutional uses Libraries PC PC PC PC PC P PC P PC N N PUD Museums/art galleries N N N N N P PC P PC N N PUD Police/fire PC PC PC PC PC P PC P P P P PUD Commercial uses Bank N N N N N PC P P N N PUD Business/trade school N N N N N PC P P P P N Office N N N A PUD/PC PC P PC CU/A CU/A PUD Retail N N N A A P PC P PC A A PUD Retail, large item N N N N N P PC P N A A N Transportation Parking lot A A A A A A PC A A A A A Parking business N N N N N P PC P P N N N Transit station PC PC PC P P P PC P P P P PUD *** St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 22 of 24 Requiring conditional use permits for small schools in the Commercial Districts: TABLE 36-115A Zoning Districts R-1 R-2 R-3 R-4 R-C C-1 C-2 O I-P I-G M-X Institutional Uses Educational/acade mic PC PC PC PC/CU P PC CU CUP CU CUP N N N PUD Section 36-193. C-1 neighborhood commercial district. (c) Uses permitted with conditions. (23) Educational (academic). a. When outdoor play areas are provided, a minimum of 40 square feet of outside play space per pupil must be provided and such space shall be screened with a bufferyard D. This bufferyard shall include, as a minimum, an F3 fence as described in section 36-364. b. Outdoor areas designated from group activities shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from a lot in an R district. c. Pickup/dropoff areas shall not conflict with other on-site or abutting land uses and shall not create congestion on public streets. Only automobiles and passenger vans shall be allowed to use an alley for pickup and dropoff of students. d. The size of the school shall be limited to 20 students. e. In multitenant buildings, the school shall have at least one separate building entrance or shall have an interior entrance that is within 50 feet of a common building entrance. (d) Conditional uses. (7) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. When outdoor play areas are provided, a minimum of 40 square feet of outside play space per pupil must be provided and such space shall be screened with a bufferyard D. This bufferyard shall include, as a minimum, an F3 fence as described in section 36-364. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 23 of 24 b. Outdoor areas designated from group activities shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from a lot in an R district. c. Pickup/dropoff areas shall not conflict with other on-site or abutting land uses and shall not create congestion on public streets. Only automobiles and passenger vans shall be allowed to use an alley for pickup and dropoff of students. d. The size of the school shall be limited to 20 students. e. In multitenant buildings, the school shall have at least one separate building entrance or shall have an interior entrance that is within 50 feet of a common building entrance. *** Section 36-194. C-2 general commercial district. (c.) Uses permitted with conditions. (24) Educational (academic) a. When outdoor play areas are provided, a minimum of 40 square feet of outside play space per pupil must be provided and such space shall be screened with a bufferyard D. This bufferyard shall include, as a minimum, an F3 fence as described in section 36-364. b. Outdoor areas designated from group activities shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from a lot in an R district. c. Pickup/dropoff areas shall not conflict with other on-site or abutting land uses and shall not create congestion on public streets. Only automobiles and passenger vans shall be allowed to use an alley for pickup and dropoff of students. d. The size of the school shall be limited to 20 students. e. In multitenant buildings, the school shall have at least one separate building entrance or shall have an interior entrance that is within 50 feet of a common building entrance. (d) Uses permitted by conditional use permit. (14) Educational (academic). The conditions are as follows: a. When outdoor play areas are provided, a minimum of 40 square feet of outside play space per pupil must be provided and such space shall be screened with a bufferyard D. This bufferyard shall include, as a minimum, an F3 fence as described in section 36-364. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8f - Zoning Ordinance Amendments Page 24 of 24 b. Outdoor areas designated from group activities shall be located a minimum of 25 feet from a lot in an R district. c. Pickup/dropoff areas shall not conflict with other on-site or abutting land uses and shall not create congestion on public streets. Only automobiles and passenger vans shall be allowed to use an alley for pickup and dropoff of students. d. The size of the school shall be limited to 20 students. e. In multitenant buildings, the school shall have at least one separate building entrance or shall have an interior entrance that is within 50 feet of a common building entrance. Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case File 03-16-ZA are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Sec.4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Adopted by the City Council August 18, 2003 Reviewed for Administration City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk 03-16-ZA/N:res-ord City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 1 of 15 8g. Secondhand Smoke Ordinance First reading of an ordinance amending Section 8-258 establishing a secondhand smoke awareness program including the public disclosure of possible secondhand tobacco smoke in restaurants. Recommended Action: Approve 1st reading of the ordinance amending Section 8-258 and set second reading for August 18th City Council meeting. Purpose The ordinance creates a secondhand tobacco smoke awareness program intended to increase the knowledge of the general public about possible exposure to secondhand smoke in restaurants and promote informed personal decision making. Overview The program will accomplish this purpose through indoor air sampling of restaurants that permit smoking, a posted disclosure notice at all entrances for patrons and employees, and educational materials provided by the city. This program will serve to educate patrons, employees, and owners of restaurants on the possible hazards from exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke, also referred to as Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS), and provide the tobacco smoke concentration relative to other restaurants in the city. Next to each disclosure notice would be educational materials explaining the program including a list of resource agencies for further secondhand smoke information, health risks of tobacco usage and assistance for those pursuing cessation of their smoking habit. Goals To provide information that will help the community make conscious decisions regarding exposing themselves and their families to potential harmful effects of secondhand smoke. The disclosure notice and educational materials will also serve as a talking point about secondhand tobacco smoke, within families, between friends, and in the workplace. It is our goal that people will make a lasting behavior change based on personal decisions rather than government regulations. Community residents and guests will be provided with clear information before entering a restaurant on the possibility of exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke. Restaurants must also make a conscious decision about whether to allow smoking, taking into account their employees, customers, and other possible business implications. A decision about whether to permit or prohibit indoor tobacco smoking must be made on an annual basis by each restaurant. Background The Mayor and City Council authorized the creation of a Restaurant Smoking Task Force in April 2002 consisting of community members, including residents, restaurant owners, medical professionals, students, and city staff. Jim Rhodes served in the position of Task Force chair. The purpose was to study issues regarding tobacco smoking in restaurants and the exposure of the public to secondhand tobacco smoke. A recommendation would be made to the City Council on what, if any, course of action the city should consider. The task force met for nine months to familiarize themselves about the current status of the city's restaurants, learn about the effect of secondhand St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 2 of 15 smoke on health, current government regulations, and experiences of other cities. The discussions led the Task Force to an agreement on three basic operating principals; 1) secondhand tobacco smoke is a health hazard and there is not a safe level of exposure; 2) state or national regulation prohibiting indoor smoking of tobacco products was preferable to local regulation; and 3) the importance of the issue requires a recommendation that takes a pro-active step towards making a difference. A final Task Force prepared recommendation (Attachment A) was presented to the City Council on March 10, 2003, which subsequently evolved into the proposed education program and ordinance. During the May 12, 2003 meeting Task Force members Dr. Stu Hanson and Ann Deshler returned to submit a minority report (Attachment B) urging the city to consider making all St. Louis Park workplaces smoke-free including restaurants. In the following months Task Force members, staff, and Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) sponsored three public meetings, and mailed environmental tobacco smoke information to 2,500 businesses. They also prepared a cable show discussing the Task Force recommendation, showing where to obtain secondhand smoke information, and discussing the new Minnesota Department of Health secondhand smoke regulations as they apply in the workplace. Fifteen written and verbal comments were received and 123 comment cards returned. All of the responses were provided in the Council Study Session report of June 9, 2003. Comments covered the spectrum of possible responses from support to opposition. Seventy of the comment card respondents indicated that they would take into consideration the posting of a disclosure notice. State Regulations Effective September 23, 2003, smoking of tobacco products will be restricted in offices, factories, warehouses, and other similar workplaces. The new Minnesota Department of Health drafted rules include requirements for designating smoke-permitted areas that must control the drift of smoke into areas where smoking is not allowed. Essentially, it would require separate smoking rooms with independent ventilation systems installed. Restaurants as a workplace had been originally included into the draft rules but were removed after the State Legislature passed a bill requiring legislative approval for any new state rules restricting smoking in bars or restaurants. The new regulations do not apply to