Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003/09/02 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA September 2, 2003 7:30 p.m. 7:25 p.m. EDA Meeting - Council Chambers 1. Call to Order a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll Call 2. Presentations - None 3. Approval of Minutes a. City Council minutes of August 18, 2003 b. City Council Study Session minutes of August 10, 2003 c. City Council Study Session minutes of August 25, 2003 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 6. Public Hearings 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Resolution authorizing an HRA levy 090203 - 8a - City HRA levy.doc Council authorization of HRA levy as approved on EDA agenda Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution setting HRA levy for 2004 8b. Approve preliminary 2004 property tax levy, budget for the 2004 fiscal year, revisions to the 2003 adopted budget, and set Public Hearing date for on proposed budget and property tax levy document Resolution approving the preliminary property tax levy and budget is required by Truth in Taxation legislation. Information contained in the resolution will appear on the individual tax notices prepared by the County. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the Resolution establishing the preliminary tax levy and budget for 2004, approves revisions to the 2003 adopted budget and sets public hearing date for proposed budget and property tax levy. 8c. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance amending Chapter 22 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances relating to Solid Waste Management, creating standards for collection of refuse/garbage, recycling, and yard waste as well as for composting for residential properties. document Recommended Action: Motion to Approve Second Reading of Proposed Amendments to Chapter 22 of St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to Solid Waste Management, creating standards for collection of refuse/garbage, recycling, yard waste, and composting, adopt Ordinance, approve summary, and authorize publication. 8d. Request of the Edgewood Investors for a Conditional Use Permit for the excavation of approximately 13,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and processing waste and backfill of approximately 13,000 cubic yards of imported soil on Industrial Property located at 2401 Edgewood Ave. document Case No. 03-47-CUP, 2401 Edgewood Ave Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a Resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit subject to conditions listed in the resolution. 8e. Request of SLP Motors, LLC for a Final PUD to redevelop the Win Stephen Buick Pontiac property for Westside Volkswagen 2370 and 2440 State Highway 100 S. document Case Nos. 03-14-PUD, 2370 and 2440 St Hwy 100 Final PUD to allow the redevelopment of an automobile dealership, including replacing the building at 2370 TH 100, remodel the building at 2440 TH 100 and add a parking ramp at 2440 TH 100. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt Resolution approving Final PUD subject to the conditions in the resolution. 8f. Request of Methodist Hospital for a Preliminary PUD to allow a phased expansion, 6700 Excelsior Blvd. document Case No 03-44-PUD, 6700 Excelsior Blvd. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a Resolution approving the Preliminary PUD, subject to the conditions included in the resolution. 8g. Resolution establishing city policy regarding dangerous weapons on city property and Resolution requesting legislature to amend the MN Personal Protection Act. document Recommended Action: 1. Motion to adopt Resolution relating to public safety by prohibiting dangerous weapons on city property. 2. Motion to adopt Resolution supporting an amendment to the 2003 Minnesota Personal Protection Act. 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 SEPTEMBER 2, 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 approve second reading and adopt an ordinance amending 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; approve summary ordinance and authorize publication. Case Nos. 03-24-ZA document 4b. Motion to accept withdrawal of Carlson Restaurants Worldwide application for a variance to the sign ordinance to increase the maximum allowable square footage of signage and number of pylon signs for the property. document 4c. Motion to approve Resolution accepting work on Contract sealcoating for Allied Blacktop City Project No. 03-08, Contract No. 76-03 document 4d. Motion to authorize execution of a Contract with Calgon Carbon Corporation for the purchase of Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) in the amount of $52,400. document 4e. Motion to approve Resolution requesting cooperation from Hennepin County in researching feasibility of county operated Dispatch Services for the City of St. Louis Park document 4f. Motion to approve Stormwater Facility Maintenance Agreement with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to sweep ten (10) local streets in the Spring and Fall of each year. document 4g. Motion to accept for filing Planning Commission Minutes of August 6, 2003 document 4h. Motion to accept for filing Vendor Claims of 8/27/03 (Supplement) AGENDA SUPPLEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING September 2, 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: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 1 of 11 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA August 18, 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 Acting City Manager and Community Development Director (Mr. Harmening); City Attorney (Ms. McDowell-Poehler); Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Ms. Jeremiah); Assistant Zoning Administrator (Mr. Morrison); Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin); City Engineer (Ms. Hagen); Director of Finance (Ms. McGann); Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffman); Environmental Health Official (Mr. Camilon); Public Works Coordinator (Mr. Merkley); Public Works Administration Specialist (Ms. Hellekson); and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). 2. Presentations: None 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of August 4, 2003 The minutes were approved as presented with the following changes: Councilmember Velick: Item 8g, page 8, paragraph 5, at the end of the paragraph add: Councilmember Velick thinks the testing and posting would be misleading because it would give the public the wrong idea that second-hand smoke at lower levels would be safe. Councilmember Sanger: Item 8g, page 6, paragraph 2, at the end of the paragraph add: Ms. Stark said the proposed posting of test results would mislead the public about the dangers of second-hand smoke. Councilmember Sanger: Item 8g, page 6, paragraph 3, at the end of the paragraph add: Ms. Carmona indicated opposition to the proposed testing and posting of nicotine levels. Councilmember Sanger: Item 8g, page 6, paragraph 5, at the end of the paragraph add: Ms. Birnbaum indicated opposition to the proposed testing and posting of nicotine levels. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 2 of 11 Councilmember Sanger: Item 8g, page 7, paragraph 7, at the end of the paragraph add: Ms. Walder discussed the problem of second-hand smoke to wait staff at restaurants. Councilmember Sanger: Item 8g, page 8, paragraph 2, at the end of the paragraph add the following to the last sentence: and which provide no evidence of the effectiveness of the testing proposal. Councilmember Sanger: Item 8g, page 8, paragraph 6, at the end of the paragraph add: Councilmember Sanger pointed out that while the Council has typically supported recommendations of community task forces, Council has not always done so, such as the proposal from this task force for financial incentives to restaurants or a portion of the recommendations of the Elmwood task force. Councilmember Omodt: Item 8g, page 8, between paragraphs 6 and 7, add the following new paragraph: Councilmember Omodt strongly recommended that this item be returned to a Study Session because there are flaws in the language of the ordinance that are not addressed. 3b. City Council Study Session minutes of July 28, 2003 The minutes were approved as presented with the following changes: Councilmember Basill: Item 3, page 3, paragraph 4, at the beginning of the first sentence add: Some of the Councilmember Sanger: Item 2, page 2, paragraph 3, add the following to the last sentence: and that the City would not have potential liability. Councilmember Sanger: Item 3, page 3, paragraph 4, add the following at the end of the paragraph: He was informed by Staff that a mixed-use site requires multiple stories. Council indicated they do not support a one-story building. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. 4a Removed from Consent Calendar to Regular Agenda as Item 8f. 4b Designate Rehrig Pacific, Inc. as the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $454,892.00 for refuse cart purchase. 4c Approve Second Reading of Ordinance No. 2247-03 regarding 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 for properties 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 subject to approval of the amendments to change the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 3 of 11 Comprehensive Plan land use designations from Industrial to Office, Medium Density Residential, Park, and Commercial Mixed Use by the Metropolitan Council, approve summary Ordinance and authorize publication. 4d Approve Second Reading of Ordinance No. 2248-03 amendmening the 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, approve summary and authorize publication. 4e Motion to adopt Resolution No. 03-101 rescinding parking restrictions on the south side of W. 14th Street from Kentucky Avenue to a point 140 feet west and adopt Resolution No. 03-106 authorizing the installation of permit parking along the south side of W. 14th Street from Kentucky Avenue to a point 140 feet west. 4f Designate O’Malley Construction the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $268,936.35 for the 2003 Sidewalk Improvement Project – City Project No. 03-01A & 03-02A 4g Accept for filing the Charter Commission Minutes of May 14, 2003 4h Accept for filing the Human Rights Commission Minutes of May 21, 2003 4i Accept for filing the Planning Commission Minutes of July 16,2003 4j Accept for filing the Housing Authority Minutes of July 9, 2003 4k Accept for filing the Vendor Claims (Supplement) A motion was made by Councilmember Sanger that Item 4a be moved from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda as Item 8f. Councilmember Omodt said Council was told by Staff that the second-hand smoke ordinance would return as a Regular Agenda item. Councilmember Omodt continued: When the Council packets were received on Thursday night, the second-hand smoke item was not listed on the Regular Agenda. If we are going to make these changes and forget to tell the Council, who requested it, I think to maintain the trust of the situation, we need to at least make a phone call or let people know so that it is not a surprise and we don’t think something is getting ram-rodded on us. Councilmember Velick seconded Councilmember Sanger’s motion. It was moved by Councilmember Velick, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar as amended. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and Commissions: None 6. Public Hearings: None St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 4 of 11 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public: None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Resolution Setting Public Hearing for Park Nicollet Health Services Private Activity Revenue Bonds and Approving Public Hearing Notice Resolution No. 03-102 Finance Director Jean McGann presented a Staff report regarding the request of Park Nicollet Health Services. They are requesting to refund approximately $200 million of outstanding private activity revenue bonds and issue approximately $80 million in new debt to construct a heart and vascular center. Councilmember Basill said as this item comes forward to a public hearing, we want to be sure that it is conditioned upon the final PUD being approved. Ms. McGann said she is aware of that and with the resolution that will be in place for the September 15, 2003 meeting, Staff will include all of that language to stipulate that no dollars, with the exception of the bond issue costs, be released until all of the conditions are met. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve Resolution No. 03-102 setting a public hearing for September 15, 2003 for Park Nicollet Health Services Private Activity Revenue Bonds and to approve the public hearing notice. The motion passed 7-0. 8b. First Reading of an Ordinance amending Chapter 22 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances relating to Solid Waste Management, creating standards for collection of refuse/garbage, recycling, and yard waste as well as for composting for residential properties Public Works Coordinator Scott Merkley presented a report, and he was accompanied by Sarah Hellekson, Public Works Administration Specialist. Mr. Merkley reported that a main concern among residents is the requirement that the placement of carts during non- collection periods not be visible from the street or alley. Councilmember Santa said from her observations in Ward 3, some residents would be criminalized just because the rules have changed, and she thinks the ordinance does not reflect the Council’s intent. Councilmember Santa would like to propose that the language be changed to: Not in the front yard or side yard but in the backyard; somewhere screened from public view. Mayor Jacobs agreed. Councilmember Sanger agreed, and she is also concerned about the requirement that carts not be visible after 7:00 p.m. She said, sometimes the vendor is late in pick up and may have to return the next day, and it would make no sense for a resident to haul garbage to their home and put it out again. Councilmember Sanger said before second reading, she St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 5 of 11 would like to have the ordinance tweaked to say it is acceptable for carts to be on the street overnight—if one is waiting due to a missed or delayed pick up. Councilmember Omodt shares the same concerns as Councilmembers Sanger and Santa regarding screening. He would like to have screening defined so that it is consistent with the City’s ornamental feature and fence laws and everything else; it is not currently addressed in the proposed Ordinance Code text amendments. Acting City Manager Tom Harmening summarized that the Council is suggesting Staff look at the storage issue and state a minimum setback to the side property line. Councilmember Omodt added that the City must take care to ask what people use as screening. Councilmember Sanger added that perhaps people should have alternatives because some yards have irregular shapes. Councilmember Basill is concerned that some people may have no area in which to put the garbage, therefore, the garbage must go outside; but he encourages residents to put garbage away. Councilmember Basill asked about how to discard or care for old garbage cans. Mr. Merkley said if residents have yard waste stickers, the old cans may be used for yard waste, otherwise, Waste Management will dispose of the old cans at no charge to the residents. Mr. Merkley said information will be sent to residents by Staff just prior to the new cart distribution. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to approve First Reading of proposed Ordinance Code text amendments related to Solid Waste Management and set Second Reading for September 2, 2003. The motion passed 7-0. 8c. City Engineer’s Report: Sidewalk and Lighting Improvement Project - Park Commons Drive, City Project No. 03-11. Resolution No.’s 03-104 and 03-105 City Engineer Maria Hagen presented a report regarding the construction of new sidewalk on the north side of Park Commons Drive in accordance with the City’s sidewalk, trails, and bikeway plan. Ms. Hagen said the bid tab report would return on October 6, 2003 to award a contract. It was moved by Councilmember Basill, seconded by Councilmember Omodt, to adopt Resolution No. 03-104 approving plans and specifications and authorizing advertisement for bids for construction of concrete sidewalk and installation of pedestrian lighting and Resolution No. 03-105 authorizing parking restrictions on Park Commons Drive. The motion passed 7-0. 8d. 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. Case Nos. 03-24-ZA St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 6 of 11 Assistant Zoning Administrator Gary Morrison presented a Staff report, and he was accompanied by Planning and Zoning Supervisor Janet Jeremiah. Councilmember Sanger is concerned about setback requirements for awnings and canopies, and Mr. Morrison said setback requirements are spelled out elsewhere in the ordinance. Councilmember Sanger responded that she hopes there will be no disputes over this. Councilmember Sanger is concerned about signs being placed on narrow sidewalks because the signs could be a safety hazard, and she asked about a provision governing sign placement. Mr. Morrison said it is already stated in the ordinance. Councilmember Velick asked if enforcement will be more consistent due to an improved ordinance. Mr. Morrison said he is hopeful that that will be the case. It was moved by Councilmember Velick, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve 1st reading of an Ordinance amending Section 36-82 (Temporary Use Ordinance) and Section 36-362 (Sign Ordinance) and set second reading for September 2nd City Council meeting. The motion passed 7-0. 8e. Request by RSP Architects on behalf of Carlson Restaurants Worldwide for major amendment to the existing special permit for exterior modifications to TGI Friday's with a variance to the sign ordinance to increase the maximum allowable square footage of signage and number of pylon signs for the property. Case Nos. 03-26-CUP and 03-41-VAR 5875 Wayzata Blvd (Southeast corner of Wayzata Blvd and Zarthan Ave S. The parcel is also the Northeast corner of Zarthan Ave and 16th Street west) Resolution No. 03-103 Mr. Morrison presented a Staff report. He reported that there are two Special Permits on this property, and the recommendation from Staff is to merge the two Special Permits. Mr. Morrison said the office building has 631 square feet of signage, which is over the maximum allowed of 500 square feet, and TGI Friday currently has 107 square feet for a total of 739 square feet for the entire property. Mr. Morrison stated that the request is to allow TGI Friday to increase its signage to 146 square feet from 107 square feet. Councilmember Sanger supports granting amendments to the Special Permit, however, no criteria for the granting of a variance for signage have been met, and there is no hardship. She will make a motion to direct Staff to prepare a resolution for denial of any variance. Councilmember Sanger said, if a variance were granted at this time, she does not know how the City would get the property owner to comply at a later date. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to adopt Resolution No. 03-103 approving the Major Amendment to the existing Special Permit St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 7 of 11 for exterior modifications to the existing TGI Friday's Restaurant subject to the conditions in the resolution. The motion passed 7-0. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial of the variance based upon staff's recommendation. Before taking a vote on the second motion, Mayor Jacobs invited any interested person to speak. Chuck Friedberg, Senior Associate from RSP Architects, said TGI Friday is talking to the property owner about subdividing the property. Mr. Friedberg said, if a subdivision took place, TGI Friday would be under its signage maximum. He said TGI Friday is relinquishing one pylon sign in order to accommodate signage on the building. Councilmember Brimeyer suggested the Applicant exercise its leverage. Councilmember Omodt shares Councilmember Sanger’s concerns, and he would vote to deny the variance. Mr. Friedberg stated that the Council has an agreement from the owner of TGI Friday that he will work out an agreement within 60 days. Councilmember Brimeyer commented that as a condition of a subdivision, both new lots would have to comply with the sign ordinance. Councilmember Basill is concerned that if the variance is denied, a building and a business could be without signage for two years but it doesn’t make sense to not allow the same amount of signage until the process is subdivided. He said perhaps the answer would be to defer the variance so that the Applicant can work on a subdivision versus tying their hands for two years. Councilmember Santa commented that the Applicant does not meet the criteria for a hardship but she would favor Councilmember Brimeyer’s suggestion to defer the variance. Mayor Jacobs asked if the variance can be deferred. Ms. Jeremiah said the City has an additional 60 days to extend consideration of the variance, and after that the Applicant’s written consent would be needed; Ms. Jeremiah said the first 60 days is nearly expired. Councilmember Brimeyer would like to move to defer for 60 days, however, a motion is pending. So, in that case, Councilmember Brimeyer anticipates when the resolution to deny a variance returns to Council probably on September 2nd, he will move to defer for 60 days. The motion passed 7-0. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 8 of 11 Councilmember Sanger requested training for the Planning Commissioners, especially new members, about what a variance is and isn’t so that, hopefully, we can avoid these types of situations again. 8f Second-hand Smoke Ordinance This is the Consent Agenda Item 4a that Councilmember Sanger requested be moved to the Regular Agenda. Ann Deshler, Oncology Registered Nurse from Park Nicollet, served on the task force as Dr. Hanson’s backup and medical representative. Ms. Deshler said she has been the Director of the Community Cancer Research Program in St. Louis Park for the past 20 years. She does not feel comfortable with the task force recommendation to post and test nicotine levels and, subsequently, she and Dr. Hanson submitted a Minority Report some time ago. Ms. Deshler suggested the following changes be made: 1) The EPA materials used are more than 10 years old and grossly understate the dangers of second-hand smoke; those materials should not be used; 2) more information should be included in the brochure that has been drafted by the City; and 3) Section 1B6 should state: “explaining the dangers of second-hand smoke and the disclosure.” Director of Inspections Brian Hoffman said the most recent EPA information was used, and the informational materials required by the ordinance are subject to revision and additional editing. Lollie Eidsness, 2720 Ottawa Avenue South, said she is totally opposed to smoking, however, she would prefer the Council do nothing than pass the ordinance because it is a waste of taxpayers’ money. Ms. Eidsness asked: What will the testing really do? What does the sign tell her that would be of any value when she enters a restaurant? She said, absolutely nothing. Ms. Eidsness favors educating the public but who does not know the dangers of smoking and second-hand smoke. Janel Brakke, 2918 Utica Avenue South, said she supports the City’s effort to educate the community, however, the proposed signs may be confusing and misleading. Ms. Brakke recommends passing a public health policy and educate the community by disregarding the posting of nicotine levels and post signs that state the facts, which are: Second-hand smoke is harmful; there is no safe level, and this establishment has second-hand smoke present. She supports a 100% smoke-free policy. Jeremy Hanson, Minnesota Smoke-Free Coalition, 1019 Dayton Avenue, expressed his organization’s continued disappointment with the City’s attempt to address the important issue of second-hand smoke with this failed ordinance. Mr. Hanson requested the Council work with health organizations to find a positive solution and a compromise to this issue. He said the ordinance will not protect individuals from exposure to second- hand smoke, and this ordinance is not based on scientific methodology nor will it offer meaningful information about second-hand smoke; and do remove the nicotine testing procedure in this ordinance. Mr. Hanson said the ordinance does not meet the community support test. His organization opposes the nicotine testing and disclosure plan but they do support educational materials based on evidence and best practice. The St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 9 of 11 Minnesota Smoke-Free Coalition urges Council to oppose this ordinance or, at lease, remove the risky nicotine testing and disclosure sections. Zelda Rae Walder, 3025 Ottawa Avenue South, said her restaurant coworkers and friends expressed their appreciation to her for speaking up about this issue. Ms. Walder asked Council to vote for no smoking. Councilmember Velick said she respects the task force and its work. It was moved by Councilmember Velick, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to table the entire proposal. The motion failed 3-4. (Councilmembers Brimeyer, Basill, and Santa and Mayor Jacobs opposed). Councilmember Sanger reported a factual error in the Staff report. She said the following restaurants are smoke-free: Taste of India, Thando Restaurant, and Vescio’s. Councilmember Sanger’s proposal would be to consider amending the ordinance to say that any restaurant that is not smoke-free by January 1, 2004 would have to pay a proportionate share of the costs upfront for the testing equipment. She said the City should spend money on a program toward the education of children in St. Louis Park as to the dangers of second-hand smoke as opposed to the costs associated with the implementation of this ordinance. Councilmember Omodt echoed Councilmembers Sanger and Velick’s comments. He said passing this ordinance will lead to bad legislation and bad ordinance. Councilmember Omodt would like to offer some amendments, and he said the testing does nothing except tax some businesses. It would be better, he said, to educate people, which would be a worthy goal. The testing is invalid. Councilmember Omodt said it would be better to return this item to a Study Session. One of his amendments would address budget concerns. Mr. Hoffman explained the process of pursuing grants, and who would bear the responsibility for equipment expense. Councilmember Velick said this is not good public policy, and it should return to a Study Session. It was moved by Councilmember Omodt to return this item to a Study Session; and he listed his amendments: scrap the testing program and do an education program; there is no consistency on where the signs go; unknown cost and no set budget; in regard to air handling systems, stand alone building versus multi-tenant buildings are not addressed; put in a sunset clause, i.e., if it isn’t working within two years, it will be scraped; and a clause that all educational materials be reviewed by the Council or task force. Councilmember Brimeyer said, as a member of the task force, he is disappointed with the medical community because he relied heavily on them; and the American Cancer Society was invited to the table and, although he did not attend every meeting, he did not see St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 10 of 11 American Cancer Society representatives at the meetings. Councilmember Brimeyer said the City should require restaurants to say: “Full smoking or limited second-hand smoke, where would you like to sit?” Now, that, he said, would be silly but that is what this is all about. He inquired of Council, if signage is the issue, what would you think to: Adopt the ordinance with the testing in place but no signs are to be posted until after 12 months of testing, study, and analyses to see how we might properly notify the customers who use the restaurants? Councilmember Sanger seconded the motion to defer this item to a Study Session. Councilmember Basill said he thinks Council has looked at this issue as objectively as it can. He respects the work of the smoking task force. Mayor Jacobs said there were about 20 people on the task force. Mayor Jacobs described the task force as being composed of four or five representatives of restaurants that allowed smoking; one restaurant representative had a no-smoking restaurant, and that representative was suggested to Mayor Jacobs by the American Cancer Society; three representatives were placed on the task force by the American Cancer Society, and they rarely showed up; two, three or four who were community members with no particular vested interest in it; and two high school students. Mayor Jacobs said to say the task force was 6-2 is inaccurate, and testing was debated for two full months. Mayor Jacobs said he attended every meeting for ten full months, and he mostly listened. The motion to return this item to a Study Session failed 3-4. (Councilmembers Brimeyer, Basill, and Santa and Mayor Jacobs opposed). Councilmember Santa said calls she has received from residents have primarily expressed support for the ordinance. She said some of the realities obscured in this issue is that smoking is legal in Minnesota, and smoking is a legal behavior in restaurants that are posted for smoking. Councilmember Santa thinks the level of awareness has been increased. From the beginning, Councilmember Santa had suggested the Council do nothing, however, Mayor Jacobs and Councilmember Sanger had suggested a total smoking ban. The City has come up with a way to address smoking in restaurants and the issue of second-hand smoke in restaurants. Councilmember Santa thinks it has value and merit. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to approve second reading of Ordinance No. 2246-03 amending Section 8-258 regarding second-hand smoke in restaurants. Councilmember Omodt said it is an exercise of raw power, a number of issues are on the table as well as an imperfect resolution and, yet, some want to continue to do it. It is not right, some legitimate issues need clarification, need to be finessed, and this needs to make sense for everybody. The motion passed 4-3. (Councilmembers Omodt, Sanger, and Velick opposed). St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3a - CC Minutes 8-18-03 Page 11 of 11 Mayor Jacobs said he would like to encourage more restaurants to become smoke-free, to get people educated about the numerous dangers of second-hand smoke, and he would like to work with the healthcare community to get the word out. 9. Communications Mayor Jacobs stated a reminder that a sprinkling ban is in effect. 