restaurants. Task Force Recommendation The Task Force recommendation was developed into the proposed ordinance (Attachment C) amending Section 8-258 of the City Code relating to food and beverage licensing. The ordinance incorporates all of the Task Force recommendation of January 9, 2003 except for one: “Promote incentives through low interest loans or other assistance for business owners who choose to improve air quality through building improvements”. Without a recognized safe or acceptable level of secondhand smoke to achieve, the use of public funds to improve ventilation systems is not included at this time. The Inspections Department staff however will always be available to discuss building and mechanical codes & technologies, such as independent smoking rooms that a restaurant may want to consider. In addition, city web-site recognition of smoke-free restaurants is a recommended incentive as a way to further promote awareness of secondhand tobacco smoke and assist people looking for restaurants without tobacco smoking. This service is currently being done by the cities of Bloomington, Edina, and Richfield. A statewide web-site, ansrmn.org, is also available and identifies about 450 smoke-free restaurants through out the state. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 3 of 15 Components of the Program Each of the 60 currently licensed restaurants with indoor seating will be asked at the time of annual license renewal (Nov./Dec. of each year) if they will allow tobacco smoking or intend to be smoke- free. During a phone questionnaire earlier this year, 37 of the restaurants indicated they are currently smoke-free and the remaining 23 allowed smoking. For restaurants remaining or becoming smoke-free the following would occur: • Awarded a Commendation (mounted plaque) from the city supporting their decision to provide a smoke- free environment for patrons and employees. • Supplied with free international non-smoking symbol(s) for placement at each entrance. • Placed on the city web-site as a provider of smoke-free dining. • No license surcharge, testing, or disclosure required. Or Restaurants allowing smoking would be required to: • Submit the testing/disclosure surcharge with annual food license fee by December 31st. • Allow city Inspection staff to set-up portable air sampling equipment in the non-smoking section of the restaurant at three various times throughout the year for 100 minutes at a time. • Post the Disclosure Notice with averaged test results at each entrance, either on the door, sidelight or entry vestibule if no glass exists. • Place and maintain free brochures and a holder provided by the city in an accessible location near the disclosure notice(s). • Restaurant staff must be trained on the testing/disclosure program and provided with a copy of the brochure. Sampling and Laboratory Analysis of Nicotine In searching for an acceptable testing procedure to determine relative concentrations of secondhand smoke, staff contacted the City of Vancouver in Canada after reading on the Internet the amount of research and testing they had done on tobacco and restaurants. The Health Ministry of British Columbia was the first to boldly address tobacco on a provincial basis rather than leaving it up to individual health boards across the nation. The City of Vancouver, along with the Workman's Compensation Board (WCB) saw an increasing number of tobacco claims and deemed tobacco an "occupational hazard". The Coalition of Cancer Society supported prohibition of tobacco smoke, and began also looking into the smoke levels in bars, pubs and restaurants. A couple of studies that included tobacco smoke testing were conducted. Larkheart Risk Management performed the tests for the WCB, and the samples were analyzed by Cantest, LTD. Nicotine was the most obvious choice although it needed some special care in preventing off-gassing due to its higher reactivity. However, a simple cooling of the samples and quick delivery to the lab could control this. Cotinine was also found to be another indicator but is typically obtained from hair samples and/or body secretions. 3-Ethenylypyridine is yet another good marker because of its tendency to be very stable, and Cantest, Ltd. Stated they routinely tested for 3-Ethenylpyridine simultaneously with St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 4 of 15 nicotine. Solenasol is a very good tracer if you are looking for tobacco smoke particles. Larkheart found that nicotine, by and large, to be the best practical measurable marker for tobacco smoke. A report by notable Secondhand Smoke Consultant James Repace of Repace Associate, Inc. also states that "air nicotine and body fluid cotinine are the best and most widely used specific tracers for ETS." (June of 2000) Cantest LTD. (Vancouver, B.C.) is one of two commercial labs we contacted that have expertise in nicotine analysis. Cantest did - and still does - hundreds of nicotine samples for the Workman's Compensation Board studies in Canada on secondhand smoke in the workplace using the OSHA and NIOSH test methods. Axion Analytical Laboratories (Chicago, IL) also does testing for identifying secondhand smoke products and is well versed in the analysis of nicotine. One of the disadvantages of shipping the samples is the degradation of the nicotine amounts. The sampling and analysis method is 92% accurate providing the samples are kept temperature stable and analyzed within 5 days.The chemical sampling information for nicotine used by British Columbia was taken from the Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) here in the United States. It provided a general description, exposure limits, health factors and a monitoring procedure using a Primary Sampling/ Analytical Method (SLC1) referencing the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's (NIOSH) 2544 analytical methods. Environmental Health staff will conduct testing of each of the restaurants that allow smoking by setting up small air sampling pumps in the non-smoking areas, collecting nicotine samples in XAD-2 Sorbent Tubes. The machines will run for 100 minutes (~ 2 crowd turnovers) based OSHA and NIOSH testing methods and on the lab manager's recommendation. The sampling tubes would then be disconnected from the sampler, capped, stored in a cooler and delivered by vehicle to the Tri-City laboratory. The Tri-City laboratory is a three-way partnership between Bloomington, Edina & St. Louis Park, and has provided us with a low cost professional laboratory for water quality testing and food sample analysis over many years. A newly constructed lab is located in the City of Bloomington's water- treatment facility just south of Hwy 494 on Hwy 100. The lab would analyze the samples using a mass gas chromatograph and an auto-sampler that reads the amount of nicotine from each sample in mg/m3. The anticipated fractional number measurement in milligrams (0.018 for example) will be converted to micrograms (18) for use on the disclosure notices, providing a whole number for easier comparison. The local turnaround time for the sampling results could be obtained within four hours and up to a week for batch testing versus shipping them out of state to a regional lab. Each restaurant would have three tests done annually and at different times during the business hours. These three results would then be averaged into an annual score that would be required posted on the disclosure notice at each entrance to the restaurant for employees as well as patrons. Per our Tri-City lab manager, a 95% test accuracy range is statistically achieved if they perform a test three times. Performing a test seven times increases the accuracy range to 99.9 %. We believe a 95% accuracy range is the most cost-effective option for our comparative disclosure notice. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 5 of 15 City Jurisdiction The city attorney has reviewed the proposed ordinance and determined that the intent and content is within the legal parameters of the city’s authority for regulation. Current State regulations for restaurants only require that a minimum 30% of total indoor seating must be designated as non- smoking. Separation between smoking and non-smoking sections must be either a 4-foot wide aisle, 56-inch high barrier, or 15c.f.m. of outside air ventilation. Local jurisdictions may implement additional requirements. Financial implications There are three primary expense categories that will be incurred by the city and restaurants allowing smoking: 1) Start-up costs – Approximately $5,500 would be expended by the city in 2003/2004 for the purchase of air sampling equipment, calibrator, collection tubes, plaques, frames, and printed brochures. Additionally there would be a commitment of staff time to finalize the program and public information material. To partially offset these expenses the city would submit a grant request to the Park Nicollet Foundation. Community grant requests of up to $5000 dollars may be submitted anytime of the year and are available annually to assist with projects to improve assets in the community health education, intervention and preventive care. 2) Tri- City laboratory costs – The lab has indicated the total test cost per nicotine sample would be $80.00. This includes covering their operating costs and repayment of a capitol equipment loan. The lab cost is competitive with the $100.00 per sample quote we received from Cantest LTD when taking the exchange rate and shipping costs to Vancouver, B.C. into effect. The lab is capable of performing a variety of tests however, lab manager John Eaton, has stated they will need an updated Mass Gas Chromatograph (Mass GC) and auto sampler costing approximately $17,000 to efficiently and accurately process the number of nicotine samples proposed. According to Finance Director Jean McGann, the City’s Public Improvement Fund could loan the Tri-city lab the funds for necessary capital equipment purchase. The equipment loan would accrue interest and a repayment plan developed based on the actual use of the equipment over a three-year period. A portion of the charges from each sample tested on the equipment would be dedicated to the loan repayment. This equipment would be primarily used for the City’s nicotine testing, but has the capability of being used for a variety of testing by other partner cities or lab clients. This could result in additional fees collected from those other lab users for more rapid repayment of the loan. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 6 of 15 3) Restaurant License Surcharge – The proposed $700 annual surcharge is intended to reimburse the city for all annual operating costs including labor, overhead, lab charges, test supplies, and printing. The surcharge amount was determined as follows and only apply to the restaurants in the city that choose to allow smoking: Lab charges Six samples per year @ $80/sample = $480 Staff time Four hours @ $45hour (salary, benefits, and overhead) = $180 Supplies Includes testing equipment and printing = $ 40 $700 Implementation Schedule If the ordinance becomes effective this summer, equipment purchases would occur before the end of the year. After restaurants inform us of their decision to allow or prohibit smoking for 2004 on their license application and payment of surcharge, sample collection would begin for those restaurants with smoking. Applications for 2004 are mailed out early in November and must be returned to city by December 31st. Following collection of the three sets of samples, disclosure notices will be printed and posted in restaurants by mid-2004. Evaluation An evaluation of the program could be developed to measure the effectiveness of this pilot program on the community. In discussing this project with Dr. Paul Terry, President of the Park Nicollet Institute, the research and education arm of Park Nicollet Clinic, he expressed interest working with us as a community partner. During our discussion Dr. Terry identified two useful measurements where we could collect relevant data about the effectiveness of this secondhand smoke awareness program. The first would be an objective survey of other cities to determine if the percentage of smoke-free restaurants in St. Louis Park (currently 61%) increases more than in other comparable places without a disclosure or education program. The second measure would be to develop a more subjective exit survey of restaurant patrons on their awareness of secondhand smoke, measuring the effect of the program on their personal choices on dining and tobacco exposure. Baseline data could be determined before the program disclosure notices are posted. The Institute would be able to develop a descriptive study to be used in the evaluation of this program for about $5000. Depending on the extent of data collection additional costs would occur. Two possible funding sources for this study could be from another grant application in 2004 from the Park Nicollet Foundation as well as a research grant from the Environmental Protection Agency. Prepared By: Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Manny Camilon, Environmental Health Official Approved By: Charles W. Meyer Attachments Attachment A: Smoking Task Force Recommendation Attachment B: Minority Report Attachment C: Proposed Ordinance Attachment D: Talking Points of Proposed Ordinance Amendment St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 7 of 15 Attachment E: List of Licensed Restaurants with Indoor Dining Attachment F: Example Packet of Educational Brochure, Disclosure Notices and Commendation Certificate (Supplement) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 8 of 15 Attachment A Memorandum To: City Council From: Smoking Task Force Chair Jim Rhodes Date: January 9, 2003 e: Recommendation to consider developing a public disclosure and business incentive program focusing on Environmental Tobacco Smoke _____________________________________________________________ The St. Louis Park Smoking Task Force initially met on April 11, 2002 at a neutral site. The Mayor’s charge to the task force was to consider what was best for St. Louis Park and make a recommendation to the council on how to address the environmental tobacco smoke hazards from second hand smoke, specifically in bars and restaurants. The recommendation could range in extremes from taking no further action to pursuing a ban on indoor tobacco smoking. Members of the task force include medical professionals, business owners, residents, students, and city staff. Two perspectives became clear in our initial meetings, 1) Numerous medical studies over the years clearly conclude that tobacco smoke is a health hazard, and 2) Tobacco smoking is a legal activity in our country. The task force continued forward with this understanding and asked how can we balance the rights of community members to exercise their right to smoke and the rights of all patrons to be free of health hazards. The committee had many discussions and presentations over the course of several months, including the health effects of environmental tobacco smoke, ventilation system design by mechanical engineers, limitations and possibilities of ventilation/air purification systems, evolution of minimum Building Code requirements, results in other communities after passing smoking ordinances, effects on businesses, and testing equipment and methods for determining tobacco smoke concentrations. The State Legislature helped clarify our program parameters after exempting all food and beverage serving establishments from the rule making authority of the Minnesota Department of Health. New and more restrictive rules for most other businesses are in the process of becoming effective. OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) attempted to revise their policies to include limits of exposure to tobacco smoke but were convinced to leave it to the local entities. Local units of government still retain the ability for local ordinances more restrictive than the State rules for restaurants, currently limited to providing a small non-smoking section. A developing goal of the task force was to find a solution that would make a positive difference most would find acceptable, avoiding the confrontational discussions many cities have endured pursuing ordinances on tobacco use. St. Louis Park is a children’s first community with a responsibility to our community members. Balancing that awareness with the sensitivity to businesses that could easily lose customers who could simply travel a short distance into other cities became the challenge. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 9 of 15 Our recommendation is for the City to consider development of a public disclosure program based on indoor air sampling. Identifying relative levels of environmental tobacco smoke in food and beverage establishments that choose to allow smoking, being careful not to imply an acceptable level exists. The City should develop incentive and assistance programs to assist businesses in reducing environmental tobacco smoke levels when possible or consider voluntarily becoming smoke-free. An outline of the program is offered for consideration: ¤ Air sampling of each restaurant that chooses to permit smoking. Possibly 2-3 times per year. ¤ Laboratory analysis of air samples for nicotine and other possible markers of environmental tobacco smoke to determine smoke concentrations. ¤ Provide an annual program participation certificate disclosing sampling results at public entrances into building. ¤ Require educational material be accessible to patrons and employees in making a choice to be in that environment. ¤ Promote incentives through low interest loans or other assistance for business owners who choose to improve air quality through building improvements. ¤ Annual program supported through assessing a smoking surcharge onto business license fee to cover cost of the tobacco testing. Restaurant Smoking Task Force Chair: Jim Rhodes, Xcel Energy Members: Mike Platt, Baja Tortilla Grill Jeff Kristal, Texa-Tonka Lanes Lee Engler, Doubletree Park Place Hotel Phil Weber, Park Tavern Lounge Lanes Dr. A. Stuart Hanson, Park Nicollet Medical Center Gary Rachner, Bunny’s Bar and Grill Phil Finkelstein, Resident Tom Miller, Resident John Nermyr, Resident Steve Simon, Resident Jana Burt, St. Louis Park High School Student John Boyle, St. Louis Park High School Student Brian Hoffman, Director of Inspections Charlie Meyer, St. Louis Park City Manager Jim Brimeyer, St. Louis Park Council Member Jeff Jacobs, St. Louis Park Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 10 of 15 Attachment B St. Louis Park Smoking Task Force Minority Report Submitted by Dr. Stu Hanson and Ann Deshler As health professionals appointed to serve on the St. Louis Park Restaurant Smoking Task Force convened in April 2002, we respectfully submit this minority report as an addendum to the task force's recommendations to the St. Louis Park City Council. The recommendations put forth by this task force to test air in restaurants for nicotine do not protect the public or workers from the cancer-causing chemicals in secondhand smoke (SHS). As healthcare professionals, it is our position that to fully protect the public and workers smoking should be prohibited in all workplaces, including restaurants in St. Louis Park. We oppose the task force's recommendations based on the following scientific information about SHS. .SHS is the third leading cause of preventable death in the United States killing approximately 65,000 people a year.l .SHS contains over 4,000 chemicals of which at least 43 are known to cause cancer and of which there is no acceptable level of exposure! .Exposure to SHS for as little as 30 minutes reduces coronary artery circulation.3 .People routinely exposed to SHS, such as restaurant and bar workers, can see their risk for lung cancer triple.4 Scientific evidence has not only shown that exposure to SHS is deadly to adults but that our children can suffer greater health affects from their exposure to this deadly toxin. .SHS is responsible for an estimated 2,300 Sudden Infant Death Syndrome deaths every year.5 .Exposure to SHS causes bronchitis and pneumonia in infants and toddlers and is responsible for up to 17,000 new cases of asthma in children.6 1 Glantz, SA, Pannley W. American Heart Association Circulation. 1991; 83; 1-12; US Environmental Protection Agency (EP A). Respiratory health effects of passive smoking: lung cancer and other disorders. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office. 1992. EPA!600/006F. California Environmental Protection Agency ( Cal EP A ), Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Health effects of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke. Sacramento, CA. 1997. Glantz et al. J of Am Med. 1995; 273, 13:1047-1053. 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (1989). Indoor Air Facts: Environmental Tobacco Smoke, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 3 Otsuka, Ryo, et al. "Acute Effects ofPassive Smoking on the Coronary Circulation in Healthy Young Adults." JAMA, 286 (2001) 436-441. 4Johnson, Kenneth, et al. "Lifetime Residential and Workplace Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer in Never-Smoking Women, Canada 1994-97." Int. J. Cancer: 93, (2001) 902-906. 5 California Environmental Protection Agency ( Cal EP A ), Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. Estimated Annual Morbidity and Mortality in Nonsmokers Associated with Secondhand Smoke Exposure. Sacramento, CA. 1997. 6 Ibid. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 11 of 15 Children exposed to SHS can see their risk for middle ear infections increase by 20% -40%! Exposure to SHS also causes decreased lung function and lower birth weight in children.8 We also know that smoke- free policies are good for business. Economic studies using objective sales tax data from nearly 100 different communities across the country have shown that smoke- free regulations do not have an adverse economic impact on restaurants9. In fact, employers who implement smoke-free policies often experience increased sales from families who previously avoided smoky restaurants and additional cost-savings related insurance, property maintenance and worker productivity. The city should not put itself in the position of misleading the public or workers into believing there is an acceptable level of secondhand smoke exposure when all scientific evidence and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have clearly determined there is no safe level of exposure. If the city adopts a policy of testing and posting nicotine levels as a measure for secondhand smoke, it will imply that the city has approved of such levels and will be giving a false sense of security to it's citizens and especially workers. While these recommendations provide an opportunity to educate the public about the dangers of secondhand smoke, they do not go far enough to protect people from the negative health effects caused by secondhand smoke. We urge the task force and the city council to reconsider these recommendations and consider making all St. Louis Park workplaces smoke-free, including bars and restaurants. Sincerely, Stu Hanson, MD Ann Deshler, RN 7 Ibid. 8 Ibid. 9 "Economic Impact of Clean Indoor Air Ordinances". Americans ' for Non-Smokers' Rights, 2003. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 12 of 15 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. ______ - 03 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 8-258 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO THE TESTING AND DISCLOSURE OF ENVIRONMENTAL TOBACCO SMOKE IN FOOD AND BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENTS THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. Section 8-258 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to read in its entirety as follows: Sec. 8-258. Regulations and Standards. (a) All food and beverage establishments and food vending machines licensed under this subdivision shall comply with the city’s food code as set forth in section 12-1 of this Code. (Ord. No. 2181-00, § 4(16-304C.), 11-6-2000; Ord. No. 2198-01, § 2, 5-21-2001) (b) Except for smoke-free establishments, all food and beverage licensees providing indoor seating for consumption of prepared food and beverage products shall be subject to the following testing and disclosure of environmental tobacco smoke requirements: (1) A testing surcharge fee to be paid in addition to the regular license fee. (2) Licensee shall allow the city or designated representative access to the licensed premises to perform collection of air samples from the designated non-smoking section a minimum of three times per year. Collection times will be randomly selected by the city and occur during the establishments normal business hours. Two air samples of 100 liters each will be collected simultaneously by equipment placed on tables or stands separated by a distance of not less then half the distance of the area being sampled. The licensee shall ensure that the sampling equipment is not disturbed or tampered with for the duration of the test. (3) Collected samples will be laboratory analyzed for nicotine concentration using NIOSH (National Institute on Occupational Safety and Health method 2544). The results of all samples for each establishment will be averaged for the year. The resulting average nicotine concentration will be identified in micrograms per cubic meter. (4) Each establishment will be provided with a business specific disclosure notice(s) with the annual license. The notice(s) shall be placed by the licensee on the inside of all transparent entrance door(s) or sidelights into the establishment so as to be visible for the entering public and employees. When no translucent material is present at the entrance door(s), then the disclosure notice(s) shall be located on an interior side wall adjacent to the entrance door(s) approved by the city as the most visible location for the entering public. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 13 of 15 Only a single sign is needed for each entrance door or pair of doors when the doors are together. Each disclosure notice shall identify the food and beverage establishment by name, disclosure to the public that they may be exposed to environmental tobacco smoke in the non- smoking seating section, and the average level of nicotine sampled. New disclosure notices will be issued for each calendar year. (5) Establishments shall make available public education pamphlets, supplied by the city, providing information on environmental tobacco smoke and the disclosure notice. Pamphlets shall be displayed on a wall or tabletop dispenser in an easily accessed location as near to each disclosure notice as practically possible. The establishment is responsible to maintain a supply of the pamphlets on display and must notify the city if additional pamphlets are needed. (6) The public education pamphlets on environmental tobacco smoke and a training session explaining the disclosure notice shall be provided to every employee by the licensee within thirty days of the initial disclosure notice posting and at the time of hire for new employees. (7) Establishments making substantial improvements in building design or mechanical operating systems intended to reduce environmental tobacco smoke concentrations may request additional samples be collected and any relevant improvement be identified with a revised disclosure notice. (8) In order for an establishment to be considered smoke free and exempt from the requirements, it must prohibit the smoking of tobacco products within the building and have signage indicating a non-smoking environment at all public entrances. Signage must include, but is not limited to, the international non-smoking symbol with a minimum 3.5-inch cross dimension. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective fifteen (15) days after its passage and publication. ADOPTED this ______ day of ____________, 2003, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK By:___________________________ Jeffrey Jacobs, Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ________________________________ City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 14 of 15 Attachment D Talking Points of Proposed Ordinance Secondhand Smoke Awareness and Disclosure in Restaurants Purpose of Ordinance To inform the general public of the possible presence of secondhand tobacco smoke in the non-smoking section of the restaurant they may choose to dine at. Business License Addition The proposed ordinance amends business licensing Section 8-258 of the City Code that requires every food serving establishment be issued an annual license by the city. New provisions would be included for the testing, disclosure, and education of secondhand smoke in restaurants. Restaurants Choice Each owner would decide how the restaurant would be designated for the license period. Smoke-free with designated signage. or Allows smoking subject to the following disclosure program conditions: License Surcharge Restaurants choosing to allow smoking would pay a surcharge in addition to their annual food license renewal. The total to cover sample collection time and lab costs is proposed at $700 per year. Sample Collection Restaurants would permit city staff to set up air sampling equipment a minimum of three (3) times a year during randomly selected business hours. The equipment would consist of two small air samplers to be placed in the designated non-smoking section of the restaurant. The samplers would operate simultaneously for a 100-minute time period to collect sufficient quantities for accurate lab testing in accordance with NIOSH methods for testing of nicotine. Nicotine Concentration The collected sample tubes would be transported to a laboratory for analysis. Out of a total of six (6) samples collected from each restaurant per year, an average nicotine concentration level would be determined using nationally recognized test methods. Nicotine has been recognized and used as an indicator of relative secondhand smoke concentration for several years. Other substances in secondhand smoke may be a greater health hazard then nicotine, however it used as a marker chemical because of being easily measured and is unique to the burning of tobacco products. Disclosure Notice A notice disclosing the test results would be provided to each participating restaurant. The ordinance specifies the location(s) the notice(s) must be placed at each entrance into the restaurant. Education Brochures Restaurants would provide a space to display a city supplied brochure explaining secondhand smoke, the disclosure notice, and resources for further information or assistance with tobacco product cessation. Intra-year Changes Restaurants making substantial improvements in building design or operating systems that are intended to reduce second hand smoke concentrations would be entitled to additional tests and a revised disclosure notice to reflect any improvements which occurred. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 080403 - 8g - Secondhand Smoke Program Page 15 of 15 Attachment E City of St. Louis Park Licensed Restaurants with Indoor Dining Non-Smoking Restaurants (37) Restaurants Allowing Smoking (23) Arby’s Baja Tortilla Grill Best Western Inn Boston Market Bruegger’s Bagel (2) 5400 Excelsior Blvd 1650 Park Place Blvd Burger King Byerly’s Caribou Coffee (3) 5350 Excelsior Blvd 3777 Park Center Blvd 1650 Park Place Blvd Chipotle Mexican Grill Coffee Café D Brian’s Deli Dairy Queen Eddington’s El Gordo Fishman’s Food Express Kiko Rice Bowl King’s Wok Leeann Chin McDonalds (2) 5200 Excelsior Blvd 6320 Lake St W Minneapolis Golf Club Panera Bread (2) 3830 Grand Way 8332 State Hwy No 7 Pizza Sub & Express Quinzno’s Al’s Applebee’s Beek’s Pizza Bennigans (In the bar all the time and in the dining area at night) Bunny’s Bar and Grill Chili’s (Only at the bar) China Jade Restaurant Doubletree Embers Fuddruckers Holiday Inn Mojito’s (At the bar only) Olive Garden Panda Buffet Park Tavern Roller Garden Santorini’s (During Brunch no, otherwise yes) Shelly’s Woodroast Texa Tonka Lanes TGI Friday’s Timberlodge VFW YangtzeSt. Louis Park Citgo Starbucks Coffee Subway Sandwiches (2) 8128 State Hwy No 7 5621 Wayzata Blvd Taste of India Thanhdo Vescio’s Sandwich Express