10. Adjournment Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 9:41 p.m. ___________________________________ __________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3b - SS Minutes 8-10-03 Page 1 of 2 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION August 10, 2003 The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers John Basill, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer), Economic Development Director (Mr. Harmening); Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Hunt); EDA Attorney (Mr. Bubul) and City Clerk (Ms. Reichert). 1. Presentation by District 3 County Commissioner Gail Dorfman Commissioner Dorfman had requested to meet with the council to discuss various issues of concern to the city and the county. Issues addressed were related to transportation, transit oriented development; housing and affordable/supportive housing issues; social services cuts; and the possibility of placing a traffic control signal on Minnetonka Blvd near Lenox Community Center. Council thanked Commissioner Dorfman for her continuing efforts to maintain good communication between the city and the county. 2. Proposed Purchase Agreement with Anderson Builders Mr. Hunt presented an update to council on the status of an agreement with Anderson Builders to purchase property at 3501 Louisiana Ave S. Mr. Hunt informed the council that the purchase agreement would be presented at the regular meeting of August 18th and that soon after, the planning commission and council would be asked to consider the preliminary plat for the Anderson and Park Tavern properties as well as an alley vacation between the Anderson and Reddy Rents properties. The EDA would also act in the future on a purchase agreement for adjacent property by Park Tavern Lounge and Lanes. 3. Park Nicollet Health Services Issuance of Private Activity Revenue Bonds Mr. Harmening briefed council on upcoming actions related to the bond issuance. He also informed the council that the bonds would be withheld from sale until after preliminary PUD approval. Council was supportive of the bond sale and agreed with the proposed order of events related to approvals. 4. Snow Ordinance Revisions Mr. Mark Hanson, newly hired as Public Works Operations Superintendent, was introduced to the council. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3b - SS Minutes 8-10-03 Page 2 of 2 Mr. Hanson presented the proposed changes to the ordinance which were intended to enhance the ability of public works to complete plowing in the neighborhoods and to enable the Police Department to more efficiently issue citations for violations to the snow emergency ordinance. Proposed changes are to reduce the trigger for declaring a snow emergency from 2 inches to 3 inches; to change the time persons must remove vehicles from the streets from between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. to a 24-hour time period and to move enforcement from persons currently tagging violators to an enhanced Police Department program. Council questioned whether residents would move cars before retiring for the night if 3” of snow was predicted. Mr. Hanson responded that many communities have similar provisions and that it becomes the cultural norm. Councilmember Santa asked if flexibility would be shown in cases where significant hardship could be demonstrated. Chief Luse responded that discretion on a case-by-case basis would continue to be exercised as it is with the current ordinance. Council directed staff to move forward with proposed ordinance changes and a related citizen education program. 5. Communications Councilmember Sanger expressed disappointment that the draft proposed weapons ordinance prepared by the City Attorney did not contain provisions regarding weapons other than pistols. She did not believe the city attorney was following clear direction which had been given by the council. Mr. Meyer stated that he was unclear as to Mr. Scott’s reasons for drafting the ordinance as presented, but that Mr. Scott would be available for discussion on the issue at an upcoming study session. Councilmember Sanger also requested that Representative Jim Rhodes be contacted to discuss the status of Hwy 100 and why it was not listed on a recent list published by MNDot. Mr. Meyer agreed to follow up with Representative Rhodes. Councilmember Santa commended the work of Parks and Recreation Director Cindy Walsh in her preparation of a memo describing proposed park improvements. Mr. Meyer agreed to pass Councilmember Santa’s remarks on to Ms. Walsh. 7. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:52 p.m. City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 3c - SS Minutes 8-25-03 Page 1 of 1 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION August 10, 2003 The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers John Basill, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer), City Attorney (Mr. Scott); Organizational Development Coordinator (Ms. Gothberg); Police Chief (Mr. Luse); Police Captain (Mr. Ortner) and City Clerk (Ms. Reichert). 1. Dangerous Weapons on City Property City Attorney, Tom Scott, was present at the meeting and distributed a report summarizing actions taken by cities and counties in response to the Legislature’s changes to the Personal Protection Act. Council discussed options available to them and opted for a resolution which would allow the council to regulate the use of city property by disallowing dangerous weapons. Council asked that the resolution include provisions directing staff to develop appropriate administrative procedures. Council also directed staff to prepare a second resolution requesting the State Legislature to amend the Minnesota Personal Protection Act of 2003 to clarify that the cities do have the authority under statute to provide for reasonable rules governing conduct on City property. 2. Communications Council asked questions regarding the written report on the solid waste ordinance which had been presented on the evening’s agenda. After discussion, council directed staff to modify the solid waste ordinance to add a 4 foot setback from the property line. This provision had been included at first reading, but removed from the draft ordinance council had received with the written report. Mr. Meyer stated that he would work with staff to present the ordinance at second reading with the 4 ft. setback provision. 3. Organizational Development Session OD Coordinator, Bridget Gothberg, led the council in discussion about the group dynamics of the council. 7. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 9:20 p.m. City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 1 of 20 4a. Motion to approve second reading and adopt an ordinance amending 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; approve summary ordinance and authorize publication. Case Nos. 03-24-ZA Purpose In the process of 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 the temporary use ordinance and sign ordinance to clarify standards and simplify and unify language relating to signs. Background On August 18, 2003, the City Council approved first reading of the attached ordinance on a 7-0 vote. The amendments are designed to provide consistency and to clarify standards for permanent, temporary and canopy/awning signs, sign permitting requirements, and approved sign plans. On June 18, 2003, the Planning Commission opened a public hearing, and upon recommendation of staff, continued the hearing to the July 2nd meeting for consideration. No one from the public was in the audience of the July 2nd meeting to speak about the proposed ordinance, and the Planning Commission recommended approval on a vote of 5-0. Staff was directed by the Planning Commission to inquire with the City Attorney regarding how conceal and carry signs should be treated. The attorney's response is that the state statute does not specify size of sign or placement of sign, and the city should treat the sign as any other sign located on the property or in a doorway. Proposed Ordinance The proposed ordinance addresses the following: § Corrects a typographical error. § A provision was added to clarify that signage pertaining to temporary uses are considered as temporary signage under the sign code, and the appropriate provisions apply. § Addresses how signage is treated in PUDs. § Clarifies treatment of signage on awnings and canopies. § Reorganizes provisions so categories such as types of signs and yard requirements are grouped in one section. § Clarifies what signs are considered to be temporary signage as opposed to permanent signage. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 2 of 20 § Clarifies wall signage standards as applied to blade signs. § Clarifies temporary sign standards as applied to pedestrian oriented signage. § Treats all non-conforming signs consistently. If the Council approves 2nd reading on September 2, 2003, the ordinance will be published on September 11th, and become effective on September 26, 2003. Prepared By: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager Attachments Proposed Ordinance Proposed Summary Ordinance St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 3 of 20 ORDINANCE NO.______ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTIONS 36-82(b)(4)(5), 36-82(b)(9)b.3, 36-362(c), 36-362(d), 36-362(f), 36-362(f)(3), 36-362(f)(13), Table 36-362A, 36-362(g)(4)(5)(7), 36-362(h), and 36-362(i)(6)(7) CREATING CONSISTENCY, CLARIFYING AND AMENDING STANDARDS FOR PERMANENT, TEMPORARY AND CANOPY/AWNING SIGNS, SIGN PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS, AND APPROVED SIGN PLANS 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. 03-24-ZA). Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 36-82(b)(4)(5), 36-82(b)(9)b.3, 36- 362(c), 36-362(d), 36-362(f), 36-362(f)(3), 36-362(f)(13), Table 36-362A, 36-362(g)(4)(5)(7), 36-362(h), and 36-362(i)(6)(7) are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language. Section 36-82(b) (4) Carnivals, festivals and promotional events. a. Carnivals, festivals, and promotional events, including community art fairs, shall not be permitted for more than 14 days in any calendar year except in public parks or closed right-of-way as approved by the city or as specified by PUD approval. b. Carnivals, festivals, and promotional events shall be permitted within required the front yard, side yard, or rear yard; except where prohibited under section 36-76. Carnivals, festivals, and promotional events shall not be allowed within the public right-of-way unless such right-of-way will be closed for the event as approved by the city. c. Carnivals, festivals, and promotional events shall not be permitted within any required bufferyards. d. All signage must meet the temporary signage provisions found in Section 36-362(h)(3) (5) Temporary outdoor sales. a. Temporary sales, including licensed food service, shall only be permitted within a C, O, M-X or I district or in public parks or closed right-of-way as approved by the city or as specified by PUD approval. b. Temporary outdoor sales which do not exceed 100 square feet shall be permitted. However, no merchandise shall be stored outside overnight. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 4 of 20 c. Temporary sales which exceed 100 square feet shall be permitted for a period not to exceed four consecutive days or a total of 12 days in a calendar year except in public parks or closed right-of- way as approved by the city or as specified by PUD approval. d. Temporary sales shall only be allowed if associated with a permitted retail business operating within a building on the site in which the same or similar merchandise is offered for sale except in public parks or closed right-of-way as approved by the city or as specified by PUD approval. e. Temporary sales shall be permitted in the required front yard, side yard, and rear yard unless prohibited under section 36-76; however, temporary outdoor sales shall not be allowed in any required landscaped area or bufferyard or within the public right-of-way unless such right-of-way will be closed for the event as approved by the city or as specified by PUD approval. f. All signage must meet the temporary signage provisions found in Section 36-362(h)(3) (9) All garage sale signs must comply with section 36-2362(e) Sec. 36-362. Sign regulations. (a) Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish minimum requirements for the size, placement and maintenance of signs by adoption of regulations governing all signs in the city. The sign regulations are intended to permit a safe, efficient, effective and aesthetic means of communication using signage which recognizes the need to maintain an attractive and appealing appearance of property in the community, including that property used for residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, public development use, and the air space above and between those uses. These regulations are intended to permit signage which is adequate for effective communication but minimizes distractions to traffic and prevents visual clutter and visual pollution which can be caused by the unregulated use of signage. (b) Findings. The city finds that: (1) The manner of installation, location and maintenance of signs affects the public health, safety, welfare and aesthetics of the community. (2) An opportunity for identification of community business and institutions must be established. (3) The safety of motorists, cyclists, pedestrians, and other users of the public streets and property are affected by the number, size, location and appearance of signs that divert the attention of drivers. (4) Installation of signs on the tops of buildings constitutes a hazard during periods of high winds and is an obstacle to effective firefighting and other emergency services. (5) Uncontrolled and unlimited construction and placement of permanent and temporary signs adversely affects the image and aesthetic attractiveness of the community and undermines economic value and growth. (6) Uncontrolled, abandoned and unlimited signs, particularly temporary signs, which are commonly located in or near public rights-of-way or at driveway and street intersections, result in roadside clutter, obstruction of views of oncoming traffic, and a visual distraction to drivers and pedestrians. (c) Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this section, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this subsection, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 5 of 20 Backlighting means an illuminated sign where the light source which illuminates the wall behind individual sign letters is hidden from view. The sign letters are opaque and appear as a silhouette against the lighted surface. Billboard means a sign which is used for the primary purpose of selling space advertising a product, service, business, or event which is not offered for sale or rent or does not take place on the premises on which the sign is located. Commercial message means any message which identifies a business or product or promotes the sale of any product or service. Courtesy bench means any bench licensed by the city and in compliance with chapter 8 of this Code. Decorative banner means a piece of fabric attached to a pole or building wall as a decorative display of color to enhance the architecture of a building or a site which does not contain a commercial message. Direct lighting means an illuminated sign where the source of light is visible. Height means the distance measured perpendicularly from the highest point of the sign structure to the grade level of the ground directly below that point or the grade level of the centerline of the nearest adjacent roadbed, whichever grade level is higher. Indirect lighting means an illuminated sign where the sign reflects the light from an external source. Internal lighting means an illuminated sign having the source of illumination located inside a translucent panel which is not directly visible. Sign means any written message, pictorial presentation, number, illustration, decoration, flag, banner or other device that is used to announce, direct attention to, identify, advertise or otherwise make anything known. The term "sign" shall not include landscaping or the architectural embellishment of a building not intended to communicate information. For purposes of maintenance or removal, the term "sign" shall also include frames and support structures. (1) On-premises sign means a sign whose message is related to the premises or the activity and use occurring on the premises on which the sign is located. On-premises signs include multi-tenant identification signs that may advertise tenants on a different property provided such tenants are within the same approved PUD and parking is shared between properties. (2) Off-premises sign means a sign whose message is not related to the premises or the activity and use occurring on the premises on which the sign is located. Sign area means the area in square feet of all faces of the sign panel, including the frame. Each message shall be considered to be a sign. If individual letters are mounted directly on a wall, or canopy or awning without a frame, the sign area shall be the area in square feet of the smallest rectangle, which encloses the sign message or logo. The sign area of a freestanding multiple face or volumetric sign shall be determined by totaling the area of all faces. The maximum aggregate or total sign area on a lot shall include the sign area of all signs. Sign, blade means a wall sign that projects away from the wall at an angle sufficient to provide visibility to at least two sides of the sign. Sign, canopy/awning means a visual message on an awning or canopy which is constructed according to the requirements of the building code, are constructed of flexible translucent or fabric type material, is an integral part of the building, and is consistent with the architecture and design of the building. Sign, changing sign means a sign whose message can be readily changed, either by manual or automatic means. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 6 of 20 Sign, flashing sign means any illuminated sign, which is not a changing sign which emits an intermittent or flashing light, or creates the illusion of intermittent or flashing light by means of animation. Sign, freestanding sign means a sign, which is self-supporting usually by uprights placed on or in the ground. Sign, Garage sale means a sign advertising a garage sale per section 36-82(b)(9). Sign, illuminated sign means any sign, which has characters, letters, figures, designs or outlines which are either internally or externally illuminated by an artificial light source. Sign, permanent means any sign that is not a temporary sign, real estate sign, political sign, project information sign or pedestrian sign. Sign, pedestrian portable sign means a temporary sign, which is usually constructed of durable materials and is designed to be readily moved from one location to another. (ex. Sandwich board sign or any item containing a message) For purposes of this ordinance, any sign mounted to, or conveyed by means of, a vehicle shall not be considered a pedestrian sign. Sign, political sign means a temporary sign, which advertises or promotes a candidate for public office, a political party, or an issue to be considered in a public election. Sign, private directional sign means a sign, which includes no advertising placed on private property for the purpose of regulating, guiding, warning traffic or persons, or providing other safety information. Sign, project information sign means a temporary directional sign displayed during the time that a construction project on a public roadway or in an approved redevelopment district is underway. Sign, public sign means any sign defined as a traffic control sign in the Highway Traffic Regulation Act M.S.A. § 169.97 et seq., any identification sign installed in a public park by a public authority, or any other identification, regulatory, or warning sign approved by the city council for installation on public land. Sign, real estate sign means a temporary sign, which advertises the development, sale, lease or rental of land or buildings. A real estate sign is designed to be displayed for a limited period of time and is not permanently fixed to the land or a structure. Real estate signs may be constructed of paper, cloth, canvas, wood or any other light and non-durable material. Sign, rooftop sign means a sign attached to any roof or any sign attached to a building in any other manner that allows more than ten percent of its area to extend above the wall or parapet wall of the side of the building on which the sign is located. Sign, rotating sign means a sign or a portion of a sign which moves in a rotating, oscillating or similar manner other than changing signs. Sign, temporary sign means a sign designed to be displayed for a limited period of time that is not permanently fixed to the land or a structure. Temporary signs may be constructed of paper, cloth, canvas, cardboard, wood or any other light and non-durable material. Visual messages on awnings or canopies which are constructed according to the requirements of the building code, are constructed of flexible translucent or fabric type material, and which are an integral part of the building shall not be considered temporary signs. Sign, wall sign means a sign attached to or erected against an exterior wall surface of a building or structure. Supergraphics means any mosaic, mural, painting or graphic art or combination thereof which is professionally applied to a building that does not contain any brand name, product name, letters of the alphabet spelling or St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 7 of 20 abbreviating the name of any product, company, profession or business, or any logo, trademark, trade name, or other commercial message. (d) Exempt signs. The following signs are exempt from the provisions of this section: (1) Public signs. (2) Private directional signs less than four square feet in area. (2)(3) The United States flag, other national flags, the flags of all the states of the United States and the city flag. (3)(4) Supergraphics. (4)(5) A building address which does not exceed 12 inches in height. (5)(6) Signs on courtesy benches, if they comply with the requirements of chapter 8 of this Code. (6)(7) Signs on vehicles when the vehicle is being used in the normal day-to-day operation of a business. (e) Prohibited signs. The following signs are prohibited in all use districts: (1) Flashing signs. (2) Signs on or over the public rights-of-way unless the city council grants permission for a temporary sign on or over the public rights-of-way for a period of time not to exceed ten days. (3) Searchlights, beacons, strobe lights or other illuminated signs emitting a beam consisting of a collection or concentration of rays of light. (4) Rooftop signs. (5) Rotating signs. (6) Billboards. (7) Off-premises signs. (8) Inflatable signs and tethered balloons. (9) Signs painted directly on a building. (10) Signs mounted on chimneys, rooftop equipment, observation towers, flagpoles, cooling towers, elevator penthouses, commercial antennas, communication towers, belfries, church spires and cupolas. (f) General provisions. Subject to the following regulations, signs are a permitted accessory use in all use districts: (1) Permit required. A sign permit shall be issued prior to the installation of any sign. a. Exception. Real estate signs less than 10 square feet in area, political signs and garage sale signs are exempt from the permit requirements. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 8 of 20 (2) b. Submission requirements. The following information shall be submitted prior to a sign permit being issued: a. 1. Application form and fee. A fee shall be charged per sign, except that decorative banners and private directional signs less than 4 square feet per sign face shall be charged one fee per proposal submitted for review and approval. b. 2. Site plan and building elevations, if applicable. c. 3. Two sets of drawings for each sign that is proposed. (23) Required yards. No sign shall be erected or maintained in any required yard in any use district with the following exceptions: except that a wall sign may extend into the required yard a distance not to exceed 18 inches. a. In the C-1, C-2 and M-X districts, when the principal building is located more than 20 feet from the front property line, the required setbacks for a freestanding sign shall be 20 feet the required yard for any sign less than 200 square feet in sign area shall be 5 feet. All other signs shall have a required yard of 20 feet unless exempted below. b. In the C-1, C-2 and M-X districts, a blade sign may project into the required front yard if the sign meets the following requirements: 1. The sign is attached to a wall in such a manner that meets the building code; and 2. The lowest portion of the sign is no closer than 8 feet to the ground; and 3. No portion of the sign shall extend more than 4 feet from the building, and in no instances shall the sign project into the public right-of-way. 4. The sign face does not exceed 9 square feet. c. Except as allowed under (3)b of this section, a wall sign may extend into the required yard a distance not to exceed 18 inches, and a canopy or awning sign may extend into the required yard as allowed by Section 36-73(a)(5) and Section36-73(b)(3), except that structures that do not meet the current front or side yard requirements shall place signs flush against the front or side walls. d b. Signs may be placed on the front or side walls of an existing nonconforming structure even though the structure does not meet the current yard requirements. e d. A sign may be placed on the face of an existing canopy or awning located on a structure classified as conforming or lawful nonconforming use if the sign does not extend above the top or below the bottom of the vertical portion of the canopy or awning face. e. Real estate signs meeting the standards set forth in Section 36-362(h)(1). f. Private directional signs meeting the standards set forth in Section 36-362(h)(2). g. Pedestrian signs meeting the standards set forth in Section 36-362(h)(4). h. Decorative Banners meeting the standards set forth in Section 36-362(h)(5). i. Political signs meeting the standards set forth in Section 36-362(h)(6). St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 9 of 20 j. Project Information signs meeting the standards set forth in Section 36-362(h)(7). (34) Freestanding signs. Except for private directional, project information, real estate, political, decorative banners, and temporary signs, no more than one freestanding sign shall be permitted on an individual street frontage of a lot or PUD site. (45) Parking areas. Signs shall not be placed in or restrict access to required parking spaces or loading berths. (56) Multi-tenant building. The property owner or the property owner's designee shall be responsible for allocating the allowable sign area among the tenants of a multi-tenant building. If the property owner does not allocate the sign area, the city may do so based on the proportion of floor area or tenant frontage occupied by each tenant. (67) Lighting. Direct rays or glare of light from an illuminated sign shall not be visible from public rights-of-way or property other than that on which the illuminated sign is located. Any external source of illumination must be provided with shields or lenses which concentrate the light onto the sign. (78) Electrical wiring The electrical energy used to illuminate freestanding signs may not be from an overhead source but must be buried underground. The conduit and wiring to all signs must be concealed. (89) Wind load. All signs shall be designed and constructed to withstand wind loads of at least 30 pounds per square foot of area and the dead loads required by the building code and other ordinances of the city. (910) Anchoring. All signs shall be safely and securely anchored to their supporting structure. All attachments and movable parts shall be securely fastened. No sign shall be anchored to another sign. (101) Bracing. All signs shall be constructed with internal or hidden bracing. External bracing shall be eliminated whenever practicable. Exposed wire, cable and chain braces are prohibited. (112) Glass. All glass must be safety or tempered glass, and designed and installed to withstand a wind load of 30 pounds per square foot. (123) Durable Materials. All permanent sign faces and supports shall be made of durable materials. Canvas, cloth and similar materials such as flexible vinyl, are not allowed except for canopies, awnings and temporary signs other than pedestrian signs. All permanent wood signs must be constructed of durable hardwood products. The wood must be treated against rot and decay, and cannot be constructed of plywood, chipped wood, hardboard, fiber board or similar materials. Sign Support structures shall not be constructed of wood. Incombustible material. All sign faces and supports shall be constructed of incombustible material. (134) Maintenance. All signs shall be kept in good repair and free from peeling paint, rust, damaged or rotted supports or framework, broken or missing faces, facing or missing letters. Faded or torn canopies, awnings and banners shall be removed or replaced. If faded or torn canopies, awnings and banners are not removed or replaced by the owner within 30 days of notification by the city, the city may remove them and assess the cost of removal to the property. (145) Maintenance grounds. The premises surrounding all ground signs shall be maintained by the property owner or tenant of the property on which they are located in a safe, clean, and sanitary condition free and clear of all rubbish and weeds. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 10 of 20 (156) Removal and repair. Any structure from which a sign has been moved or removed shall be repaired with a material which matches the existing background. (167) Removal of painted signs. Any structure from which a painted sign is removed shall be repainted, sandblasted or treated in a manner which makes the former sign not visible. (178) Signs not to be traffic hazard. No sign shall be installed in a way that obstructs clear vision of persons using the streets or at any location that, because of its position, shape, or color, interferes with, obstructs the view of, or may be confused with any authorized traffic sign, signal or device. No sign, other than public or project informational signs, shall be visible from a public street which makes use of the words "Stop," "Look," "Danger," or any other word, phrase, symbol or character which may interfere with, mislead or confuse persons using the public streets. (189) Pedestrian clearance. Any sign which projects over a sidewalk or other pedestrianway must be not less than eight feet above ground level. (1920) Sign area and height. The allowable sign area and height are established by table 36-362A in this subsection (f)(20) and adjustments to table 36-362A in subsection (g) of this section according to the parcel size or PUD site size and use district in which the sign is located. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 11 of 20 TABLE 36-362A SIGN AREA AND HEIGHT PERMANENT TEMPORARY REAL ESTATE Use Maximum SIGNAGE SIGNAGE SIGNAGE District & Sign Maximum Maximum Maximum Maximum Lot Size Height Total Area Size of Total Area Total Area (sq ft) (feet) (sq ft) Sign Face (sq ft) (sq ft) (sq ft) SIGN AREA AND HEIGHT Maximum Maximum Total Area Use Maximum Size of size for Maximum District Maximum Permanent Permanent Temporary Total Area Size Sign Height Total Area Sign Face Signs Size for Real (sq ft) (feet) (sq ft) (sq ft) (sq ft) Estate Signs (sq ft) R-1: 6 2 2 6 6 R-2: 6 2 2 6 6 R-3: 0--15,000: 6 2 2 6 6 Over 15,000: 6 25 25 25 60 R-4: 6 25 25 25 80 R-C: 0-20,000: 15 40 40 25 80 Over 20,000: 15 80 60 25 80 C-1 0-10,000: 25 100 75 80 80 10,000- 20,000: 25 150 100 80 80 Over 20,000: 25 200 150 80 80 C-2 0-10,000: 25 100 75 80 80 10,000- 20,000: 25 200 100 80 80 20,000- 50,000: 25 250 150 80 80 50,000- 200,000: 25 300 150 80 80 Over 200,000: 25 400 300 80 80 O 0-20,000: 25 100 100 80 80 20,000- 50,000: 25 200 100 80 80 50,000- 100,000: 25 300 150 80 80 Over 100,000: 25 500 300 80 80 I-P 0-20,000: 25 100 75 80 80 20,000- St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 12 of 20 50,000: 25 200 100 80 80 Over 50,000: 25 250 150 80 80 I-G 0-20,000: 25 100 75 80 80 20,000- 50,000: 25 200 100 80 80 Over 50,000: 25 250 150 80 80 M-X: 15 per approval 150 50 80 (g) Adjustments to table 36-362A. Signs which qualify for any adjustment permitted under this section shall conform to all other sections of this chapter. (1) In an R district, identification signs may be permitted for religious institutions, libraries, museums, art galleries, schools, golf courses, country clubs, community centers, colleges, universities, hospitals and sanitariums in excess of the size allowed in table 36-362A based on the following criteria: a. Size. The sign shall be proportional to the size of the facility, need for signage, street frontage, location, visibility, and development in the area. The maximum sign size shall not exceed 20 square feet per sign face on a local street, 40 square feet per sign face on a minor collector street, and 60 square feet per sign face on any other street frontage. b. Height. No freestanding sign shall exceed 15 feet high. c. Lighting. Signs shall be lighted only by backlighting, internal lighting or indirect lighting. d. Design. The materials and design of signs shall be integrated with the site and buildings on the site by using compatible materials and consistent design features. If freestanding, the sign shall be placed in a landscaped bed equal in area to twice the size of the combined sign faces. e. Location. A freestanding sign shall not be less than 25 feet from any property line. f. Sign purpose. The principal purpose of any sign permitted under this section shall be to identify the public or institutional use made of the property. (2) For any building not located in an R district which is eight or more stories or 85 or more feet in height, the maximum size for any one sign may be increased to 400 square feet, if the sign is located on the wall of the building more than 75 feet above the ground. (3) The maximum size for any one real estate sign may be increased to 200 square feet for any building not located in an R district which is six or more stories or 65 or more feet in height, if the sign is located on the wall of the building more than 55 feet above the ground. (4) In the C-1, C-2, O, I-G and I-P districts, the total area of all wall, canopy and awning signs on a building which meets the following outlined conditions shall not be included in calculating the aggregate sign area on a lot: a. The building shall be a shopping center or a building containing multiple tenants including and limited to retail, private entertainment (indoors), restaurants with liquor, restaurants without liquor, services, food services, printing process, banks, studios and showrooms or a single-tenant building housing one of the land uses named in this subsection (g)(4)a. if such single-tenant building is located on a single lot with other principal buildings and is part of an approved planned unit development under the provisions of this chapter. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 13 of 20 b. The area of all wall, canopy or awning signs permitted by this section shall not exceed seven percent of the wall area of the building. If a shopping center or multitenant building contains land uses other than those listed in subsection (g)(4)a. of this section, the amount of wall area which may be used to calculate allowable signage shall be determined by multiplying the total wall area of the building by a percentage equal to the percentage of the gross floor area of the building occupied by the land uses listed in subsection (g)(4)a. of this section. c. No individual wall, canopy or awning sign shall exceed 150 square feet in area, except in the C-1 district where the maximum area of any individual sign shall not exceed 100 square feet. (5) The maximum size of the sign face may be increased by 20 percent for a property which is not located in an R district if the sign is located at least 100 feet from any public right-of-way. (6) The sign which identifies a contiguous group of buildings under a single ownership within a single complex shall be exempt from the total sign area requirements if the property on which the sign is erected is not located in an R district. The maximum size of the sign face shall be regulated by table 36-362A. (7) Real estate signs, Private directional signs and decorative banners are not included in the calculation of maximum total area of signage permitted on a site. (h) Special provisions. In addition to the general provisions contained in subsection (f) of this section, these special provisions apply to the following types of signs: (1) Real estate sign. Real estate signs shall be regulated as follows: a. A real estate sign which does not exceed ten square feet in area or and ten feet in height is exempt from the required yard restrictions. b. A real estate sign may only be displayed on the property on which the sign is advertising the sale, lease or rental of. c. A real estate sign may only be displayed until the advertised property is sold, leased or rented. (2) Private directional signs are regulated as follows: a. A private directional sign that does not exceed 4 square feet in sign face area and which does not exceed eight square feet in area or 42 inches in height, shall be is exempt from the required yard restrictions, and shall not be included in the maximum total area for permanent signs identified in table 36-362A. b. A private directional sign that exceeds 4 square feet in sign face area, and/or 42 inches in height shall be subject to all permanent sign regulations. c. All private directional signs shall be located on the property, or within an approved planned unit development, on which the business receiving the benefit of the private directional sign is located. (3) Temporary signs. Temporary signs are regulated as follows: a. With the exception of Pedestrian signs as defined below, temporary signs may be permitted on a lot for a total of 30 days in any calendar year, which may be divided into no more than four separate times during that calendar year. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 14 of 20 b. The total sign area of all temporary and permanent signs on a lot, including pedestrian signs, shall not exceed the total permitted in table 36-362A. c. A temporary sign shall not direct persons to or advertise a product or service not available on the premises where the sign is located. d. Temporary signs, other than pedestrian signs, may be constructed of paper, cloth, canvas, wood or any other light and non-durable material. e. Pedestrian Signs are temporary signs further regulated as follows: 1. Pedestrian signs may be displayed in the C, O and MX districts only. 2. No portion of the sign shall project beyond a cube measuring 3 feet wide by 3 feet deep by 4 feet in height. 3. Pedestrian signs may be placed up to the property line, subject to Section 36-76. No portion of the sign shall be placed in, or project into the public right-of-way, and any such sign shall be located so that it does not obstruct pedestrian or vehicular movement or impede pedestrian or vehicular visibility. 4. The sign may be displayed during business hours only. The sign shall be stored inside a building during non-business hours and during severe weather conditions. 5. The sign shall not be placed in such a manner that it obstructs the visibility of another property's permanent signage. 6. No place of business shall display more than 1 pedestrian sign at any time and the total of all pedestrian and other temporary signs on the property shall not exceed the total allowed in table 36-362A. 7. Pedestrian signs that are maintained in good repair and in accordance with all ordinance provisions may be permitted for up to one calender year. The Zoning Adminsitrator may revoke a permit and remove any sign that does not meet the ordinance requirements, or is creating a public hazard. After one year, a new permit may be applied for. 8. Pedestrian signs may be constructed of wood, metal, non-flexible plastic or any other durable material. (4) Decorative banners. Decorative banners are allowed in the R-C, C-2, and O and M-X districts and are regulated as follows: a. All decorative banners shall be an integral part of the overall design scheme of a project. A decorative banner shall be deemed to be a part of the integral design scheme if the following conditions exist: 1. The decorative banners are compatible with the architectural character of the building in terms of rhythm of openings, horizontal or vertical emphasis, and stylistic features of the building in color, pattern and shape. 2. The decorative banners are considered to be in harmony and unity with various elements within the site and also within the larger context of the area or corridor. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 15 of 20 3. The location and placement of the banners provides a harmonious rhythm to the building and site elements. 4. The zoning administrator shall determine whether any banner meets the design criteria set forth by this subsection (h)(4). b. No single decorative banner may exceed eight square feet in area. c. Decorative banners shall be securely fastened on the full length of at least two sides of the decorative banner to a structure which was erected for another principal purpose, such as a light standard. d. Faded or torn decorative banners shall be removed or replaced. If faded or torn banners are not removed or replaced by the owner within 30 days of notification by the city, the city may remove them and assess the cost of removal to the property. e. No decorative banner may display a commercial message. Commercial messages are allowed on other signage in accordance with this section. f. Decorative banners shall be exempt from the total allowable sign area for a parcel. The maximum aggregate area for decorative banners shall not exceed 15 percent of the total allowable sign area for a parcel. g. The top of a decorative banner may not exceed 15 feet in height from the ground. h. No decorative banner may be displayed within any required yard. (5) Political signs. a. Political signs are permitted in the front yard. b. No political sign may be placed on the public right-of-way or any publicly owned property, including boulevard trees and utility poles. c. No political sign shall have more than two faces. The total square footage of sign area on one lot shall not exceed 64 square feet, except that political signs of any size are permitted from August 1 in a state general election year until ten days following the state general election. d. No sign shall be placed which obstructs the vision at an intersection or otherwise constitutes a hazard to public safety. e. Signs sponsoring candidates for public office must be removed within ten days after an election has been held unless the candidate is one who qualifies as a candidate to be named on the ballot at a general election after a primary election. In that case, signs erected or placed before the primary election by or for that candidate may be left in place until ten days after the general election. In any election which is not a primary, all political signs shall be removed within ten days after such election. (6) Project information signs. a. Purpose. The purpose of a project information sign is to identify a business or group of businesses affected by a construction project that is underway on a roadway or in an approved redevelopment district to direct traffic or convey that the business or group of businesses is open St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 16 of 20 to the public. Project information signs shall not be used for the purpose of advertising products, services or events. b. Design. Project information signs shall have black letters on a "federal highway orange" background. A project information sign displayed on public property must conform to the Highway Traffic Regulation Act, M.S.A. § 169.97 et seq., for informational signs and if displayed on private property, may not exceed the area and height requirements of this section for signs on that parcel. c. Placement. The city council shall be responsible for approving the general location of project information signs. Such signs may not be permitted on a roof. d. Duration. Project information signs will be removed when the city determines that: 1. The business identified discontinues operation; 2. The construction work has been completed; or 3. Access to the business is no longer affected by the construction project. e. Plan development. A plan for the project information signs may be initiated by either the affected businesses or city staff. If developed by city staff, the plan shall be reviewed by the affected businesses prior to transmitting the plan to the city council for consideration. f. Installation. The city will be responsible for the fabrication and installation of project information signs installed on public property. The cost of fabricating, installing and maintaining the signs will be paid by the affected businesses. If a project information sign is displayed on private property, it is the responsibility of the property owner to fabricate and install the sign according to the approved signage plan and to pay all costs, including sign permit fees, incident to the fabrication and placement of the project information signs. (7) Signs which advertise businesses on freeways and highways. a. Application may be made to the city for an increase in maximum sign height on a lot having all of the following characteristics: 1. The lot abuts the right-of-way of an interstate freeway or state highway or abuts a frontage road immediately adjacent to an interstate freeway or state highway. 2. The lot does not have and is not permitted to have directional signage on the interstate freeway or state highway directing the public to the subject lot. 3. The lot has no other option permitted by this chapter to provide the requested square footage of signage visible from 50 percent of, at a plane 3.5 feet above, the portion of the interstate freeway or highway adjacent to the lot. b. To be eligible for an increase in sign height, the second point of all cross sectional drawings, as described in subsection (h)(7)b.2.ii. of this section, must be located such that more than 50 percent of the plane above the traveled surface of the interstate freeway or state highway is obstructed from the first point, as described in subsection (h)(7)b.2.i. of this section. An application for increased sign height shall be accompanied by the following drawings drawn to scale: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 17 of 20 1. A site plan showing the location of the proposed sign, property lines of the subject property, road alignments of adjacent streets and highways and the locations of any cross sectional drawings necessary to analyze the request. 2. Cross sectional drawings necessary to analyze the request showing the entire traveled surface of the freeway or state highway, any retaining walls or fences, any frontage roads, proposed sign location and height and a straight line (referred to as the "sight line") drawn between two points described as follows: i. The first point situated on a line perpendicular to the earth's surface at the location of the proposed sign passing through the center of the sign face and 25 feet above the centerline of the nearest adjacent street or the ground level of the base of the proposed sign, whichever results in a higher elevation. ii. The second point situated on a plane surface 3.5 feet above and parallel to the traveled surface of the interstate freeway or state highway, located by projecting a line from the first point to its intersection with the plane surface so that the resulting point of intersection of the line with the plane surface (the second point) is as close as possible to the first point while not passing through an intervening obstruction that would prevent visibility. c. The zoning administrator may approve an application to increase sign height which meets the criteria set forth in this subsection (h)(7)c. where the proposed sign plan meets each of the following requirements: 1. The sign is no higher than necessary to permit the bottom edge of the sign face to be visible from at least 50 percent of the traveled surface of the interstate or state highway. 2. The top of the sign face is no more than 12 feet above the bottom of the sign face. 3. The location of the sign is such that the increase in sign height is minimized. 4. The sign face shall not exceed 150 square feet. 5. The sign lighting is either internal or indirect and no light source is visible beyond the property lines of the lot. 6. Illuminated signs located within 400 feet of the structures used for residential purposes shall have its illuminated portion shielded from view of such residential structures. (i) Nonconforming signs. (1) General. A nonconforming sign shall not be rebuilt, relocated, altered or modified in size or height unless it is made fully conforming with this section. (2) Removal. Except for changing signs or billboards, if a face or message on a nonconforming sign is removed, the entire sign and sign structure must be removed or made to conform with this section. (3) Temporary sign. Temporary and portable signs in existence at the time of passage of the ordinance from which this section is derived which do not conform to this section shall be removed or made to conform within 30 days of the effective date of the ordinance from which this section is derived. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 18 of 20 (4) Real estate signs. Real estate signs in existence as of the date of the ordinance from which this section is derived was adopted which do not conform with the requirements of this section shall be removed or made to conform within 120 days of the effective date of the ordinance from which this section is derived. (5) Billboards. a. Any billboard in existence as of the date of the ordinance from which this section is derived was adopted may remain in place if it is not increased in sign area or height and is maintained in conformance with the general provisions of this chapter. The following are not permitted on billboards: 1. Flashing signs. 2. Changing signs, unless they are limited to a display of either time, temperature or stock market indices. b. The maximum height of a billboard shall be 35 feet, including extensions, measured as required by subsection (c) of this section. c. Billboards which have been destroyed or damaged must be removed when the cost of repair equals more than 50 percent of the appraised physical value of the structure. (6) Any sign installed under a sign plan which has been approved by the city council in conjunction with a PUD or other development plan may remain as a conforming sign if the sign is maintained according to the conditions imposed in the resolution granting the sign plan. If any additional signage is to be installed on the property, the additional signage must fully conform with the requirements of this section. (76) All lawful nonconforming signs existing at the time of passage of the ordinance from which this section is derived, except temporary signs, real estate signs and billboards, must be removed or made to conform by January 1, 2000, unless the existing sign was made nonconforming by a provision of this section. Those nonconforming signs must be removed or made to conform to this section by January 1, 2005. (j) Forfeiture. Any sign installed or placed on public property shall be forfeited to the public and subject to confiscation, unless it conforms to the requirements of this section. In addition to other remedies granted to it by this section, the city shall have the right to recover from the owner or person placing the sign the full costs of removal and disposal of the sign in a civil action. Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case File 03-24-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 September 2, 2003 Reviewed for Administration St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 19 of 20 City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney 03-24-ZA:res-ord SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO._____________ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTIONS 36-82(b)(4)(5), 36-82(b)(9)b.3, 36-362(c), 36-362(d), 36-362(f), 36-362(f)(3), 36-362(f)(13), Table 36-362A, 36-362(g)(4)(5)(7), 36-362(h), and 36-362(i)(6)(7) FOR PERMANENT AND TEMPORARY SIGNS This ordinance amends the Ordinance Code relative to creating consistency, clarifying and amending standards for permanent, temporary and canopy/awning signs, sign permitting requirements, and approved sign plans. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: September 11, 2003 03-24-ZAsum:res-ord St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4a - 2nd reading Signage amendmnt Page 20 of 20 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4b- TGI Fridays sign variance Page 1 of 1 4b. Motion to accept withdrawal of Carlson Restaurants Worldwide application for a variance to the sign ordinance to increase the maximum allowable square footage of signage and number of pylon signs for the property. Background: A special permit was approved in 1978 to allow the construction of a nine-story office building with bank drive-in facility. That permit was subsequently amended in 1979 to allow the construction of a class-1 restaurant (TGI Friday's). RSP Architects applied on behalf of Carlson Restaurants Worldwide for a major amendment to the existing special permit. The amendment would be to replace the approved exterior elevations with the new proposed elevations. A variance is also being requested to allow 778.2 square feet of signage instead of the sign ordinance's maximum allowable sign area of 500 square feet. The Planning Commission reviewed this application at it's July 16, 2003 meeting, and on two 4-0 votes recommended the City Council approve the major amendment to the existing special permit, and also recommended approval of the variance to allow 239 square feet of signage more than the 500 square feet allowed by code with the condition that the variance expire on January 1, 2005. The City Council reviewed the application, together with the Planning Commission's recommendation at the August 18, 2003 Council meeting. The Council on two 7-0 votes voted to approve the major amendment to the special permit, and to direct staff to draft a Resolution of denial to be brought forward to the Council for consideration at the September 2, 2003 City Council meeting. Since the August 18th Council meeting, staff received a letter from Carlson Restaurants Worldwide requesting a withdrawal of their application for a sign variance. This letter is attached for your review. Attachments: August 26, 2003 Letter of Withdrawal from Carlson Restaurants Worldwide. Prepared by: Gary Morrison, Assistant Zoning Administrator Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4c - Res Final Pymt Allied blacktop Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. 03 - _____ RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON CONTRACT SEALCOATING CITY PROJECT NO. 03-08 CONTRACT NO. 76-03 ALLIED BLACKTOP 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 July 7, 2003, Allied Blacktop has satisfactorily completed the 2003 contract sealcoating, as per Contract No. 76-03. 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 September 2, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4d - Bid Tab GAC Page 1 of 1 4d Bid Tabulation: Purchase of Granular Activated Carbon (GAC) Supply Contract. Motion to authorize execution of a contract with Calgon Carbon Corporation for the purchase of GAC in the amount of $52,400 Background: Granular Activated Carbon Treatment Plants are located at 2935 Jersey Avenue (Water Treatment Plant No. 1) and at 4601 W. 41st Street (Water Treatment Plant No. 4). These plants came on line in 1986 and 1993, respectively. These GAC plants treat drinking water contaminated by the Reilly Tar and Chemical Plant. This treatment is effective in removing polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) contaminants. The GAC absorbs the PAH’s as the contaminated water passes through the filters. The GAC eventually becomes loaded with the PAH particles, is no longer effective in the removal of the PAH’s, and must be replaced. The GAC treated water is continually monitored to measure the amount of PAH’s removed. When the level of PAH’s in the treated water increases to the Drinking Water Advisory Level the GAC has to be scheduled for replacement. Based on years of experience, the replacement of the GAC is now done annually at these plants. Bids were received on August 20, 2003 for the supply and regeneration of GAC for Water Treatment Plants No. 1 and 4. An advertisement for bids was published in the St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor on July 30, 2003. A summary of the bid results is as follows: Bidder Bid Amount Calgon Carbon Corporation $ 52,400.00 Norit Americas, Inc. $ 54,320.00 Financial Considerations: The bid amount of $52,400 is about a 2% decrease from the 2002 contract with Calgon Carbon Corporation which totaled $53,600. The 2003 Water Utility Budget provides $60,000 for this GAC exchange at Water Treatment Plants No. 1 and 4. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the contract be awarded to the low bidder, Calgon Carbon Corporation for the contract amount of $52,400. Prepared by: Michael Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4e - Henn Cty Cooperation - Dispatch Page 1 of 2 4e. Motion to adopt Resolution requesting cooperation from Hennepin County in researching feasibility of County operated dispatch services for the City of St. Louis Park. Background: Police Chief John Luse has been pursuing options for consolidation of public safety dispatching services. He had asked the Hennepin County Sheriff if the Sheriff’s Department would be able to take over dispatching for St. Louis Park and Golden Valley. John’s concern was that he was aware that the current Sheriff’s dispatch center is near capacity and may not be able to add two additional cities without incurring considerable expense. The Sheriff had asked John to prepare a letter asking the Sheriff under what terms a takeover could occur, specifically would the County charge the City to dispatch. John discussed this issue with City Council and advised that he would be sending such a letter and the letter was distributed to Council. When Sheriff Pat McGowan presented his report to the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners on the impacts of taking on the two cities he indicated that he would need to expand the technical capacity of the dispatch system and staffing but that building facilities would not require expansion. The Sheriff pointed out in his presentation that he assumed the existing County Board policy of providing dispatch services to suburban cities at no charge would continue to apply in this expansion hence the costs of the expansion would be borne by the County. There was considerable discussion on this issue and many related issues such as staffing, record systems etc. At the end of the conversation, County Board Chair, Mike Opat, asked if the St. Louis Park (and Golden Valley) City Council had acted on this request. We responded that while the City Council had been informed of the request and concurred with making it, that they had not taken action. Mr. Opat suggested that before the County Board give additional consideration to this issue that they should have confirmation that the City Council was supportive. The dilemma that staff has in presenting this item to Council is that the action proposed for Council is really no action at all. We are not proposing that the City Council support the County takeover of dispatch since we do not have any cost information. So we are asking the Council to support the request made by the Police Chief for information about the terms of a takeover and any potential costs. Essentially the City Council will be supporting a request for information from the County. While it is difficult to see how this action advances the discussion, we feel it is necessary to comply with the request of the County Board Chair. In a related note, the Sheriff’s Department has indicated that it does not intend to participate in our consolidation study but the County Administrator’s Office has advised us that they do intend to participate. Attachments: Resolution Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4e - Henn Cty Cooperation - Dispatch Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 03-______ RESOLUTION REQUESTING COOPERATION FROM HENNEPIN COUNTY IN RESEARCHING FEASIBILITY OF COUNTY OPERATED DISPATCH SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota and other Minnesota cities are experiencing budget reductions which may impact the ability of cities to deliver cost-effective dispatch services; and WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park is considering the possibility of entering into an agreement with Hennepin County whereby public safety dispatch services would be provided to the City of St. Louis Park by the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department; and WHEREAS, in order to move forward in evaluating this option, the Police Chief of the City of St. Louis Park has requested the cooperation of the Hennepin County Board and the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department in providing us with information, statistics and an on- going dialogue about services which could be provided to the City of St. Louis Park by Hennepin County should we choose this option. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that we support the efforts of our staff to evaluate options available to us for the provision of public safety dispatch services to our residents and businesses and further request that the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners, Sheriff’s Department, and other Hennepin County staff cooperate fully in assisting us to evaluate the possibility of entering into an agreement with the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Department for dispatch services. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4f - MCWD Maint Agmt Page 1 of 3 4f Motion to approve Stormwater Facility Maintenance Agreement with the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District to sweep ten (10) local streets in the Spring and Fall of each year. Background: The City has submitted a permit application to the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) for the construction of sidewalk improvements at the following ten (10) locations: • Alabama Avenue from 36th Street to 37th Street • Alabama Avenue from Goodrich Avenue to 39th Street • Texas Avenue from Minnetonka Blvd. to 31st Street • Texas Avenue from 32 ½ Street to 36th/Walker Street • Aquila Avenue from 36th Street to 34th Street • Aquila Avenue from Highway 7 to 37th Street • Wooddale Avenue from Oxford Street to Highway 100 entrance ramp • Wooddale Avenue from Highway 7 to 36th Street • 36th Street from Wooddale Avenue to Alabama Avenue • Park Commons Drive from Monterey Drive to Quentin Avenue The permit will cover sidewalk construction being completed under Project No. 03-01A (3rd year of the City Sidewalk Program) and Project No. 03-11 (Park Commons Drive sidewalk construction). As a condition of the permit issuance and in accordance with the MCWD rules a Maintenance Agreement must be executed with the Watershed District. The proposed Agreement with the MCWD commits the City to insuring the above roadway segments are swept twice a year, once in the Spring and again in the Fall. The City’s current sweeping operations meet the permit requirements. No additional work effort is needed to meet this sweeping commitment. This agreement is similar to others that have been approved with the Watershed District for the other sidewalk construction projects. The City Attorney, Mr. Tom Scott, has reviewed the proposed Maintenance Agreement and authorized its submittal to the City Council for consideration. Attachment: Agreement Prepared by: Maria 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: 090203 - 4f - MCWD Maint Agmt Page 2 of 3 STORMWATER FACILITY MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT This Maintenance Agreement is made this day of , 2003, by and between the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as “City”, and the MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT, a public body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Minnesota, hereinafter referred to as “MCWD” to provide for the street sweeping roadway facilities constructed pursuant to MCWD permit application number 03-XXX. WHEREAS, the City has applied for a permit from the MCWD pursuant to MCWD Rule N, application attached hereto as Attachment 1; and WHEREAS, the property which is the subject of this Agreement is described in Attachment 1 to this Agreement; and WHEREAS, the streets and other parts of the construction project will be public improvements under the control of the City and County, and WHEREAS, MCWD Rule N provides, “A maintenance agreement shall be submitted for: stormwater treatment ponds, outlet structures for such ponds, culverts, outfall structures and all other stormwater facilities. This maintenance agreement shall specify methods, schedule and responsible parties for maintenance and must include at a minimum, the elements contained in the District’s Maintenance Agreement Form.” NOW, THEREFORE IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED by and between the parties: 1. The City or its designee will upon completion of the public improvements and in accordance with its local Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan sweep the following locations in the spring and fall of each year, and remove all sediment and debris: • Alabama Avenue from 36th Street to 37th Street • Alabama Avenue from Goodrich Avenue to 39th Street • Texas Avenue from Minnetonka Blvd. to 31st Street • Texas Avenue from 32 ½ Street to 36th/Walker Street • Aquila Avenue from 36th Street to 34th Street • Aquila Avenue from Highway 7 to 37th Street • Wooddale Avenue from Oxford Street to Highway 100 entrance ramp • Wooddale Avenue from Highway 7 to 36th Street • 36th Street from Wooddale Avenue to Alabama Avenue • Park Commons Drive from Monterey Drive to Quentin Avenue a. Violation of the inspection and/or maintenance provisions of this agreement is a violation of the MCWD permit for the project for which the MCWD may take action against Applicant. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4f - MCWD Maint Agmt Page 3 of 3 b. This agreement will be for an initial term of five years and will automatically renew every five years thereafter unless otherwise agreed to by the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto execute this Maintenance Agreement. Dated: CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK By: Jeffrey W. Jacobs, Mayor By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager Dated: MINNEHAHA CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT By: Its: STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF HENNEPIN) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of , 2003, by Jeffrey W. Jacobs and Charles W. Meyer, respectively the Mayor and City Manager of the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota municipal corporation, on behalf of the corporation and pursuant to the authority granted by its City Council. Notary Public THIS INSTRUCMENT WAS DRAFTED BY: Campbell Knutson Professional Association 1380 Corporate Center Curve, Suite 317 Eagan, Minnesota 55121 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4g - Plan Com minutes 8-6-03 Page 1 of 7 OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA August 6, 2003 -- 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Phillip Finkelstein, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian MEMBERS ABSENT: Ken Gothberg STAFF PRESENT: Judie Erickson, Julie Grove, Janet Jeremiah, Nancy Sells OTHERS PRESENT: Greg Ingraham, Consultant 1. Call to order - Roll Call Chair Robertson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes of July 16, 2003 Commissioner Morris moved to approve the minutes of July 16, 2003. The motion passed 4-0-1. (Commissioner Bissonnette abstained). 3. Hearings: A. Case No. 03-44-PUD--Request of Methodist Hospital for a Preliminary PUD to allow a phased expansion--6700 Excelsior Boulevard Planning Associate Julie Grove presented a staff report. Ms. Grove reported that Methodist Hospital is requesting approval for a preliminary PUD for Phase I and concept approval for future phases, which the applicant is calling Phase II. Ms. Grove reported that a PUD modification to the R-C District height restriction is also being requested for the existing eight-story hospital building and a mechanical penthouse on top of the proposed six-story Heart and Vascular Center. As a condition of approval, staff is recommending that elevations of the entire hospital be submitted prior to City Council consideration; at this time, only elevations for the proposed Heart and Vascular Center have been received. Staff is recommending the amount of metal be reduced or material changed on the penthouse in order to make it appear less industrial. Ms. Grove said the floor and ground floor area ratios factor in the entire lot area, including wetlands. Ms. Grove said, in the event of future expansion, staff is recommending a limit be placed on the height of the parking ramp or it may be so stated in a resolution as an elevation limit. Ms. Grove said a higher standard of lighting is preferred and a lighting plan with the final PUD can address issues for its final design. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4g - Plan Com minutes 8-6-03 Page 2 of 7 Ms. Grove said, at this time, signage is nonconforming. Methodist Hospital would have to come into compliance or a variance may be issued with the final PUD. If applying for a variance, staff would like a variance application with the final PUD process. In response to questions about traffic, Ms. Jeremiah stated that traffic issues reviewed in the recent Methodist EAW were comprehensive in operational terms, but pedestrian safety issues were not reviewed. Discussion needs to take place with Hennepin County regarding any proposed changes affecting Excelsior Boulevard. Chair Robertson said he strongly encourages the use of light, architectural metal on the penthouse, and given how the metal would wrap around the building gives it a very strong design—he believes a change would weaken it. Duane Spiegle, Vice President Real Estate, Park Nicollet Health Services, said the overall plan has changed due to neighborhood involvement, and it has been a very effective process. Mr. Spiegle said, generally, Park Nicollet is in agreement with the staff recommendations. He said that discussions need to occur with Hennepin County regarding Excelsior Blvd. modifications and the Louisiana Ave. access. He commented on recent improvements made for pedestrian safety near the warehouse building. Mr. Spiegle stated that Park Nicollet will be working with a sign consultant for the project. Parking maps will be provided. He added that more shuttlebuses will be routing people around temporarily during construction. He stated that there will be challenges during construction and Park Nicollet is very sensitive to the concerns of patients, the neighborhood and staff during construction. Mr. Spiegle anticipates no increase in helicopter deliveries, which is slightly more than one per month. Commissioner Finkelstein favors a one-way street design due to an increase of ambulatory patients using the new Heart and Vascular Center. He encouraged the creation of a Louisiana Avenue entrance. Commissioner Bissonnette made two corrections to the report regarding dates of neighborhood meetings: change November 19 and 21, 2003 to November 19 and 21, 2002, and change December 11, 2003 to December 2002. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. Randy Manthey, 3979 Dakota Avenue South, discussed the process, clarification points, specific conditions, and presented a summary. Mr. Manthey said the building height definition needs to be a function of elevation based on the distance from the property line and using the 1:5 ratio wedge. Planning and Zoning Supervisor Janet Jeremiah said she will check on the exact elevation that would be allowed. Mr. Manthey said there is no berm. Mr. Manthey said the Bufferyard F should not be a condition because it is required by ordinance (he referenced page 9 of the staff report). St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4g - Plan Com minutes 8-6-03 Page 3 of 7 Mr. Manthey discussed the following conditions for consideration: The PUD process allows for a public hearing for final—a public hearing should be recommended by the Planning Commission. What is the nature of the intersection at Excelsior Blvd.? The neighborhood proposes that a condition be to require a specific traffic study for that area. The EAW only looked at the level of service. As part of Phase I, the Louisiana Avenue entrance should be upgraded to look like a main entrance. For the Bufferyard F parking ramp, the neighbors would like interior screening to be of opaque material at the edges on the neighborhood side. Neighbors would like a six-foot tall opaque parapet wall on the top level of the parking ramp, only on the neighborhood side of the hospital. The hospital shall provide computer generated design to avoid surprises. Lighting is a huge issue for the neighbors; fix it once and for all for the long term. The lighting criteria from the staff and the applicant is confusing. A photometric plan does not look at subjective criteria. Do request written criteria of the lighting design requirements for the interior, top, internal roads, and any building lighting. The staff report states design principles should be generally adhered to, however, neighbors want it to state that design principles shall be adhered to. Ramp height is not a function of vertical measurements but how the ordinance is written for defining height. Mr. Manthey asked for the Planning Commission's support in protecting the neighborhood. He said it is an important facility, and a PUD allows excess height, but in return the neighborhood expects some protection. Steve Steuck, 8812 West 36th Street, asked for a comparison of the height of the Tourtellotte Building to the proposed building; and how many additional car spaces will be added? Mr. Spiegle said currently there are 302 stalls and Park Nicollet is looking to go to a maximum of 500. The Tourtellotte Building is four stories and the new building is proposed to be six stories. Cynthia Chamberlain, 3990 Dakota, said she agreed with Mr. Manthey's comments. She added that lighting is a huge neighborhood concern. Ms. Chamberlain said the neighborhood needs to see a computer generated design of the project. Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4g - Plan Com minutes 8-6-03 Page 4 of 7 Commissioner Morris would like clarification of Phase I and Phase II bufferyard installation as a condition. Commissioner Bissonnette moved to recommend approval of the Preliminary PUD subject to the conditions in the staff report; she asked that further consideration be given to the comments voiced by the neighborhood. The motion passed 4-0-1. (Commissioner Finkelstein abstained). B. Case Nos. 03-37-CP and 03-38-PUD--Request by Silver Crest Properties for an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan and preliminary Planned Unit Development approval for a residential senior housing development--3601, 3633 and 3663 Park Center Boulevard Greg Ingraham, Planning Consultant for the City of St. Louis Park, presented a staff report regarding the request of SilverCrest Properties. Mr. Ingraham stated that the developer proposes to build a 150-unit, 14-story residential senior building on the 1.91 acre site currently occupied by the Park Center three-story office building at 3601 Park Center Blvd. The PUD would combine the previous approvals of the existing Parkshore developments at 3633 and 3663 Park Center Blvd. with the new proposal. The three properties would be included in the approved Redevelopment Plan and PUD. In response to a question about how a new north-south roadway recommended by the Park Commons West Study would affect access to this property, Ms. Jeremiah said the north-south roadway and other potential traffic improvements for Park Commons West are currently being studied as part of an EAW for future expansion of the Park Nicollet medical clinic. The EAW will probably be heard in about October, and the EAW and traffic study will include a 10% design concept for the roadway. Mr. Ingraham said staff is recommending a driveway connection among the three properties and a right-in/right-out/left-in driveway for the 3601 property, at least until more comprehensive traffic improvements are made. Mr. Ingraham said staff is recommending approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and approval of the preliminary development plans but with a fair number of modifications and conditions. Commissioner Morris inquired that the need for an EAW for the project can be negotiated. Ms. Jeremiah said yes, one can call for a discretionary EAW. However, the primary issue is traffic, and that is already being studied. Ms. Jeremiah said staff would like to include language that the applicant work with the City to resolve the access issues as the recommendations from the broader traffic and north/south roadway study come forward. Chair Robertson said he is not comfortable with a seven-foot curb-to-building setback because it is too close. Mr. Ingraham said there is probably room to increase that distance. Mike Gould, SilverCrest Properties, addressed the Planning Commission, and introduced the project’s architect Peter Pfister. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4g - Plan Com minutes 8-6-03 Page 5 of 7 Mr. Pfister, Pfister & Associates Architects, listed some site issues. Mr. Pfister said they are proposing to move an access point about 80 feet south to improve operations at the 36th Street intersection; they would like to keep site access open until the preliminary study of the north/south roadway is finished; address safety issues regarding the parking area; and address the shading analysis. Mr. Pfister reviewed shading effects on the future skate park and future retail building to the northeast. Commissioner Morris asked if any of the office space on the first floor is anticipated to be rented office. Mr. Gould said no, the offices would be strictly for SilverCrest Properties. Commissioner Morris asked what guarantee can be offered in the PUD that it will remain strictly SilverCrest offices. Ms. Jeremiah said restrictions can be stated in the PUD that the office must be related to the residential use; the office would not be looked at as a separate use for parking requirements as long as it is the management office for the residential. Mr. Gould said price ranges are projected to be about $200,000-500,000, and the units will be condominiums not co-ops. Ms. Jeremiah said the earliest the preliminary would go to Council would be about September 2nd, final could go to the Planning Commission in early October, and final could go to Council perhaps as early as November. Ms. Jeremiah said staff is still waiting for the traffic information from the EAW, so staff would like the conditions to address future recommendations from that study. In response to a question regarding how the proposed height fits with policies for the area, Ms. Jeremiah noted that a 13- story building was anticipated, so this is an increase of one story. It would provide an urban appearance for the town center and further frame the park. The lower Assisted Living Family facility would provide a break between the two taller buildings in a manner that is common in urban environments. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. John McCain, 3440 Belt Line Blvd., expressed his concerns about the project. Mr. McCain said shading would appear to cover his entire building to the northeast. Mr. McCain said the staff report does not take that into account. He said there may be possible interference with communications via satellite for his future tenants in the building, and he is concerned about the placement of the mechanical operations and, subsequently, the noise and view. Ms. Jeremiah said the shading ordinance is considered for each individual building, i.e., it could not cover more than 50% of any building for more than two hours a day between the hours of 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m., and for more than 60 days of the year. Ms. Jeremiah said the architect will look more closely at that and will have to provide evidence that the ordinance is met before Council approval of the preliminary PUD. Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4g - Plan Com minutes 8-6-03 Page 6 of 7 Commissioner Morris favors the proposal but it is necessary to look at this in the context of the north side of 36th Street and future development. Chair Robertson reiterated his concern regarding the seven-foot curb-to-building setback, and he would favor losing some of the five feet on the west side of the parking landscape area to increase the curb-to-building setback to ten feet. Commissioner Finkelstein said he likes the idea of a green gable design to match the other two buildings and unify the properties if it does not add to the shading problem. Chair Robertson said the architect has a challenge to make the building the very best it can be as it will dominate the area. Commissioner Morris moved to recommend approval of amendments to the City’s Comprehensive Plan and the preliminary Planned Unit Development, subject to the conditions as recommended by staff; he asked staff to further consider the spirit of the conditions as discussed tonight. The motion passed 5-0. 4. Unfinished Business 5. New Business A. Consent Agenda: None At 8:45 p.m., Chair Robertson announced a five-minute recess. B. Other New Business i.) Case No. 03-14-PUD--Request of SLP Motors, LLC for a Final PUD to redevelop the Win Stephen Buick Pontiac property for Westside Volkswagen at 2370 and 2440 State Highway 100 S. Planning Coordinator Judie Erickson presented a staff report. Ms. Erickson said that this is the Final PUD and the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Preliminary PUD on June 18, 2003. The only outstanding issues are the location of the pedestrian crossing at Stevens Drive and two minor issues with the utility plan. Ms. Erickson suggested adding the following conditions: 1) require that the utility plan be corrected; and 2) crosswalk location be reviewed to evaluate the stopping distance from the ramps prior to City Council review. Tim O’Dougherty, Luther Automotive Group said staff’s conditions, as presented by Ms. Erickson tonight, are acceptable. Commissioner Finkelstein moved to recommend approval of the Final PUD subject to the conditions in the staff report; and to include the conditions stated by Ms. Erickson. The motion passed 5-0. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 4g - Plan Com minutes 8-6-03 Page 7 of 7 6. Communications A. Recent City Council Action - July 21, 2003, August 4, 2003 B. Other i.) Board of Zoning Appeals minutes June 26 ii.) Board of Zoning Appeals agenda July 24 7. Miscellaneous 8. Adjournment Chair Robertson adjourned the meeting at 8:50 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Respectfully submitted by: Linda Samson Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Administrative Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8a - City HRA levy Page 1 of 2 8a. Resolution authorizing an HRA levy Council authorization of HRA levy as approved on EDA agenda Recommended Action: Adopt resolution setting HRA levy for 2004 Background: At the July 28, 2003 study session, the HRA levy was discussed. At that time, the Council indicated they would like to proceed with the HRA levy for taxes payable in 2004. If approved, this will be the third year that the Council has authorized a HRA levy. The EDA is required to approve this levy as well as the City Council. As outlined in the resolution, the HRA levy cannot exceed .0144 percent of the taxable market value of the City. As of August 11, 2003, the market value of the City is $3,771,698,700. This market value allows the City to levy $543,125 for taxes payable 2004. The proposed 2004 levy amount of $543,125 is $46,603 higher than 2003. This is due to increased taxable market valuation. Staff will review market values prior to final certification in December. The levy amount is included as part of the Development Fund budget. Levy proceeds are to be used for infrastructure improvements in redevelopment areas. Recommendation: Adopt resolution setting HRA levy for 2004. Attachments: Resolution Prepared By: Jean D. McGann, Director of Finance Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8a - City HRA levy Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 03 - ____ RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE HRA LEVY FOR 2004 WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA Act”), the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "Authority"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the EDA Act, the City Council granted to the Authority all of the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and WHEREAS, Section 469.033, subdivision 6 of the Act authorizes the Authority to levy a tax upon all taxable property within the City to be expended for the purposes authorized by the HRA Act; and WHEREAS, such levy may be in an amount not to exceed 0.0144 percent of taxable market value of the City; and WHEREAS, the Authority has filed its budget for the special benefit levy in accordance with the budget procedures of the City; and WHEREAS, based upon such budgets the Authority will levy all or such portion of the authorized levy as it deems necessary and proper; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the St. Louis Park City Council: 1. That approval is hereby given for the Authority to levy, for taxes payable in 2004, such tax upon the taxable property of the City as the Authority may determine, subject to the limitations contained in the HRA Act. Approved this 2nd day of September, 2003, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. Reviewed for Administration City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8b - Prelim Tax Levy 2004 Page 1 of 4 8b. Approve preliminary 2004 property tax levy, budget for the 2004 fiscal year, revisions to the 2003 adopted budget, and set Public Hearing date for on proposed budget and property tax levy Resolution approving the preliminary property tax levy and budget is required by Truth in Taxation legislation. Information contained in the resolution will appear on the individual tax notices prepared by the County. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the resolution establishing the preliminary tax levy and budget for 2004, approves revisions to the 2003 adopted budget and sets public hearing date for proposed budget and property tax levy. Background: The 2004 proposed budget and the 2003-revised budget were reviewed by the City Council at the July 28, 2003 study session. By law, the City Council must approve a preliminary tax levy and budget for 2004 and submit the tax levy certification to the County by September 15, 2003. The County will mail out parcel specific notices to affected taxpayers on or before November 22, 2003. Final action of the levy and 2004 budget will not occur until the second Council meeting in December. It is proposed that the preliminary levy certification be set at the maximum levy allowed by the State. In addition, the City will levy for the 1999 General Obligation Bond, 2003 General Obligation Bond, PERA increase from 2003 to 2004, and an HRA levy. The HRA levy will be handled separately from the City levy. Property Tax Levy: For fiscal year 2004, a total levy of $16,323,715 is proposed. This represents a property tax increase when compared to the 2003 adopted budget of approximately .07% to the general fund budget. The overall property tax levy increase is approximately 11%. This increase is attributable to the following; 2003 General Obligation Debt (1st year of levy) $ 512,600 Loss of Local Government Aid (60% eligible for levy) $1,283,258 PERA Employers Contribution Decrease $ (4,471) Total levy increase $1,791,387 The total levy helps to support the operations of the General Fund, Park and Recreation operations and Park Improvements. A portion of the levy is dedicated to the retirement of General Obligation Debt. The allocation of property taxes is indicated in the chart below. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8b - Prelim Tax Levy 2004 Page 2 of 4 Legislative requirements provide that Cities hold a “Truth in Taxation” public hearing related to the budget. Staff is recommending holding the budget, (Truth in Taxation), hearing on December 1, 2003 to discuss the proposed 2004 budget as well as the legislative changes. This will assist in clarifying the budget status for, and allow input from, the public. Staff also recommends setting December 8, 2003 as a continuation date for the Public Hearing if needed. Recommendation: Approve resolution setting the preliminary 2004 tax levy, 2004 budget, 2003 revised budget and setting public hearing date on proposed budget and property tax levy. Attachments: Resolution Prepared By: Jean D. McGann, Director of Finance Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager Levy 2002/2003 2003/2004 General Fund 11,261,020$ 12,069,320$ Parks and Recreation Fund 2,763,323 2,488,822 Park Improvement Fund 182,485 927,473 1999 GO Debt 329,400 325,500 2003 GO Debt - 512,600 Total Levy 14,536,228$ 16,323,715$ St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8b - Prelim Tax Levy 2004 Page 3 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 03 - _____ RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED 2003 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 2004, APPROVING PROPOSED BUDGET FOR 2004, REVISED BUDGET FOR 2003 AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR PROPOSED BUDGET AND PROPERTY TAX LEVY WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by Charter and State law to approve a resolution setting forth an annual tax levy to the Hennepin County Auditor; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes currently in force require approval of a proposed property tax levy and a preliminary budget on or before September 15th of each year; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the proposed budget document; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the preliminary 2004 budget for all Governmental Funds, Enterprise funds and Internal Service funds shall be as follows: Revenues:Appropriations General Property Taxes 16,326,715$ Personal Services 19,824,582$ Licenses and Permits 2,078,000 Supplies Services and other Charges 20,795,486 Intergovernmental 1,981,707 Capital Outlay 2,194,969 Charges for Services 3,147,226 Transfer Out 2,593,521 Fines, Forfeits and penalties 298,000 Enterprise 9,083,945 Special Assessments 111,083 Miscellaneous 3,010,269 Transfer In 4,941,703 Total Revenue 40,978,648$ Total Appropriations 45,408,558$ Fund Balance/Reserves - Jan. 1 65,872,578$ Fund Balance/Reserves - Dec. 31 61,442,668$ Total Available 106,851,226$ Total Available 106,851,226$ AVAILABLE RESOURCES:REQUIREMENTS: And as supported by the proposed budget document; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing required by Truth in Taxation legislation will be held on December 1, 2003; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied in 2003, collectible in 2004 upon the taxable property in said City of St. Louis Park for the following purposes: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8b - Prelim Tax Levy 2004 Page 4 of 4 General Fund 12,069,320$ Park and Recreation Fund 2,488,822 Park Improvement Fund 927,473 GO Debt Service 838,100 Total 16,323,715$ And BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota and to the Local Government Aids/Analysis Division, Department of Revenue, State of Minnesota as required by law. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 1 of 18 8c. 2nd Reading of an Ordinance amending Chapter 22 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances relating to Solid Waste Management, creating standards for collection of refuse/garbage, recycling, and yard waste as well as for composting for residential properties. Recommended Action: Motion to Approve Second Reading of Proposed Amendments to Chapter 22 of St. Louis Park Ordinance Code relating to Solid Waste Management, creating standards for collection of refuse/garbage, recycling, yard waste, and composting, adopt ordinance, approve summary, and authorize publication. BACKGROUND: Solid Waste Program Goals include: • High quality service • Environmental stewardship • Cost effective services • Effective communication and continual evaluation of program and industry On Monday, September 18, 2003, Council discussed the proposed changes to the Solid Waste Management ordinance needed to implement the approved changes in the City’s Solid Waste Program. Council supported all ordinance changes except cart storage location requirements during non-collection times and the time requirement by which carts need to be retrieved from their collection location. Council requested staff propose revisions to address these concerns. On Monday, August 25, 2003, staff provided Council with proposed revisions to address the concerns raised on September 18. The revisions proposed would: • Require carts to be stored indoors or, if stored outdoors, they would have to be located behind the building line adjacent to any street or alley right-of-way line. • Allow carts or bags to remain at their collection location until 7:00 p.m. the day they are collected. • Correct a technical error revising the wording that allows for charging a service charge for garbage/refuse collection for residential dwelling which mixes refuse with yard waste. After reviewing the proposed revisions, Council expressed a desire to retain the original sideyard setback of four (4) feet which would not allow carts to be stored outdoors within four (4) feet of an interior lot line. PROPOSED REVISIONS TO FIRST READING: Listed below are the three (3) sections of the Ordinance that Council requested staff to revise and the proposed revisions. Sec. 22-35. Precollection practices. (original) (c) Duty to maintain containers in sanitary condition. Except when placed out for collection that day, garbage and refuse carts shall be located by the owner, tenant, lessee or occupant of the premises at least four feet from any neighboring dwelling or structure, outside of any street or alley right of way not visible from the street or alley, and in such St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 2 of 18 a manner to prevent them from being overturned. The owner, tenant, lessee or occupant of the premises… Sec. 22-35. Precollection practices. (revised) (c) Duty to maintain containers in sanitary condition. Except when placed out for collection that day, garbage and refuse carts shall be located by the owner, tenant, lessee or occupant of the premises inside a building or outside on the property. If located outside the carts must be located behind the building line adjacent to any street or alley right-of-way line. Carts must also be placed four (4) feet or more from interior lot lines. Carts should be placed in such a manner to prevent them from being overturned. The owner, tenant, lessee or occupant of the premises… The revision above generally allows for outdoor cart storage alongside or behind homes, but no closer than four (4) feet to an interior lot line. Allowable outdoor storage areas are shown on the attached drawing – Cart Storage Area. Sec. 22-36. Collection practices. (original) (a) Frequency of collection. Garbage and refuse accumulated at residential properties shall be collected at least once a week. Garbage and refuse accumulated at stores, restaurants, other businesses and institutions shall be collected no less than once each week and as often as once each business day if necessary to protect the public health. Collection by the authorized city residential garbage and refuse collection contractor will take place between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays when necessary. Items from residences shall be placed out for collection curbside or alley side by 7:00 a.m. on their designated collection day, and the carts or containers shall be retrieved as soon as practical after collection but no later than 7:00 p.m. No cart, container, bag, item or material shall be allowed to remain in its collection location for more than 24 hours. Sec. 22-36. Collection practices. (revised) (a) Frequency of collection. Garbage and refuse accumulated at residential properties shall be collected at least once a week. Garbage and refuse accumulated at stores, restaurants, other businesses and institutions shall be collected no less than once each week and as often as once each business day if necessary to protect the public health. Collection by the authorized city residential garbage and refuse collection contractor will take place between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays when necessary. Items from residences shall be placed out for collection curbside or alley side by 7:00 a.m. on their designated collection day, and the carts or containers shall be retrieved as soon as practical after collection but no later than 7:00 p.m. on the day of collection. This revision allows for carts or bags (garbage) to remain at the collection site until picked-up. The 24 hour limitation was removed. Sec. 22-37. Garbage/refuse service rates. (original) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 3 of 18 (c) A service charge in an amount set from time to time by the city and listed in appendix A of this Code shall be added to the quarterly service charge for garbage/refuse collection for residential dwelling yard waste. Sec. 22-37. Garbage/refuse service rates. (revised) (c) A service charge in an amount set from time to time by the city and listed in appendix A of this Code shall be added to the quarterly service charge for garbage/refuse collection for residential dwelling which mixes refuse with yard waste. This is a technical correction adding several words inadvertently left off the first reading version. DISCUSSION: Staff has incorporated Council requested changes, as shown above, into the Ordinance (attached), but has reservations over the provision requiring outdoor carts to be four (4) feet or more from interior lot lines. It appears to staff that hundreds of residents will be in noncompliance with this provision of the new Ordinance. Many garbage cans are currently located next to garages within the 4 foot setback in violation of this requirement. Many residents have elaborate paved areas where cans are currently stored that will no longer be usable. Staff is also concerned that if enforcement is required that resources will have to be diverted from other programs of higher importance. Attachments: Cart Storage Area Ordinance Ordinance Summary Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator Through: Michael Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 4 of 18 ORDINANCE NO. ______ - 03 CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 22 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. Chapter 22 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to read in its entirety as follows: Article I. In General Sec. 22-1. Construction debris containers (dumpsters). Secs. 22-2--22-30. Reserved. Article II. Garbage Collection Division 1. Generally Sec. 22-31. Short title. Sec. 22-32. Definitions. Sec. 22-33. Collection of garbage and refuse within the city. Sec. 22-34. Collection supervised by director of public works. Sec. 22-35. Precollection practices. Sec. 22-36. Collection practices. Sec. 22-37. Garbage/refuse service rates. Sec. 22-38. Disposal. Secs. 22-39--22-60. Reserved. Division 2. Recycling Sec. 22-61. Purpose of division. Sec. 22-62. Definitions. Sec. 22-63. Designation of items. Sec. 22-64. Implementation. Sec. 22-65. Ownership. Sec. 22-66. Unauthorized collection. Secs. 22-67--22-90. Reserved. Division 3. Recycling for Multiple-Family Residential Structures St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 5 of 18 Sec. 22-91. Purpose of division. Sec. 22-92. Definitions. Sec. 22-93. Separation and storage. Sec. 22-94. Collection. Sec. 22-95. Disposal. Secs. 22-95--22-99. Reserved. ARTICLE III. Composting Sec. 22-96. Compost. Sec. 22-97. Definitions. Sec. 22-98. Duties of Owner, Occupant or Tenant. Sec. 22-99. Duties of Licensed Collectors. Sec. 22-100. Composting Process Sec. 22-101 Nuisance. Sec. 22-102 Existing Non-Conforming. Sec. 22-103. Application to City Owned or Operated Compost Facilities. ARTICLE I. IN GENERAL Sec. 22-1. Construction debris containers (dumpsters). (a) Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish minimum standards for construction debris containers (dumpsters) and similar containers used for the collection, storage or transport of any construction, demolition debris, or other solid waste in volumes larger than city provided containers or carts and to prohibit placement of these large containers on city property. (b) Definitions. Construction debris container, as that term is used in this Chapter shall mean any four- sided industry standard steel or plastic container used to collect, store or transport volumes of waste or other materials in excess of city-provided containers or carts, including but not limited to dumpsters, tubs, and pods. (c) Regulations. (1) The construction debris container shall be watertight; clearly labeled with the name and phone number of the container owner. The debris or other materials stored within the construction debris container shall not exceed three feet in height from the top of the construction debris container, and shall not be used for storage of any refuse other than construction or demolition debris unless totally sealed. (2) The construction debris container shall be located outside of the city right-of-way. The construction debris container shall not be located on an individual lot or parcel for more than six months during any 12-month period. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 6 of 18 (3) The construction debris container shall be placed in a location that will ensure the least possible obstruction to pedestrian and vehicular traffic, as well as provide for the safety of the general public and residents living in the area. (Ord. No. 2198-01, § 1, 5-21-2001) Secs. 22-2--22-30. Reserved. ARTICLE II. GARBAGE AND REFUSE COLLECTION DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 22-31. Short title. This article shall be known and may be cited as the Garbage and Refuse Collection Ordinance of the city. (Code 1976, § 9-301) Sec. 22-32. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Commercial establishment means any premises where a commercial or industrial enterprise of any kind is carried on, and shall include clubs, churches and establishment of nonprofit organizations where food is prepared or served or goods are sold. Garbage means waste material, animal or vegetable, which results from the handling, preparation, cooking, service, and consumption of food. Incinerator means any device used for the destruction of refuse, rubbish or waste materials by fire. Licensed collector means any person holding a valid license from the city for the collection of garbage, refuse, yard waste, recyclables or other materials covered by this Chapter. Refuse means all wastes (except body wastes) including, but not limited to, rubbish, tin cans, papers, Christmas trees, cardboard, grass clippings, ashes, glass jars and bottles, and wood normally resulting from the operation of a household or business establishment, but not including garbage, sod, dirt, rocks, construction material, cement, trees, leaves, hedge or tree trimmings, or anything one person could not lift easily. Residential dwelling means any single building consisting of four or fewer separate dwelling units with individual kitchen facilities for each. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 7 of 18 Residential garbage and refuse collection contractor means any person with whom the city contracts for collection of garbage and refuse from residential dwellings in the city. Solid Waste Material or Material, unless otherwise qualified, means refuse, garbage, recyclable materials, yard waste, appliances, bulk items and any other solid waste from residential dwellings and activities that the generator of the waste aggregates for collection. Yard waste means all compostable organic plant material that consists of grass clippings, leaves, weeds, soft garden materials, Christmas trees, and brush and limbs under four inches in diameter and four feet in length, if bundled with twine or other organic material. (Code 1976, § 9-302) Cross reference(s)--Definitions generally, § 1-2. Sec. 22-33. Collection of garbage and refuse within the city. Except as otherwise authorized by the city in this article, all garbage and refuse accumulated at any residential dwelling in the city shall be collected, conveyed and disposed of by the authorized city residential garbage and refuse collection contractor. The residential solid waste collection contractor shall charge a fee for special pickup of garbage, refuse, yard waste or recycling in an amount as determined by the City. This section does not prohibit the following activities: (1) The disposal of garbage by any device, which grinds and deposits the garbage in a sewer; (2) The owner or occupant of any premises upon which garbage or refuse has accumulated from personally conveying and disposing of such garbage or refuse in accordance with the provisions of this article and with any other applicable law or ordinances; (3) Collectors of refuse from outside of the city from hauling such refuse over city streets, provided that such collectors comply with the provisions of this section and with any other applicable laws or ordinances of the city; or (4) Any licensed private garbage and refuse collector from hauling garbage or refuse from any premises that is not a residential dwelling. (Code 1976, § 9-303) Sec. 22-34. Collection supervised by director of public works. All garbage and refuse collected, conveyed and disposed of by the city shall be under the supervision of the director of public works. The city manager shall have the authority to make regulations concerning the days of collection, type and location of waste containers, and such other matters pertaining to the collection, conveyance and disposal as he/she shall find necessary, and to change and modify the regulations in accordance with the provisions of this article and contract between the city and its garbage and refuse collection contractor. Any person aggrieved St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 8 of 18 by a regulation of, or fee charged by the city manager shall have the right of appeal to the city council which shall have the authority to confirm, modify or revoke any such regulation or fee. (Code 1976, § 9-304) Sec. 22-35. Precollection practices. (a) Preparation of garbage and refuse. All garbage and refuse as accumulated on any premises other than bulk items, appliances, and yard waste shall be placed and maintained in city provided containers and shall have drained from it all free liquids before being deposited for collection, and shall be placed in sealed bags or wrapped. If any residential dwelling has more garbage and refuse than will fit into the cart(s), the resident may purchase an "extra refuse" sticker from the City, place the garbage or refuse in a securely sealed bag for collection, affix the sticker, and place the bag in the same location and at the same time for collection as the cart(s). No explosive or highly inflammable material shall be deposited or placed for collection. Such material shall be disposed of as directed by the fire chief at the expense of the owner or possessor. (b) Contagious disease refuse. Refuse such as, but not limited to, bedding, wearing apparel or utensils from residential dwelling units or other units where highly infectious or contagious diseases are present shall not be deposited for regular collection, but shall be disposed of as directed by the health department at the expense of the owner or possessor. (c) (c) Duty to maintain containers in sanitary condition. Except when placed out for collection that day, garbage and refuse carts shall be located by the owner, tenant, lessee or occupant of the premises inside a building or outside on the property. If located outside the carts must be located behind the building line adjacent to any street or alley right-of-way line. Carts must also be placed four (4) feet or more from interior lot lines. Carts should be placed in such a manner to prevent them from being overturned. The owner, tenant, lessee or occupant of the premises is responsible for providing yard waste containers or bags. Yard waste containers and bags shall not exceed forty pounds when filled and shall be of a size and nature to be easily handled and lifted by a single person. All containers shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition and kept free from any substance, which will attract or breed flies, mosquitoes or other insects. No container shall have ragged or sharp edges or any other defect liable to hamper or injure the person collecting the contents. Containers not complying with the requirements of this article shall be promptly replaced upon notice. The director shall have the authority to refuse collection services for failure to comply herewith. (d) Garbage and refuse containers. Garbage and refuse containers shall be kept tightly covered when there is garbage therein. Containers for residential collection under the city’s contract will be provided by the City. (e) Points of collection. Garbage and refuse containers shall be placed for collection in one place at ground level on the property, not within the right-of-way of a street or alley, and as remote as possible from any surrounding dwellings, and accessible to the street or alley from which collection is made. All containers which contain yard waste must be St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 9 of 18 placed on the abutting alley if there be one, or upon the boulevard area of the street for collection by the city. (Code 1976, § 9-305) Sec. 22-36. Collection practices. (a) Frequency of collection. Garbage and refuse accumulated at residential properties shall be collected at least once a week. Garbage and refuse accumulated at stores, restaurants, other businesses and institutions shall be collected no less than once each week and as often as once each business day if necessary to protect the public health. Collection by the authorized city residential garbage and refuse collection contractor will take place between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Monday through Fridays and 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. on Saturdays when necessary. Items from residences shall be placed out for collection curbside or alley side by 7:00 a.m. on their designated collection day, and the carts or containers shall be retrieved as soon as practical after collection but no later than 7:00 p.m. on the day of collection. (b) Collection by actual producers and outside collectors. The actual producers of refuse, or the owners of premises upon which refuse is accumulated, who desire personally to collect and dispose of such refuse, persons who desire to dispose of waste material not collected by the city, and private collectors of refuse and garbage from outside of the city who desire to haul over the streets of the city, shall use a vehicle provided with a tight cover and so operated and maintained as to prevent offensive odors escaping therefrom, and refuse from being blown, dropped or spilled from the vehicle. Such receptacles on vehicles shall be kept clean and as free from offensive odors as possible and shall not be allowed to stand in any street, alley or other place longer than is reasonably necessary to collect garbage and refuse. The collector shall comply with ordinances of the city and laws or regulations of the state relating to sanitation and collection of garbage and refuse. The collector shall keep all equipment used in the performance of the work in a clean, sanitary condition and shall thoroughly disinfect each vehicle at least once a week unless the vehicle has not been used since its last disinfection. (c) Refuse property of city. Ownership of garbage and refuse material set out for collection and collected by the city shall be vested in the city. (Code 1976, § 9-306) Sec. 22-37. Garbage/refuse service rates. (a) A service charge for garbage/refuse collection, including recycling service, and yard waste collection service, provided to residential dwelling units with the city shall be an amount set from time to time by the city and listed in appendix A of this Code (b) Each dwelling unit in a residential dwelling will be charged a service charge for garbage/refuse collection and for yard waste collection, regardless of whether they utilize the service, provided that residents with an extended absence from the city and non-use St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 10 of 18 of service during that period may apply to the City for a temporary suspension of service and charges. (c) A service charge in an amount set from time to time by the city and listed in appendix A of this Code shall be added to the quarterly service charge for garbage/refuse collection for residential dwelling which mixes refuse with yard waste. (d) Charges for the collection and disposal of garbage/refuse, bulk items, electronics, appliances and yard waste shall be a charge against the owner, lessee, occupant, or all of them of the premises served, any of whom shall be charged and billed for such service. (e) Garbage/refuse bills will be mailed to customers for each quarter/year service period at the rate shown in this subsection. The proceeds from collection of these bills shall be placed in a separate fund. A penalty in an amount set from time to time by the city and listed in appendix A of this Code shall be added to the amount due on any bill if not paid within three weeks after the billing date. Payments received three working days following the due date shall be deemed as paid within such period. (f) All charges for garbage/refuse service shall be due and payable within three weeks after the billing date; accounts shall be considered delinquent when not paid within three working days following the date. Such charges shall be a charge against the owner of the premises and shall be certified by the city clerk to the city assessor who shall prepare an assessment roll each year providing for assessment of the delinquent amounts against the respective properties served for collection as other taxes. (g) The city council reserves the right to adjust the rates provided by this section from time to time. (Code 1976, § 9-307) Sec. 22-38. Disposal. (a) Private incineration. No garbage or refuse from any commercial or residential establishment shall be disposed of by burning except in an incinerator of an approved type as specified by ordinance of the city. (b) Dumping. No garbage or refuse shall be disposed of by dumping or disposal at or on any place within the city. (c) Scattering of garbage or refuse. No person shall cast, spill, place, sweep or deposit anywhere within the city any garbage or refuse in such a manner that it may be carried or deposited by the elements upon any street, sidewalk, alley, sewer, parkway or other public place, or into any other premises within the city. (Code 1976, § 9-308) Secs. 22-39--22-60. Reserved. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 11 of 18 DIVISION 2. RECYCLING Sec. 22-61. Purpose of division. This division is designed to ensure that a designated recycling program is conducted in an orderly fashion to avoid adverse effects on the public health, welfare, safety and environment. (Code 1976, § 9-309(1)) Sec. 22-62. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this division, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Authorized or designated recycling program means a program for the collection and recycling of recyclable materials which is instituted, sponsored and controlled by the city. Recyclable materials means all items of refuse which are part of an authorized recycling program and which are intended for transportation, processing and remanufacturing, or reuse. (Code 1976, § 9-309(2)) Cross reference(s)--Definitions generally, § 1-2. Sec. 22-63. Designation of items. A list of refuse items designated to be part of an authorized recycling program shall be prepared. Such items must be ones which are generally accepted by the recycling industry for remanufacture and reuse, which can be cleaned, prepared and stored in a manner to protect the public health, welfare, safety or environment, and which can be collected and recycled without threatening the economic viability of an authorized recycling program. This list shall be published in the official newspaper. The list may be modified as circumstances warrant by following the procedure specified for the original designation. (Code 1976, § 9-309(3)) Sec. 22-64. Implementation. All recyclable materials intended and set out for collection shall be cleaned, prepared and stored in accordance with city specifications and shall be placed for collection in the same manner as other materials. The City will provide recycling containers to residents. All recyclables must be placed in the recycling containers provided by the city or in recyclable bags within the containers to prevent litter and spillage. Except when placed out for pickup that day, recyclable materials must be stored inside a dwelling or structure. Failure to use a city provided recycling container may void the opportunity to participate in an authorized program and shall constitute a public nuisance where such failure causes a threat to the public health, welfare, safety or environment or results in a disorderly and unsightly collection or refuse visible to the public. All city St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 12 of 18 provided recycling containers must be kept clean and sanitary by the resident and remain the property of the city. (Code 1976, § 9-309(4)) Sec. 22-65. Ownership. Ownership of recyclable materials remains with the person or household from which the materials originated until collected by designated collection programs. Upon removal by the city or its designated agents or contractors from a designated collection point, ownership of properly prepared and stored recyclable materials intended for a city authorized collection program shall be vested in the city. Materials not prepared, cleaned or stored according to city specifications shall remain the responsibility and property of the individuals or household from which the materials originated. Nothing in this division shall abridge the right of an individual or household to give or sell their recyclable materials to any recyclable materials program. (Code 1976, § 9-309(5)) Sec. 22-66. Unauthorized collection. No person other than one expressly authorized by the city council shall take or collect recyclable material set out for authorized collection programs within the city. (Code 1976, § 9-309(6)) Secs. 22-67--22-90. Reserved. DIVISION 3. RECYCLING FOR MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES Sec. 22-91. Purpose of division. The purpose of this division is to require mandatory separation of recyclables, and to aid and promote collection and disposal by means other than deposit in a sanitary landfill or by incineration. (Code 1976, § 9-309.101) Sec. 22-92. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this division, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning: Multiple-family residential structure means any residential building consisting of five or more apartments, townhomes or condominiums, or other living units. Recyclables means newsprint, corrugated paper (cardboard), office paper, mail, magazines, phone books, glass containers, aluminum foil and cans, tin cans, steel cans, bi-metal cans, reasonably free of dirt, food and other contaminants, and plastic bottles. Also included as a St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 13 of 18 recyclable is any other material that the city may hereafter be required to collect as a recyclable by the county or its environmental department. (Code 1976, § 9-309.102) Cross reference(s)--Definitions generally, § 1-2. Sec. 22-93. Separation and storage. (a) It shall be the obligation and responsibility of the owners of each multiple-family residential structure including, but not limited to, an apartment building, townhome complex, townhome association, condominium complex, and condominium association to have recycling containers available and accessible, and provide recycling collection services at least twice each month to all residents residing within each structure. (b) Every resident of every multiple-family residential structure shall separate the recyclables from all other refuse, garbage, rubbish and waste matter, and shall store the recyclables in containers designated as containers for the storage of recyclables. (c) Containers with tight fitting lids for storage of recyclables shall be kept in the same location as refuse containers; provided, however, that residents of those dwellings where curbside or alleyside collection is available, shall place the recyclables and the containers for recyclables at a place adjacent to the dwelling (or building in which the dwelling is located) or garage accessory thereto and visible from the street in front of the dwelling (or building in which the dwelling is located) or from the alley by the dwelling (or building in which the dwelling is located) if that dwelling (or building in which the dwelling is located) has refuse collection service at the alley. After the scheduled collection, the containers for recycling and any materials not collected shall be returned by the resident of such dwelling to the same location as containers for refuse are kept. (Code 1976, § 9-309.103) Sec. 22-94. Collection. (a) Collection of recyclables from the multiple-family residential structure shall be by a hauler selected and paid by the owners of the complex or by a manager of such or by a management company of such or by an association governing such, but which hauler is then duly licensed by the city under applicable ordinances of the city or county. Also, such collection shall be done in compliance with all other applicable ordinances of the city now or hereafter in effect. (b) The owners or manager or management company or governing association of each complex shall report to the city manager or the city manager's designee, upon written request from time to time made by the city manager or the city manager's designee, and on forms prescribed and provided by the city manager or the city manager's designee, such information relative to the program for separation, storage, and collection of recyclables then in effect for their complex as the city manager or the city manager's designee shall then request. The owners or managers of each complex shall post and St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 14 of 18 provide this information and additional educational material regarding recycling to residents of the complex. (c) The provisions of subsection (a) of this section notwithstanding, the city, at any time, and from time to time, may contract with a hauler for collection of recyclables from some or all complexes, and if the city so contracts, the recyclables shall be collected from the premises by the collector under contract with the city and on terms and conditions set out in such contract. (d) Neither the provisions of subsections (a) or (c) of this section or any other provisions of this division shall prevent any resident from disposing of that resident's recyclables without the use of a paid hauler or the city collection, but the provisions of section 22-95 shall be complied with by such resident. (Code 1976, § 9-309.104) Sec. 22-95. Disposal. Recyclables collected from multiple-family residential structures shall not, in any event, be: (1) Deposited in any landfill; (2) Burned in any incinerator; or (3) Deposited or distributed in any way or manner contrary to applicable law, statute, ordinance, rule, or regulation. The restrictions of subsections (1) and (2) of this section shall not comply to any recyclables which are deposited in a landfill or burned in an incinerator pursuant to specific, prior written approval granted by the county and consented to in writing by the city manager or the city manager's designee. Residents shall take such action as is reasonable under the circumstances to determine that recyclables are not disposed of contrary to the provisions of this section. (Code 1976, § 9-309.105) Article III. Compost Sec. 22-96. Compost. This article shall be known and may be cited as the Compost Ordinance of the city. Sec. 22-97. Definitions. The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 15 of 18 Yard waste means organic material consisting of grass clippings, leaves, and other forms of organic garden waste. Composting means any aboveground microbial process that converts plant material to organic soil amendment or mulch. Kitchen waste means egg shells, coffee grounds, chopped vegetables, and fruit remains. Acceptable materials means plant material or garden waste consisting of grass clippings, leaves, weeds, small twigs (1/4 inch diameter or less), evergreen cones and needles, wood chips, organic mulch, herbaceous garden debris and commercial ingredients (mixed into the composting material) specifically designed to speed or enhance decomposition. Sec. 22-98. Duties of Owner, Occupant or Tenant. Every owner, occupant or tenant of any premises who does not otherwise dispose of or compost Yard Waste in a sanitary and environmentally sound manner, shall use the City- contracted yard waste service, if eligible, or contract with a licensed collector to collect and dispose of Yard Waste. Every owner, occupant or tenant shall make such Yard Waste available to collector as required under this Chapter. Sec. 22-99. Duties of Licensed Collectors. Each licensed collector shall collect yard waste separately from other material, and haul it away to an approved compost site. Sec. 22-100. Composting Process Every owner, occupant or tenant of any premises who composts Yard Waste shall do so in an environmentally sound manner, shall use a compost bin or structure that meets the design standards described in this section, and shall meet all other standards set forth in this ordinance. Composting shall be allowed only on properties where there is located a single family detached dwelling, up to a four-plex multi-family dwelling. No permit is required to compost or to install a compost structure on the property. (a) Containment Structure Location. Composting containment structures shall be located in the back yard of the residential property and not be located in a front yard. Composting containment structures shall be located at least 15 feet from any inhabited building not owned by the generator of the compost material, 3 feet from any City park, trail, alley or right-of-way. The compost enclosure must be located above the 100-year high water level for the closest adjacent pond or wetland. (b) Materials Allowed in Compost Containment Structure. Only acceptable materials, as defined in Sec. 22-97 Definitions, generated from the legal boundaries of the site of the containment structure shall be allowed into the containment St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 16 of 18 structure. Composting of the following materials shall be prohibited: kitchen waste, food scraps, meat, animal waste, carcasses, or other vermin-attracting materials. (c) Containment Structure Maintenance. Standard composting techniques shall be employed to enhance rapid biological degradation of the material without producing objectionable odors. Techniques include, but are not limited to, aeration, adding moisture, and providing a balance of composting materials. Compost shall be properly maintained to minimize odor generation and to promote effective decomposition of the materials. Containment structures must be properly maintained at all times, and in such a manner that conforms to the requirements of this ordinance. (d) Containment Structure Design. Compost containers must comply with this ordinance. Upon the start of the composting process, the container must be in place. Compost containers shall be designed to limit odors as well as rodent and pest access. Compost structures shall be made of impenetrable and durable material such as wood, plastic or fiberglass, enclosed on the top and sides, and not to exceed a total of 150 cubic feet in volume for all composting on site. Wire structures, metal fencing or other open mesh materials shall not be used for composting. Sec. 22-101 Nuisance. Composting that results in objectionable odors, and/or includes prohibited material, and/or attracts vermin is deemed a public health nuisance. Failure to comply with any of the provisions of this ordinance shall also constitute a nuisance, and the owner and/or occupant of the lot on which nuisance is located shall be responsible for its abatement. Sec. 22-102 Existing Non-Conforming. All existing non-conforming compost piles must be in conformance by May 1, 2004. Sec. 22-103. Application to City Owned or Operated Compost Facilities. This Article does not apply to any compost facility owned or operated by the City. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective fifteen (15) days after its passage and publication. ADOPTED this 2nd day of September, 2003, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 17 of 18 City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8c - Solid Waste Ordinance 2nd rdg Page 18 of 18 SUMMARY ORDINANCE NO.______ - 03 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO SOLID WASTE CHAPTER 22 This ordinance states that Sections 22:1, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 61, 64, 91, 92, 93, 94, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, and 103, of the Solid Waste Ordinance shall be amended relative to: Language changes including requiring the following: use of city garbage carts for garbage collection and city recycling bins for recycling collection, all bags of garbage to be stored within a city cart for collection or marked with an “extra refuse” sticker, all cart lids to be completely closed, all carts and yard waste containers stored inside or in the back yard, recycling bins to be stored inside, no in-ground containers, all containers to be placed at ground level for collection, yard waste containers to be no greater than forty (40) pounds, containers be placed for collection by 7:00 a.m. on collection day and retrieved by 7:00 p.m. on day of collection, posting of education for tenants in multi- family buildings; and an addition to the chapter that outlines proper composting techniques and requirements. This ordinance shall take effect 15 days after publication. Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this ordinance is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: September 11, 2003 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8d - Edgewood excavate fill CUP Page 1 of 7 8d. The request of the Edgewood Investors for a Conditional Use Permit for the excavation of approximately 13,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and processing waste and backfill of approximately 13,000 cubic yards of imported soil on Industrial Property located at 2401 Edgewood Ave. Case No. 03-47-CUP 2401 Edgewood Ave Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit subject to conditions listed in the resolution. Current Zoning: IP, Industrial Park Comprehensive Plan Designation: Industrial Background: In July, 2003, Edgewood Investors, Inc. purchased the subject site and propose to demolish the existing 105, 000 square foot industrial building and construct a 79,000 square foot office and warehouse building. This property has a history of contamination as a result of several former property owners (See attached site history). The identified contaminates at the site include petroleum hydrocarbons, lead, barium, and lithium. Some of the waste material extended to approximately 14 feet below the ground surface. As part of the proposed construction project the contaminated soil and processing waste will be excavated and disposed off site and replaced with clean fill. Edgewood Investors is currently requesting a CUP to allow approximately 7,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and approximately 6,000 cubic yards of lithium ore processing waste to be excavated. Following the excavation, approximately 13,000 cubic yards of soil will be imported and placed on site to replace the excavated material grades to those shown on the attached grading plan. 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 building can be approved administratively. On August 5, 2003 a demolition permit was issued for the property to permit the property owner to begin demolition of the existing building. To facilitate the planned schedule for construction of the proposed building, some material will be excavated and stockpiled on site until the CUP approval has been obtained. On August 20, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted 6-0 to recommend approval. The Planning Commission recommended adding conditions that right turns only be allowed exiting the site from Edgewood Ave onto Cedar Lake Road and that traffic control devices be used as needed (i.e. signs ahead of the intersection noting “Slow Trucks Hauling or other solution such as a flag person if necessary). St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8d - Edgewood excavate fill CUP Page 2 of 7 Issues: What route is proposed to haul the material? How long will the hauling take place and what will be the hours of operation? How will disturbance be managed? What route is proposed to haul the fill? Trucks carrying impacted soil off-site or imported soil on-site will use Edgewood Avenue, Cedar Lake Road, and Hwy 100. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend prohibiting trucks from using Eliot View Road and Florida Avenue to access Cedar Lake Road. This will ensure trucks do not enter the residential neighborhood west of Edgewood Avenue. As noted, the Planning Commission recommends right turns out only and traffic control as necessary. The has been included in the resolution. How long will the hauling take place and what will be the hours of operation? It is expected that the hauling will take approximately two weeks. Per Ordinance, hauling can occur between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Monday through Friday, and the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on the weekend and holidays. The applicant has indicated that they will be finished hauling by about 4:30 p.m. How will disturbance be managed? The project will be performed using standard construction equipment (e.g., excavators, loaders, bulldozers, trucks, and compactors). Health and safety protocols, dust control practices, and erosion control practices for the removal of contaminates are under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) and will adhere to the “Response Action Plan” as approved by the MPCA in April 2003. Staff recommends requiring as a condition of approval that dust control measures be followed to mitigate impacts to adjacent properties. An erosion control permit will be obtained from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and a NPDES storm water general permit will be obtained. Stockpiled soil will be covered with weighted tarps or plastic sheeting. Transportation vehicles will be tarped prior to leaving the site with impacted soil or processing waste. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit to remove 7,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and approximately 6,000 cubic yards of lithium ore processing and the placement of 13,000 cubic yards of soil subject to the conditions in the resolution. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8d - Edgewood excavate fill CUP Page 3 of 7 Attachments: • Location Map • Resolution • Unofficial Planning Commission Minute Excerpts • Site History (supplement) • Application & Grading & Site Plans (supplement) Prepared by: Julie Grove, Associate Planner Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager Location Map FLORIDA AVE23RD ST W BRUN 18TH ST W FRANKLIN AVE W HAMPSHIRE AVE SGEORGIA AVE SFLORIDA AVE SEDGEWOOD AVE S 25 1/2 ST W CEDARLAKE RD RIDGE DRIVEPETER HOBART SC HOOL Subject Site St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8d - Edgewood excavate fill CUP Page 4 of 7 RESOLUTION NO. 03 - _____ A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-79 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT EXCAVATION OF APPROXIMATELY 13,000 YARDS OF CONTAMINATED SOIL AND PROCESSING WASTE AND BACKFILL OF APPROXIMATELY 13,000 CUBIC YARDS OF IMPORTED SOIL FOR PROPERTY ZONED IP INDUSTRIAL PARK DISTRICT LOCATED AT 2401 EDGEWOOD AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Edgewood Investors LLC has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-79 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of excavation of approximately 13,000 yards of contaminated soil and processing waste and backfill of approximately 13,000 cubic yards of imported soil within a IP Industrial Park District located at 2401 Edgewood Avenue for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Parcel 1: Tract C, Registered Land Survey No. 916, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin Parcel 2: All that part of Tract D, Registered Land Survey No. 916, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, which lies Westerly of the following described line: Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Tract D; thence Northerly along the Westerly line of said Tract D, a distance of 179.87 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; thence Northerly deflecting to the right 5 degrees 38 minutes 26 seconds a distance of 83.26 feet; thence Northerly deflection to the right 2 degrees 41 minutes 29 seconds a distance of 106.65 feet; thence Northwesterly deflecting to the left 38 degrees 24 minutes 43 seconds to the West line of said Tract D and there terminating. Torrens 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 03-47-CUP) and the effect of the proposed excavation of contaminated soil and processing waste and placement of new fill on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Council has determined that the excavation of contaminated soil and processing waste and placement of new fill will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed excavation and placement of fill is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8d - Edgewood excavate fill CUP Page 5 of 7 4. The contents of Planning Case File 03-47-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Conditional Use Permit to permit the excavation of contaminated soil and processing waste and placement of new fill at the location described is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Grading Plans such documents incorporated by reference herein. 2. Trucks shall enter/exit the site using Edgewood Avenue and Cedar Lake Road. Trucks are prohibited from using Eliot View Road and Florida Avenue and shall travel eastbound on Cedar Lake Road when exiting from Edgewood Avenue. 3. The hours of operation shall be limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and 9:00 am and 10:00 p.m. on weekends and holidays. 4. The site must be watered regularly for dust control and streets must be kept clean throughout hauling routes. 5. Assent form and official exhibits must be signed by applicant and owner and financial surety for cleaning repair of streets shall be submitted prior to hauling soil on or off-site. 6. Operations shall comply with noise restriction or obtain a temporary noise permit. 7. Traffic control devices shall be implemented as determined by the Public Works Director. 8. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fine of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. Under the Zoning Ordinance Code, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the grading is not completed in accordance with approved plans within one year. This Conditional Use Permit is for excavation and fill only. A separate building permit, which may impose additional requirements must be obtained prior to any building construction activities. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8d - Edgewood excavate fill CUP Page 6 of 7 Excerpt - Unofficial Minutes Planning Commission August 20, 2003 3B. The request of the Edgewood Investors for a Conditional Use Permit for the excavation of approximately 13,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and processing waste and backfill of approximately 13,000 cubic yards of imported soil on Industrial Property located at 2401 Edgewood Ave. Case No. 03-47-CUP Ms. Jeremiah presented a staff report regarding the request of Edgewood Investors, LLC, also known as Real Estate Recycling, for a CUP to allow approximately 7,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil and approximately 6,000 cubic yards of lithium ore processing waste to be excavated. Ms. Jeremiah stated that after excavation approximately 13,000 cubic yards of soil will be imported and placed on site to bring the grades to those described in the grading plan. It is being proposed that the existing 105,336 square foot industrial building will be demolished and replaced with a single-story 79,000 square foot office/warehouse building. Ms. Jeremiah said the proposed route for trucks to haul the fill off-site and on-site is to use Edgewood Avenue, Cedar Lake Road, and Highway 100. As a condition of approval, staff is recommending that trucks be prohibited from using Eliot View Road and Florida Avenue to access Cedar Lake Road. Ms. Jeremiah wants to make it clear that absolutely no construction activity of any kind is to take place before 7:00 a.m. She said there are a number of health and safety protocols in place, as well as dust control practices, which fall under the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, and they have a Response Action Plan. Staff is recommending approval of the CUP for this hauling activity subject to the site being developed in accordance with the grading plan, that trucks use only Edgewood Avenue and Cedar Lake Road, the hours of construction be strictly observed, that the site must be watered for dust control, streets must be kept clean throughout hauling routes, a financial surety is to be submitted, and operations must comply with all noise restrictions or the applicant must obtain a temporary noise permit. Commissioner Morris asked if there are any proposed traffic control, traffic devices or regulatory person to be situated at the T-intersection. Ms. Jeremiah responded no, but there could be a recommendation to have a flag person or other traffic control there. Commissioner Morris said he strongly suggests that be done. Commissioner Gothberg said he would like a condition be added that Cedar Lake Road eastward to Highway 100 be used exclusively, and Cedar Lake Road to the west not be used. Chair Robertson suggested looking at the return route from the west on Cedar Lake Road to prevent left turns across Cedar Lake Road. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8d - Edgewood excavate fill CUP Page 7 of 7 Paul Hyde, applicant, said his intention was to head only eastward on Cedar Lake Road, not west. Commissioner Finkelstein expressed concern about children in proximity to the construction site. Ms. Jeremiah and Mr. Hunt said the site is fenced, and Ms. Jeremiah said the stockpiles will be covered with tarps during non-construction hours. Commissioner Carper asked about the number of trucks, hours of hauling and volume to be anticipated. Mr. Hyde said the landfill location has not yet been selected but landfills typically close at 4:30 p.m. so he would not anticipate hauling later than that. He was not able to determine a volume amount at this time. Commissioner Morris recommended that the typical language about violations associated with construction and hauling be included with conditions. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. With no one wishing to speak, Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. It was moved by Commissioner Morris to adopt a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit subject to conditions listed in the resolution; and with the conditions discussed by the Commission, that is, the inclusion in the language of fines if operating before or after the specified times, and the condition for traffic signaling devices, warning devices or a flag person—Commissioner Morris would like a sign posted to warn motorists of trucks hauling—to be implemented as needed. The motion passed 6-0. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 1 of 15 8e. Request of SLP Motors, LLC for a Final PUD to redevelop the Win Stephen Buick Pontiac property for Westside Volkswagen 2370 and 2440 State Highway 100 S Case Nos. 03-14-PUD Final PUD to allow the redevelopment of an automobile dealership, including replacing the building at 2370 TH 100, remodel the building at 2440 TH 100 and add a parking ramp at 2440 TH 100. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolution approving Final PUD subject to the conditions in the resolution. Current Zoning: C2 – General Commercial F2 - Floodplain Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial Background: On June 4, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the Preliminary PUD with variances for the subject property. The Planning Commission continued the public hearing until June 18, when it recommended approval of the request on a vote of 4 to 0. The owner of the medical office building to the south provided the only public comment during the hearing. On July 7, 2003, the City Council approved the Preliminary PUD with variances for the subject property. Three variances were granted to accommodate the placement of the proposed parking ramp due to the residential adjacency and included: § reductions to setbacks for the parking ramp from residentially developed parcels, § increased parking ramp height, and § reduction in the required bufferyards and elimination of the requirement for a berm or berm wall. On August 6, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval of the Final PUD. No one from the public spoke at the meeting. Subsequent to the Planning commission meeting staff has had more detailed discussion related to construction phasing issues (see last section of Issues Analysis). The subject property is located on the west side of State Highway 100 S. with frontage road access. The property received special permits to operate a motor vehicle sales lot (Stephens Buick) in 1962 and 1964 under a previous industrial zoning classification and prior to the delineation of the flood plain or adoption of flood plain regulations. There are currently a number of non-conformities on the site including parking setbacks, signage, and bufferyards. All of the existing signs are being removed, and the applicant is submitting a new sign package for the PUD site. The proposed site plan and landscape plan show the conforming setbacks and bufferyards. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 2 of 15 Industrial uses are located north and west of this property and a medical office use and a residential use are located to the south. About a third of the southwest portion of the southern lot is located in a flood zone and the existing sales lot on this property frequently floods resulting in damage to the vehicles displayed there. The requested use is permitted by Conditional Use Permit. The applicant is requesting a PUD so that the two parcels can be considered together as one overall development. STEPHENS DR 2 3 R D S T W (/100 Subject Subject St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 3 of 15 Site Data: PUD Size (2 lots): 6.96 Acres Current Land Use Auto Dealership Proposed Land Use Auto Dealership Other required approvals: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Variances Approved 3 Building Area existing 63,693 square feet Proposed 59,666 square feet Parking Existing 720 approx. Proposed 747 Description of Request: The applicant proposes to remove the existing building on the north property and replace it with a new building to house the Volkswagen dealership and service that is currently located on the east side of TH 100 at Cedar Lake Road. The building on the south lot is being retained and rehabilitated for the used car VW sales office and car wash. The existing canopies will be removed and other site improvements are proposed including a 3-level parking ramp along the west property line of the south property. The parking ramp is being proposed as a remedy for the current flooding problem. Storage of the 100-year flood will occur under the ramp. The applicant is proposing to use the lower two levels of the parking ramp to store inventory and the upper level for employee parking. This configuration will allow for snow removal without relocating the car inventory. The property abuts commercial and industrial property to the north, south and west, except that a portion of property in the southwest corner of the southerly lot abuts a residential parking lot. The actual apartment building is located 130 feet from the property line. The applicant is proposing to locate a 3-level parking ramp along the western lot line of the southerly lot over the existing floodplain. The existing flood plain area is far more extensive than what occurs on the subject parcel, extending to the south and west. The applicant was granted three variances to accommodate the placement of the parking ramp due to the residential adjacency. These include reductions to setbacks from residentially developed parcels, the parking ramp height, and bufferyard. The applicant has stated that due to the popularity of the Volkswagen, the Cedar Lake Road (1820 Quentin Ave S.) site is too small to handle the sales volumes and the improvements proposed for this site are in keeping with the corporate image established for Volkswagen. To help alleviate problems at the Cedar Lake Road site, the southern lot is currently being used in its current condition for Volkswagen display and sales. The proposal is to construct a new building on the north lot first. When that is complete then the construction will move to the southern lot with the remodel of the existing southern building and construction of the parking ramp. It is desirable for the applicant to have continuous use of part of the site in order to alleviate some of the congestion on the Cedar Lake Road property. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 4 of 15 Issues: • Are the requirements of the PUD ordinance met, including all of the submittal requirements? • Are the Final PUD plan consistent with the Preliminary Plat resolution and plans? § Are the Final PUD plans consistent with zoning ordinance requirements? § How does continuous use of the parcel affect construction phasing? Issue Analysis: • Are the requirements of the PUD ordinance met, including all of the submittal requirements? A. The design shall consider the whole of the project and shall create a unified environment within project boundaries by ensuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and design and efficient use of utilities. The applicant is requesting a PUD in order that the two properties can be considered together as one development. The proposal is to replace an existing building on the northerly parcel and to remodel the existing building on the southerly lot and add a parking ramp. The exterior design of the buildings will use similar materials, decorative motif, and colors. In addition, all of the existing canopies and signs will be removed, the parking reorganized with a new circulation pattern and a reduced number of curb cuts. The proposal adds sidewalk along all the public ways and adds extensive landscaping, both internal and along the perimeters. The PUD requires a “higher standard” of development than would be required under a conditional use permit. Several features of the proposal are of a higher standard. These include: § Building materials: Proposed building materials exceed the code requirements for 60% class 1 materials for the proposed new building and for 3 sides of the existing building. The 4th side of the existing building is concrete block, and will not be visible from off-site. The 60% Class 1 requirement does not apply to building elevations that are not visible from off-site. The proposal is to paint the block to match the existing brick and to add a pre-finished aluminum band across the top to match the new building. § Parking ramp: A parking structure is considered a higher standard than a surface parking lot. The proposed building materials for the parking ramp exceed the requirements for parking ramps; the proposal is to use a brick veneer for the entire ramp. Staff, the Planning Commission and the City Council approved the Preliminary Plat finding that all of these proposed improvements meet the intent of this section. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 5 of 15 B. The design of the PUD shall achieve the maximum compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses, both existing and proposed, and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse affects of the surrounding land uses on the PUD. The proposed parking ramp will be located on the west part of the southern lot. The walls that are visible from the residential uses to the south will not have openings and will be covered with a brick veneer that matches the main building on the north property. The parking ramp wall will buffer the activity associated with the dealership from view. A bufferyard E is proposed between the south parking ramp wall and adjacent residential use. The proposed bufferyards around the periphery of the development will buffer this use from all of the adjacent streets and uses. C. The design shall take into account any modifications of ordinance requirements permitted by Section 36-367(d) of this ordinance and provide appropriate solutions to eliminate the adverse impacts of any modification required for approval of the PUD. The applicant is not seeking any modifications from Section 36-367(d). The PUD is requested so that both properties can be considered as one when applying limits on used car sales (see motor vehicle sales conditions below). The applicant has submitted all of the necessary drawings and application materials to evaluate the proposed development. Public Works has found that the final grading, drainage and erosion control plan and storm water calculations are acceptable. The site plan and landscape plans indicate that the proposal intends to meet all of the ordinance requirements, except those for which a variance has been granted. The Environmental Coordinator has requested that two tree species shown on the landscape plan be changed, one because of hardiness and the other because it has become invasive. The applicant has agreed to this change and will submit a corrected landscape plan prior to building permit. • Are the Final PUD plan consistent with the Preliminary Plat resolution and plans? The Preliminary Plat drawings are consistent with the approved Preliminary Plat resolution. There have been several minor changes to the plans. These include: § Modification to the parking ramp elevations and floor plans that reflect a functional redesign. The north and south ramp elevation plans no longer show a “split” floor. This redesign allows for a reduction in total height of the ramp. § A small landscaped area on the south side of the north building has been redesigned and reduced in size in order to allow vehicle drop off. The plan continues to meet the ordinance requirements for internal landscaping. § Are the Final PUD plans consistent with zoning ordinance requirements? The zoning code permits motor vehicle sales by conditional use permit in the C2—General Commercial district. There are a number of conditions listed that need to be met in order to approve the use. Parking ramps are also permitted in the C2 district and have additional requirements related to height, setbacks, and landscaping when located within 200 feet of a lot St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 6 of 15 with a residential or institutional use. The southwest portion of the southern lot is located within the 100-year floodplain, which requires additional conditions. Floodplain. About a third of the southern lot is located within the regulatory flood plain. The Zoning Code prohibits any fill in the floodplain unless compensating storage is provided. The applicant is proposing to fill a portion of the floodplain between the existing building and the southern lot line and to provide the compensating storage under the parking ramp. Public Works has reviewed the proposal and finds it an acceptable solution. Cut and fill calculations have been submitted and found to indicate a balance of cut and fill. Motor vehicle sales conditions: a. No previously registered but currently unlicensed or nonoperable vehicles shall be stored on premises. This has been added as a condition of approval. b. A minimum of 50% of the vehicles for sale on the premises shall be new vehicles. This condition is met as a whole for the PUD site. The plans submitted indicate that 54.2% of the sales display area of the combined sites will be for new vehicles, while 45.8% will be for used vehicles. This has also been made a condition of approval. c. All open sales or rental lots shall be operated in conjunction with a building or buildings containing the same or similar materials as displayed on the open sales or rental lot. This condition is met. Two sales buildings are proposed to contain new and used vehicle sales office and display. d. The building and the sales or rental lot shall be on one contiguous site. This condition is being met through the PUD. The subject properties are actually two properties that are divided by Stephens Drive. Through the PUD they would operate as one site. e. All parking and paved areas shall meet all of the landscaping and design requirements of section 36-361. The final PUD landscape plan indicates that this condition is met. f. String lighting shall be prohibited. This has been added as a condition of approval. g. The area of open sale or rental lot used for storage and display of merchandise shall not exceed two square feet for every one square foot of building on the site devoted to the same or similar use or accessory use. This condition is met. The total square footage of building area on both sites equals 59,666 square feet. Thus, an open sales lot of 119,322 square feet is allowable under this condition. The plans proposed 91,484 square feet of open sales and display. This has been added as a condition of approval. h. No test driving shall be permitted on local residential streets. Staff acknowledges that it may be difficult to enforce this requirement. However, the applicant has submitted two alternative test-driving routes. One of these routes will not be available after the redesign of TH 100. In the interim, both routes are acceptable. The proposed routes will be included in the official exhibits for the PUD and are included as a condition of approval. i. No outdoor public address system shall be permitted. The existing buildings do currently have an outdoor public address system. In fact, staff recently received a complaint that a loud speaker was being used on site. A condition of the Preliminary PUD is that this be dismantled during the redevelopment of this property. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 7 of 15 Today, there are numerous alternatives to outdoor loudspeakers such as pagers and mobile phones. This has been added as a condition of approval. j. All customer and employee parking shall be clearly designated and signed. This has been added as a condition of approval. k. No motor vehicle transport loading or unloading shall be permitted on any minor residential street. This has been added as a condition of approval. l. No display or storage of motor vehicles shall be permitted on any public right-of-way. This has been added as a condition of approval. m. A bufferyard C shall be provided along all public ways and along an abutting O district. The Zoning Code also requires a 6-foot setback for parking lots from a public right of way in addition to the above requirement. The Final PUD landscape plan indicates that this provision is met. n. A bufferyard F shall be installed and maintained along all property lines of an R use. A variance was approved to reduce this requirement to a bufferyard E along the south property line and a bufferyard D along the west property line that abuts a residential use district. The Final PUD landscape plan complies with the requirement after the variance. o. The storage lot shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from an R use. The site plan indicates this condition is met. p. The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of the redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood in which it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying this requirement. The Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map were recently amended to permit this use. Parking ramp. The applicant is proposing to construct a three level parking ramp along the west property line of the southern lot. Parking ramps are permitted as accessory uses in the C2— General Commercial District, however these are subject to the same conditions as parking ramps as principal uses. The southwest portion of the south lot abuts the parking lot for an apartment building as is shown on the aerial photo. The actual apartment building is about 130 feet from the property line (142 feet from the parking structure). The south and west elevations of the parking ramp do not show any openings so that these elevations more closely resemble a building than a typical parking ramp. The ramp façade is proposed to be covered with a brick veneer using a decorative motif and patterns that match the proposed new building on the north lot. Ingress and egress from the parking ramp occur on the east side, away from the residential uses. Noise and activity associated with the parking ramp will be shielded from the residential property by the parking ramp structure itself. There are specific requirements that limit lighting on the roof of the parking ramp so it is not visible from neighboring residential uses. The applicant will be required to show how this is resolved prior to building permit being issued. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 8 of 15 Conditions for approval of a parking ramp include: a. The height of any parking ramp located within 200 feet of 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, may not penetrate the height of a line commencing at and perpendicular to said parcel and extending upward away from said parcel at a slope of five horizontal feet for each vertical foot. The City Council granted a variance from this provision of the code. The maximum height of the parking ramp is indicated on the Final PUD elevation exhibit. b. The minimum yard requirement for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of 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, shall be 50 feet. A variance was granted from this provision to allow the parking ramp to be located 12 feet from the south property line and 6 feet from the west property line. c. Access shall be from a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or otherwise located so that access can be provided without conducting significant traffic on local residential streets. The proposed parking ramp meets this requirement. d. The parking ramp shall be screened from view from any abutting property located within an R district with a bufferyard F. This bufferyard shall include a B4 berm or Bw3 berm wall if the parking ramp is above ground. A variance was granted to reduce this requirement to meet the total number of points required for a bufferyard E on the south property line and a bufferyard D on the west property line. The Final PUD landscape plan complies with the requirements of the variance. e. If the parking ramp is located within 400 feet of 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, all light sources on the top deck of a parking ramp shall be below the sight lines drawn from a point one foot about the light source to any pint within said parcel ten feet lower than the maximum structure height of that use district at a distance of 400 feet from the wall of the parking ramp nearest to said parcel. An analysis of the lighting will be required prior to issuance of a building permit and this has been added as a condition of approval. Other Ordinance Code Requirements: Parking Standards The proposed plan exceeds the ordinance parking requirements. Open sales lots require 1 space for each 2500 square feet of land used for sales and display. Under motor vehicle service and repair, the ordinance also requires 4 parking spaces for each service bay, each bay can be a maximum of 400 square feet in size. The developer is proposing to use 91,482 square feet for display and 42 service bays are proposed in the new Volkswagen building on the northern site. Thus requiring a total of 205 parking spaces. 727 stalls in total are proposed on site; 110 customer parking stalls, 20 employee stalls on the surface lot, 99 employee stalls on the 3rd level of the parking ramp, 300 vehicle display stalls, 198 inventory parking stalls on the 1st and 2nd levels of the ramp. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 9 of 15 The applicant has stated that there are 720 stalls existing on the site and that the 727 stalls proposed would only replace what is currently existing. The proposed site plan reorganizes the site adding curbs, drive aisles, and landscaping. The parking ramp displaces a number of at- grade parking places. Tree removal/replacement. There are no existing trees on the site and thus no tree replacement is required. Sidewalks and Trails. The Zoning Ordinance requires that sidewalks be provided along all public ways of commercial development. There is a need for a sidewalk/trail connection from the neighborhood to the south to the regional trail north of this site just south of the Burlington Northern railroad property. The applicant has agreed to provide sidewalks and trails and these are reflected on the Final PUD site plan. The site plan indicates that a portion of these sidewalks and trails are on private property. Staff has informed the applicant that an easement will be required over that area of private property where the sidewalks are shown. A legal description for the easement has been submitted and has been found acceptable by staff. The easement must be recorded prior to issuance of any building permits. There has been considerable discussion, but no resolution about the final location of the cross walk on Stephens Drive. The Final PUD site plan may need to be adjusted to reflect a location other than what is being shown. The Final PUD resolution indicates that pedestrian crossings are required to be painted on the roadways and pedestrian crossing signs installed prior to a certificate of occupancy for the site. Grading and Utility Plan Generally the grading and utility plans are found to be adequate. Other Issues The Demolition Plan shows the removal of all of the canopies as well as the existing building on the north lot. There are several issues related to the demolition of the existing building related to utility services that will need to be addressed as part of the demolition permit process. Recently, the land use “Autobody/painting” was added as a permitted accessory use to “Motor vehicles sales”. The proposed PUD does not include “Autobody/painting”. Since this accessory use may have off-site impacts, a condition was added to the Final PUD resolution that would require the applicant to amend the PUD before this accessory use could be added to the current operation. A lighting plan with photometrics is required that shows the lighting levels proposed for the site and that indicates light levels at the property lines consistent with code requirements. The applicant is required to submit this plan prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicant will be required to irrigate the landscape areas on the site. An irrigation plan will be required prior to issuance of a building permit. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 10 of 15 § How does continuous use of the parcel affect construction phasing? In order to reduce the off-site impacts associated with high sales volumes that Westside Volkswagen was experiencing at its current site at 1820 Quentin Avenue S. (Cedar Lake Road east of TH 100), a portion of that business was transferred to the southern lot at 2440 State Highway 100. The applicant is proposing to continue its Volkswagen operation on this site during construction of the new building on the north lot. After the northern building is complete, construction and site work will commence on the southern lot. In order to ensure that the site improvements are completed on the southern lot, staff recommends requiring building permits for the parking ramp and the southern building be issued and a letter of credit for site work be obtained prior to issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the north building. Staff recommends that the permanent certificate of occupancy not be issued until all of the work on both lots is complete. Staff believes this is important since the two sites received benefits through the PUD and do not meet car sales ordinance requirements unless redeveloped as one. These conditions have been discussed with the applicant and included in the resolution. Due to this sequencing, it is necessary to maintain some amount of signage on the southern lot during construction of the 2370 lot. The resolution does require that all non-conforming signs on both properties be removed prior to beginning any site work on the 2370 lot. The Development Agreement, required by the Final PUD resolution will also address the sequencing and signage issues. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Final PUD subject to the conditions indicated in the resolution. Attachments: Final PUD resolution Final PUD plans supplement Prepared by: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator (952) 924-2574 Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 11 of 15 RESOLUTION NO. 03 - ____ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL LOCATED AT 2370 and 2440 STATE HIGHWAY 100 SOUTH WHEREAS, the City Council approved the Preliminary PUD on July 7, 2003, Resolution No. 03-082; and WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received and deemed complete on May 19, 2003 from the applicant, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final PUD at the meeting of August 6, 2003; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Final PUD on a 5- 0 vote with all members present voting in the affirmative, and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the staff reports, Planning Commission minutes and testimony of those appearing at the public hearing or otherwise including comments in the record of decision. BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. SLP Motors, LLC (The Luther Company) has made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the C-2 General Commercial district located at 2370 and 2440 State Highway 100 South for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Tract I: That part of the South 310 feet of the North 340 feet of the Southwest Quarter of the Northwest Quarter of Section 31, Township 29, Range 24, lying West of State Highway No. 100 and lying East of a line drawn at a right angle to the North line of said quarter quarter and from a point therein distant 375.18 feet East of the Northwest corner of said quarter quarter. Abstract Tract II: Parcel 1: That part of Tracts A and B, Registered Land Survey No. 493, Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin, lying Easterly and Southerly of a line parallel with and 22.5 feet Easterly and Southerly of a line described as beginning at a point in the South line of said Tract B, distant 443.3 feet Easterly as measured along said South line, from the Southwest corner of said Tract B; thence North 2 degrees 24 minutes East, 298.84 feet to an intersection with a line parallel with and 242.5 feet Southerly of the Southerly right of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 12 of 15 way line of the Great Northern Railroad right of way, thence North 73 degrees 08 minutes East along last said parallel to the Easterly line of Tract C in said Registered Land Survey and there terminating; except the East 50 feet of the above described property. For the purposes of this description the West line of said Tract A is assumed to bear due North and South. Parcel 2: That part of the Easterly 50 feet of Tracts A and B which lies Southerly of the Southerly line of Tract C and of the Westerly extension of said Southerly line, all in Registered Land Survey No. 493. Files of Registrar of Titles, County of Hennepin. Parcel 3: That part of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northwest 1/4 of Section 31, Township 29, Range 24, lying south of the Great Northern Railway right of way and West of State Highway No. 100, except that part described as follows, to-wit: Commencing at the point of intersection of the Southerly right of way line of the Great Northern Railway with the Westerly right of way line of State Highway No. 100; thence Southerly along said Westerly right of way line of State Highway No. 100, 377.6 feet; thence Westerly parallel with said Southerly right of way line of Great Northern Railway, a distance of 400 feet; thence at right angles Northerly 250 feet to the Southerly right of way line of Great Northern Railway; thence Easterly along said right of way line 220 feet; thence at right angles Northerly along Great Northern Railway right of way 80 feet; thence Easterly along the Southerly right of way line of Great Northern Railway 364 feet to the point of beginning, also except that part thereof embraced in Registered Land Survey No. 493. Torrens 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 03-14-PUD) and the effect of the proposed PUD on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that the PUD will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also determined that the proposed PUD is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 36-367(b)(5). 4. The contents of Planning Case File 03-14-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Final Planned Unit Development at the location described are approved based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 13 of 15 1. The site shall be developed, used and maintained in accordance with the Final PUD official exhibits which shall be amended prior to signing to meet the following conditions: a. The final site plan shall be modified to comply with the final crosswalk location as approved by Public Works, if different from what has been proposed. b. The final landscape plan shall be modified to reflect the final crosswalk location (if different from proposed). 2. Final PUD approval and development is contingent upon developer meeting all conditions of final approval including all Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requirements. 3. Prior to any site work, the applicant shall comply with the following requirements: a. Pursuant to Section 36-367(e)(6) of the Zoning Ordinance, a development agreement shall be executed between the developer and the City that covers at a minimum, sidewalk and construction and maintenance, repair and cleaning of public streets, requirement for a sidewalk and trail easement, the use of interim signage during construction of the 2370 building, construction phasing, and requirements for escrows or letters of credit to ensure compliance. b. Submit financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the costs of sidewalk installation and repair/cleaning of public streets. c. Reimbursement of City attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents. d. Record an easement for the required sidewalk/trail where it is located on the private property. e. A copy of the Watershed District permit shall be forwarded to the City. f. Any other necessary permits from other agencies shall be obtained. g. Sign assent form and official exhibits. h. Obtain the required erosion control permits, utility permits and other permits required by the City. i. Meet any other conditions as required by the development agreement. 4. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements, the developer shall comply with the following: a. Meet any Fire Department emergency access requirements for during construction. b. The applicant shall furnish the City with evidence of recording of the sidewalk and trail easement. c. Building materials samples shall be submitted to and approved by City. d. A lighting plan with photometrics, fixture detail, and irrigation plan that comply with City ordinance regulations shall be submitted and approved by the community development department. These shall include lighting plans and details for the roof of the parking ramp. e. Remove all non-conforming signs from the PUD site. f. A revised site plan showing a relocated pedestrian crossing shall be submitted. g. A revised landscape plan showing modifications of plant species as indicated by the Environmental Coordinator and accommodating the relocated pedestrian crossing shall be submitted. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 14 of 15 5. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction: a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays and 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays. b. Loud equipment shall be kept as far as possible from residences at all times. c. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. d. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. e. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in order to mitigate the impact of construction on surrounding properties. 6. Prior to issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy for the 2370 property, the developer shall comply with the following: a. Complete construction drawings and obtain building permits for the new parking ramp and building improvements for the existing 2440 building. b. Submit a letter of credit for completion of all site and exterior building improvements of the 2440 site. c. Crosswalks and pedestrian crossing signs shall be located in accordance with the Final PUD site plan exhibit. 7. Prior to issuance of any final certificate of occupancy for the properties, all site and building improvements including the parking ramp shall be completed on both properties and 20% of the landscaping portion of the letter of credit shall be maintained for replacement. 8. During operation of the motor vehicle sales the property owner shall comply with the following: a. No previously registered but currently unlicensed or non-operable vehicles shall be stored on premises. b. A minimum of 50% of the vehicles for sale on the PUD premises shall be new vehicles. c. String lighting is prohibited. d. The area of open sale or rental lot used for storage and display of merchandise shall not exceed two square feet each square foot of building area. e. Test driving is prohibited on local residential streets. A map showing test driving routes as indicated in the approved PUD exhibits shall be provided to all customers and employees. f. Outdoor public address systems are prohibited. g. All customer and employee parking shall be clearly designated and signed. h. The display or storage of motor vehicles is prohibited on any public right-of-way. i. No motor vehicle transport loading or unloading shall be permitted on any minor residential street. 9. Autobody/painting is not permitted as an accessory use to the PUD without a major amendment to it. 10. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8e - Luther Final PUD Page 15 of 15 Pursuant to Section 36-367(e)(6) of the Zoning Ordinance, the City will require execution of a development agreement as a condition of approval of the Final P.U.D. The development agreement shall address those issues which the City Council deems appropriate and necessary. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 03-14-PUDfinal:res/ord St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 1 of 21 8f. Request of Methodist Hospital for a Preliminary PUD to allow a phased expansion. Case No 03-44-PUD 6700 Excelsior Blvd Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Preliminary PUD, subject to the conditions included in the resolution. Current Zoning: RC, Multi-family Residential F2 - Floodplain Comprehensive Plan Designation: Office Background: The subject property, Methodist Hospital, is bound by Excelsior Blvd and the Meadowbrook Golf Course to the south; Louisiana Avenue and Minnehaha Creek to the west; industrial property to the north; and single family homes to the east. The existing R-C Zoning on the property allows hospitals by CUP or PUD. Methodist Hospital, built in 1957, is currently under a special permit, which was first adopted in 1965 with the latest amendment in 1998. Flood Plain and wetland are located on the west side of the property adjacent to the Methodist Hospital campus. Methodist is now proposing to convert the existing special permit to a planned unit development (PUD). They are also requesting approval of two phases of new construction. Preliminary PUD approval for Phase I and concept plan approval for the future Phase II projects are being requested at this time. A PUD modification to the R-C District height restriction is also being requested for the existing 8-story hospital building and a mechanical penthouse on top of the proposed 6-story Heart & Vascular Center. On June 16, 2003, the City Council approved a resolution approving an EAW, finding no need for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and requiring certain mitigation as described in the EAW (the EAW included both a parking and traffic study conducted by SRF). On November 19 and 21, 2002, Park Nicollet held neighborhood meetings to discuss their proposed expansion of Methodist Hospital as well as future expansion of the Park Nicollet clinic site (Park Center). A smaller neighborhood meeting was held by the City on December 11, 2002 to discuss the scope of the traffic studies associated with the expansions. Adjustments were made to analyze traffic issues raised by the neighborhoods. On March 27, 2003, an additional full-scale neighborhood meeting was held to discuss preliminary findings of the EAW for the Methodist expansion and to discern if anything additional needed to be addressed. A public hearing for the EAW was held at the May 21, 2003 Planning Commission meeting. On June 10, 16, 24, and July 8 and 22, 2003, PUD Process meetings were held with neighborhood representatives to further discuss the proposed expansion of the Hospital and PUD process. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 2 of 21 On July 29, 2003, a much larger community/neighborhood meeting was held to provide an overview of the preliminary PUD prior to the Planning Commissions review. On August 6, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Finkelstein abstained) to recommend approval of the Preliminary PUD subject to the conditions recommended by staff. During the public hearing a resident requested that the Commission consider attaching several additional conditions. These are outlined in the attached Minutes. The Planning Commission recommended further consideration be given to the comments voiced by the neighborhood. Staff has addressed several of the comments within the staff report. On August 12th and 26th, additional PUD process meetings were held with the neighborhood representatives to further discuss design and neighborhood mitigation. To date, there have been 12 neighborhood meetings and two public hearings related to this project. Existing Conditions: Site Data: PUD Size : 38.10 Acres Current Land Use Hospital/Clinic Proposed Land Use Hospital/Clinic Other required approvals: Minnehaha Creek WatershedDistrict PUD modification requested 1 (Height) Building Area existing 782,427 square feet After Proposed Phase I 956,727 square feet FAR existing .47 After Proposed Phase I .58 GFAR existing .10 After Proposed Phase I .11 Parking Existing 2,326 approx. After Proposed Phase I 2,497 Description of Request: Methodist is proposing a two phase expansion of their hospital facilities. Phase I includes the demolition of the existing 32,500 square foot Tourtellotte building, located on the south side of the hospital. This is proposed to be replaced with a new 206,800 square foot Heart and Vascular Center. A new parking ramp is proposed in the Blue Parking Lot, south of the hospital closest to Excelsior Blvd. The ramp would be connected to the Heart and Vascular Center by a covered walkway. Proposed site circulation improvements are intended to improve the safety of the Excelsior Blvd entry and to discourage its use by delivery vehicles and by patients, staff and visitors who are better served by the north Louisiana Ave. entry. A site circulation diagram has been submitted (this provides the long term goals of both Phase I & Phase II) but final design St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 3 of 21 will be reviewed with the final PUD approval. Preliminary PUD approval is being requested for Phase I at this time. Phase II, includes building expansions planned for a future date. The application has not defined the exact timing, size and location of these future expansions, however the applicant is proposing to define a framework for the future development. The Concept Plan submitted identifies the following projects as part of Phase II: horizontal expansion of the Meadowbrook Building, vertical expansion of the east and west tower of the Hospital Building, future laboratory facility, and a new parking ramp in the Orange Parking Lot on the north side of the building or the northwest side of the Campus. Louisiana entry improvements are also proposed to increase the utilization of this as an entrance point. The goal is to direct staff, patients and visitors to the proper entry point and decrease the use of the internal connecting roadway east of the hospital, adjacent to the residential properties. There has not been enough information provided for Phase II to analyze it as part of this Preliminary PUD. Therefore, Phase II will require both preliminary and final PUD approval. The April 23, 2003 Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) analyzed a total hospital building area of 1,235,927 square feet. This included approximately 209,000 square feet for Phase I and 217,000 with phase II. The applicant is proposing to keep the total campus building area below the total area analyzed in the EAW, however, the building area in each phase has been modified. The applicant is proposing to construct less square footage with Phase I, 206,800 sq. ft, and more with Phase II, 279,200 sq. ft, than was analyzed in the EAW. Staff does not believe this will have any substantial impact on the analysis or recommendations of the EAW. Staff has confirmed this with SRF Consulting, who prepared the EAW. The remainder of this staff report analyzes Phase I for Preliminary PUD. Issues: • Is the Proposed Development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? • Is the Preliminary PUD plan consistent with zoning ordinance requirements? • Are the requirements of the PUD ordinance met, including all of the submittal requirements? • Are there any other issues? Issue Analysis: Is the Proposed Development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan? The subject property is guided as Office. This land uses states, “The office designation currently applies to 3% of the City’s land area….This category allows for concentrated areas of fairly intensive office and mixed use development.” The proposed project is for a 6-story hospital addition. Hospitals in the R-C District are required to have an Office designation. Tall buildings, such as the Traveler’s Tower near I-394 and Hwy St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 4 of 21 100 are expected in the office designation, and the current proposal is not as tall as some parts of the existing hospital. Plan By Neighborhood This Section of the Comprehensive Plan currently states: “This diverse neighborhood contains residential, industrial, and medical uses. Methodist Hospital, recognized as a trauma unit, is retained as a major medical facility. Meadowbrook Clinic is located immediately to the north of that facility. Access to both the clinic and hospital is provided at Excelsior Boulevard and at Louisiana Avenue.” Staff believes the proposal is compatible with this neighborhood plan provided neighborhood impacts are minimized. • Is the Preliminary PUD plan consistent with zoning ordinance requirements? The zoning code permits hospitals by conditional use permit in the R-C High-Density Multi- Family District. There are a number of conditions listed that need to be met in order to approve the use. Parking ramps are also permitted in the RC district as accessory uses and have additional requirements related to height, setbacks, and landscaping when located within 200 feet of a residential or institutional use. The western portion of the property is located within the 100-year floodplain, which requires additional conditions. Following are the applicable zoning ordinance standards and what is proposed for this project: Compliance Table for Phase I RC Ordinance Allowed by PUD Proposed Building Height 6 stories or 75 feet No maximum if consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Phase I: 6 stories/74 feet plus 18 feet for mechanical penthouse. Existing Hospital: 8 stories (PUD modification requested) Ramp Height 23.42 feet* Same 23 feet (elevation 925’– 4”) Building Setbacks Front: 30 feet, West Side: 49 feet East Side:54 feet Rear: NA: No required yards Front: ~440 feet West Side: 166 feet East Side:253.5 feet Rear: NA: Ramp Setbacks Front: 30 feet West Side: 15 feet East Side: 50 feet Rear: NA: No required yards Front: 39.5 feet West Side: ~52 feet East Side: 117 feet Rear: NA: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 5 of 21 Parking stalls Max required 2460 after 10% transit reduction 2091 after allowable 15% reduction 2499 spaces Landscape Buffers Bufferyard F required for east property line adjacent to residential Same Bufferyard F Floor Area Ratio 1.2 max Limited by height and GFAR .58 Ground Floor Area Ratio .25 max 5% increase .11 *See Parking Ramp condition A below Floodplain. About a half of the western portion of the lot is located within the regulatory 100- year flood plain. Portions of the existing building lie within the 100 year flood zone at an approximate elevation of 893.4ft. The Zoning Code prohibits any fill in the floodplain unless compensating storage is provided. The Heart and Vascular Center and parking ramp are proposed to be outside the Flood boundary. The applicant is proposing to fill a portion of the floodplain west of the proposed ramp and to provide the compensating storage in a nearby location. Public Works has reviewed the proposal and finds it an acceptable solution. No actual calculations have been submitted that show the balance of cut and fill. These will be required prior to final PUD approval. Hospital a. Buildings located within 100 feet of any R-1, R-2 or R-3 district shall be limited to the lesser of four stories or 45 feet. The height of all other buildings shall be regulated by yard and floor area ratio requirements. The building is proposed to be located 283 feet from residential property. The building height is proposed to be 6 stories and 74 feet (or elevation 974 feet), excluding the penthouse, when measured from the mean curb level along Excelsior Blvd (The building is proposed to be 70.5 feet or at an elevation of (or elevation 974 feet) on the east elevation excluding the penthouse). See below for further discussions on the height of the building. The floor area ratio is proposed to be .58 and the ground floor area is proposed to be .11, which are under the ordinance maximum requirements. The floor and ground floor area ratios noted above factors in the entire lot area, including wetlands, per Code. Given the proximity of residential property and the fact that the location of the wetlands requires the hospital density to be concentrated closer to the nearby residential, staff believes it would be appropriate to analyze the net floor and ground floor area ratios for Methodist’s proposed expansions. The net property area is approximately 1,190,059 sq. ft. Thus for Phase I, the net floor area is proposed to be .80, and the net ground floor area is proposed to be .15. Staff also estimated the ratios for Phase II based on the General Development Plan. Staff estimated the net floor area to be approximately 1.04 after Phase II, and the net ground floor area .19. Both of these are under the ordinance maximum requirements even without including the wetland area which is allowed by Code. The neighborhood expressed interest in limiting the total amount of floor and ground floor on this property. Should the City Council decide to St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 6 of 21 recommend additional limits on future floor and ground floor area ratios, a condition of approval should be added to the resolution. However, future phases would be required to go through Preliminary and Final PUD approval. Therefore, the future proposed floor areas will be further reviewed through the public hearing process. b. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the comprehensive plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. This condition is met. Access to Methodist’s property is via Excelsior Blvd to the south and Louisiana Ave to the west. Excelsior Blvd is a Major Arterial and Louisiana is a Minor Arterial. c. Internal traffic circulation shall be designed to minimize traffic within 100 feet of any abutting residential property. There is an existing internal roadway near the eastern property line abutting single family properties. A bufferyard currently exists between the internal roadway and the single-family property. The bufferyard is proposed to be improved (see below). A site circulation/vehicular diagram has been submitted that details the applicant’s goals for improving internal traffic circulation. Phase I improvements are proposed to include redesigning the intersection at Excelsior Blvd. to improve vehicular and pedestrian safety. The entry drive will be improved to efficiently move vehicles to the new entry plaza and parking ramp. Currently this entry drive continues north and directly connects to the Emergency Department and north end of campus. The applicant is proposing design features intended to discourage the use of this portion of the roadway by creating the feel of a secondary roadway. Although easy access is necessary for emergency vehicles, the applicant’s goal is to design the secondary roadway in a way that diminishes the number of vehicles using Excelsior Blvd to access the north end of the campus. Final plans for changes to the entry will be reviewed as part of the final PUD application. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend these final plans be submitted as a condition of approval. Future revisions to the Louisiana Ave entry are also proposed as part of Phase II. A majority of Methodist’s on-campus parking is on the north end of the campus. This location is anticipated to become the “front door” for the majority of patients, visitors, vendors, and delivery vehicles. Future revisions are planned for the entry drive to improve truck access, and create an easily understood path to the future north front door. These changes will be reviewed with the future Phase II proposal. d. A bufferyard F shall be installed and maintained along any abutting R district. A bufferyard F is proposed along the eastern property line adjacent to Phase I, the parking ramp and Heart and Vascular Center. However, a more detailed analysis of the landscaping plan will be conducted with Final PUD. The existing bufferyard between the residential properties and the existing hospital and northern parking lots does not appear to meet Bufferyard F requirements, thus is nonconforming. The applicant is proposing to provide a Bufferyard F in the future with Phase II. The northern parking lot is also nonconforming with internal landscaping and lighting requirements. The Zoning code prohibits approval of the PUD unless all nonconformities are brought into compliance as a condition of approval. Staff believes the applicant should start St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 7 of 21 addressing how they are going to bring all existing nonconformities into compliance. Therefore, staff recommends a plan be submitted with Final PUD for bringing the nonconformities on the site into compliance (e.g., Bufferyard F along residential on north part of site; parking lot landscaping, lighting and other design aspects on north side). Staff is willing to work with the applicant on this plan. e. The property shall be designated for office use in the comprehensive plan. This condition is met. The property is guided as Office. Parking Ramp The applicant is proposing to construct a four level parking ramp in the blue parking lot, south of the hospital. Parking ramps are permitted as accessory uses in RC, Multi-Family Residential District. As stated the ramp is proposed to be four levels, two levels above ground level. It will hold approximately 475-500 vehicles. The ramp is approximately 117 feet from residential properties to the east. Ingress and egress from the parking ramp occur on the east and north sides. To minimize activity on the east side, this access is proposed to be for staff only. The north entrance would be a public access. Staff, patients and family members benefiting from services within the new Heart & Vascular Center will use the ramp. Architecturally the ramp is proposed to use a combination of brick, concrete, aluminum, metal, and cables. Three alternatives for the east elevation facing the residential properties have been proposed. The architectural details will be further analyzed with final PUD. There are specific requirements that limit lighting on the roof of the parking ramp so it is not visible from neighboring residential uses. Lighting plans will also be analyzed further with Final PUD. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend these as conditions of approval. Conditions for approval of a parking ramp include: a. The height of any parking ramp located within 200 feet of 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, may not penetrate the height of a line commencing at and perpendicular to said parcel and extending upward away from said parcel at a slope of five horizontal feet for each vertical foot. This condition is met. The proposed ramp is approximately 117 feet away from the residential property to the east. This property line is at an elevation of 901 feet 11 inches. Based upon the calculation above, the ramp cannot exceed 23.42 feet or an elevation of 925 feet 4 inches. The ramp is proposed to be approximately 22 feet at the south end of the east elevation, and 23 feet at the north end of the east elevation. During the public hearing a resident requested that a 6 foot tall opaque wall be installed on the top level of the ramp to screen vehicles from the residential properties. A 42 inch safety rail is required on all parking ramps. This rail is included in the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 8 of 21 proposed ramp height of 23 feet (924’ 3”). The ordinance allows parapet walls to extend 3 feet about the maximum height. Therefore, staff has made the interpretation that a 3 foot parapet screen wall could be installed on top of the 42 inch safety rail without a height variance. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend limiting the ramp to no more than two levels above ground level as proposed to ensure that the height does not increase at some point in the future. b. The minimum yard requirement for any parking ramp located within 200 feet of 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, shall be 50 feet. This condition is met. The ramp is proposed to be approximately 117 feet from the residential property. c. The parking ramp shall be screened from view from any abutting property located within an R district with a bufferyard F. This bufferyard shall include a B4 berm or Bw3 berm wall if the parking ramp is above ground. A Bufferyard F is proposed east of the ramp. As will be discussed in more detail below, some of the trees for the bufferyard are proposed to be transplanted twice. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend transplanting trees only once. The applicant is agreeable to this recommendation. The berm or berm wall requirement may be proposed to be met as a combination of grade differences, fence and architectural screening of the ramp. This will be reviewed in more detail with Final PUD. d. If the parking ramp is located within 400 feet of 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, all light sources on the top deck of a parking ramp shall be below the sight lines drawn from a point one foot about the light source to any point within said parcel ten feet lower than the maximum structure height of that use district at a distance of 400 feet from the wall of the parking ramp nearest to said parcel. Typically an analysis of the lighting is required prior to the issuance of any building permit. However as will be discussed further below, residents have expressed concerns with the light levels associated with Phase I. Therefore staff and the Planning Commission recommend a lighting plan be submitted for approval with final PUD. The PUD ordinance allows such requirements to be added to “fully present the intention and character of the PUD” (Sec 36- 367(e)(4)(h)). Other Ordinance Code Requirements: Parking Standards Hospitals require 1 space for each 350 square feet of gross floor area. Methodist utilizes both on-campus and off-campus parking. The hospital campus currently has a total of 2,326 parking spaces, 1,422 spaces are on-campus, and 1,112 are off-campus (See attached parking supply map for parking locations). The City owns a triangular piece of property, which is shown as parking lot in the northeast corner of Methodist’s plans. In 1998 Methodist entered into a 5 year lease, St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 9 of 21 with the option to renew the lease for 3 additional 5 year terms (total of 20 years), to use the City’s property for parking. In the event that the lease for parking on the City property or on their leased off-site parking lot is not renewed the hospital must secure parking to replace the leased spaces and maintain a minimum of 2499 spaces for the 956,727 sq. ft. hospital prior to Phase II construction. 173 net parking spaces are proposed to be added with the construction of the blue ramp on the south side of the hospital for a total of 2,499 spaces. The new ramp will have approximately 475 spaces, replacing the existing surface lot (302 spaces). Upon completion of Phase I, Methodist is proposed to be 956,727sq ft. After applying a 10% transit reduction, and 15% PUD reduction the required amount of parking per ordinance is 2,460 and 2,091 spaces respectively. Thus parking requirements for Phase I are met, provided the off-site spaces are maintained. This will be addressed at final. To accommodate potential future parking demands (as documented in the EAW (4/23/03) and Parking study (4/11/03) conducted by SRF), Methodist is proposing another new parking ramp as part of the future Phase II. As identified on the Concept Plan (attached), the Orange Lot Ramp is proposed to be on the western edge of the property within the current Orange Lot. Tree removal/replacement and landscaping. Both a tree removal and landscaping plans have been submitted. The tree removal plan proposes to transplant approximately 52 existing trees to an undisturbed area on site. When construction is complete, the trees are proposed to be relocated in designated areas proposed on the landscape plan. Jim Vaughan, the City’s forester has determined that at least 8 of these trees are too large to transplant twice successfully (including 4 - 10”cal. Ash, 10” cal. Weeping Cherry, 12” cal. Ash, and 30’ high spruce). The forester also recommended that cooler weather or dormant periods are best for transplanting. Staff is concerned that a majority of trees will not survive being transplanted more than once as proposed on the tree removal and landscaping plan. The City forester believes the success rate will be minimal. Therefore, staff and the Planning Commission recommend that the trees identified for transplanting only be moved one time prior to construction and new trees be planted after construction. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend new tree replacement and landscape plans reflecting this change be submitted for review with the Final PUD application. As stated earlier, the landscape plan proposes a Bufferyard F along the eastern property adjacent to Phase I. Staff is recommending a plan be submitted with Final PUD detailing how the landscaping and other nonconformities on the north side of the site will be brought into compliance. Sidewalks and Trails. There are existing sidewalks along Excelsior Blvd and Louisiana Ave., and internal sidewalks and trails throughout the hospital campus. The applicant is proposing new sidewalks adjacent to the new building and parking ramp. One of these is proposed to be located along the north side of the parking ramp as a connection from Excelsior Blvd to the new building. During the neighborhood meetings the applicant discussed a concept for a loop walking path throughout the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 10 of 21 hospital campus. This concept was not proposed as part of the preliminary PUD application. Should the applicant decide to pursue this sidewalk loop, staff and the Planning Commission recommend sidewalk plans be submitted with the final PUD application. Grading and Utility Plan Generally the preliminary grading and utility plans are found to be adequate. Signage Methodist Hospital’s existing signage, including freestanding entrance signs, building wall signs, and some intercampus directional signs (some of the directional signs may be exempt from the sign provisions), is currently over the ordinance’s maximum sign area limitations. Thus the signs are technically nonconforming. The ordinance states that a PUD cannot be issued for a property which contains a nonconformity unless that nonconformity is removed as a condition of the approval. Some options to bring signage into compliance include reducing the amount of signage, or obtaining an ordinance amendment or variance. A variance could potentially be run with the final PUD if a public hearing is published at final. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the signage be brought into compliance or variance approved prior to approval of the Final PUD and prior to the issuance of any new sign permits. An ordinance amendment is not recommended since the hospital is a unique use in the R-C district, and staff believes the variance findings can be met for this site if the sign ordinance proves too limiting. Architectural Design Details of the proposed architectural design will be reviewed as part of the Final PUD. However, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that alternative designs for the proposed mechanical penthouse be submitted for consideration with the Final PUD. Ramp design will also be further considered with Final PUD. Height The applicant is proposing a 6 story, 74 foot (as measured from the south elevation) tall Heart & Vascular building plus an 18 foot high roof elevator/mechanical penthouse. This penthouse is proposed to be approximately 13,850 square feet in area and is proposed to enclose an elevator and mechanical equipment including fan units, water pump and blowers. The penthouse is proposed to have a roof and be faced with metal paneling. The ordinance does permit elevator penthouses to exceed the height limitations set forth in the zoning district by 50%. Staff has made the determination that the penthouse proposed by the applicant is too substantial to be interpreted as only an elevator penthouse. Thus both the building and the mechanical portion of the penthouse are subject to the height standards set in the RC District. A PUD modification from building height is required to approve the plans as submitted. Another option would be to screen the mechanical equipment with parapet walls. Parapet walls up to 3 feet in height are exempt from meeting the height requirements. However, taller walls would likely be needed. Staff believes a PUD modification is appropriate for the penthouse height, as it will both screen large mechanical equipment and will insulate noise from the neighborhood to the east. As stated previously, staff and the Planning Commission are recommending alternative architectural designs be submitted of the penthouse for review with final. Staff and the Planning Commission St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 11 of 21 also recommend as a condition of approval that the Heart & Vascular floor area be limited to the 6 stories as shown in the plans. Lighting Lighting has been identified by neighborhood representatives as one of the top issues of concern. This includes the overall lighting proposed with phase I and ramp lighting. A concern is that there will be bright glaring light from the ramp that is difficult to screen and therefore, a higher standard for lighting is preferred. A lighting plan has not been submitted. Typically, an analysis of the lighting is required prior to issuance of a building permit, however due to the neighborhood concerns staff is recommending that the lighting plan be submitted with the final PUD. The ordinance does have specific requirements for lighting of parking ramps that are near residential properties as stated earlier. The ordinance also contains exterior lighting restrictions intended to minimize the adverse effect of light on residential properties from vehicles and to minimize spillover light and glare from on-site lighting. In general the light levels are restricted to minimize light levels at the property lines, and protect neighboring parcels from glare through the use of downcast fixtures, shields, louvers, prismatic control devices, and limitations on height and type of fixtures. Staff will review the lighting plans, once received, to ensure they meet or exceed the City’s ordinance standards. Lighting will also be required to meet the minimum IBC, International Building Code standards. Response from Hennepin County, Watershed District & DNR: DNR Area Hydrologist stated that it appears adequate steps are being taken to contain any run off and treat it before it gets to the wetland. Any permitting in the wetland can be done through the Watershed District. A permit has been approved from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District. Hennepin County submitted a letter with the following comments: (1) The existing 60 foot right- of-way may be adequate for the future upgrading of Excelsior Blvd. (2) The access revisions should be enhanced to allow better “free flow” for the southbound right turns from the site as well as west bound right turn into the driveway. (3) A permit is required for all future construction within county right of way. Hennepin County’s vehicular flow comments seem to be in conflict with the neighborhood’s desire for improved pedestrian safety. This will be further discussed before Final PUD. • Are the requirements of the PUD ordinance met, including all of the submittal requirements? A. The design shall consider the whole of the project and shall create a unified environment within project boundaries by ensuring architectural compatibility of all structures, efficient vehicular and pedestrian circulation, aesthetically pleasing landscape and site features, and design and efficient use of utilities. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 12 of 21 This will be reviewed in more detail prior to Final PUD consideration. However, staff believes this condition can be met. Architectural compatibility between the existing Heart & Vascular Center is proposed through use of similar materials, colors and building massing. As noted, staff believes alternatives should be considered to use of metal on the penthouse. Pedestrian circulation currently exists throughout the site and includes both exterior sidewalks and interior walkways connecting buildings. Additional sidewalks and trails are proposed to improve pedestrian circulation. Vehicular circulation is proposed to improve internally throughout the site during both Phase I and Phase II. Regarding landscape and site features, a significant amount of landscaping is proposed on the site. The required bufferyards are proposed and in some cases are proposed to exceed requirements. Rain gardens are proposed to meet required storm water and water quality requirements. Some additional site amenities include statue, wooden bridge, and stone walking path are proposed near the new Heart and Vascular Center. Other site features include a natural wetland. A plan should be submitted to address the future removal of the existing nonconforming bufferyard and other nonconformities on site. B. The design of the PUD shall achieve the maximum compatibility of the project with surrounding land uses, both existing and proposed, and shall minimize the potential adverse impacts of the PUD on surrounding land uses and the potential adverse affects of the surrounding land uses on the PUD. The proposed PUD encompasses an existing hospital facility. The hospital has been in existence since 1957. The expansion of the hospital facilities will increase traffic to the campus and the amount of required parking. Strategies have been proposed to accommodate parking and to improve traffic throughout the campus. The proximity of single family residential homes to the east makes screening of the ramp and site lighting very important. The proposed use with this PUD is compatible with the surrounding land uses and is consistent with the uses identified by the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed use is consistent with those identified by the Comprehensive Plan. C. The design shall take into account any modifications of ordinance requirements permitted by Section 36-367(d) of this ordinance and provide appropriate solutions to eliminate the adverse impacts of any modification required for approval of the PUD. The applicant is seeking a modification from the height requirement of 6 stories or 75 feet for the existing 8-story hospital building. This height was approved as part of the special permit for the hospital in the 1960’s. At that time there were no vertical limitations on structures. A Master Plan approved in 1990 identified the vertical expansion of the central portion of the hospital. Staff believes the modification for the existing building is appropriate. A modification for the height of the Heart & Vascular Center is also required to approve the plans as submitted. As stated earlier this height modification would be for an 18-foot tall rooftop elevator/mechanical penthouse. The penthouse will screen the rooftop St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 13 of 21 equipment as well as insulate noise from the residential properties to the east. Staff believes the modification is appropriate. • Are there any other Issues Phasing: Methodist’s general staging plan for Phase I proposes to demolish the Tourtellotte building in November 2003, start site work and construction in January 2004, completion of the Blue ramp is anticipated in October 2004, and completion of the Heart & Vascular Center is anticipated August 2005. There are several issues related to the demolition of the existing building related to construction limits, staging of construction vehicles, noise & vibration, placement of construction debris, and timing that will need to be addressed. Staff recommends this be addressed with the final PUD application. Neighborhood concerns: As stated, Brooklawns neighborhood residents were involved in discussions during several neighborhood meetings that have been held to discuss the proposed expansion projects. Below are some of the main concerns expressed by the neighborhood residents in recent meetings. Most of these issues have been addressed within this report: • Lighting both for the ramp and the site overall. The amount and type of lighting is of great concern to the neighborhood. The lighting on the parking ramp needs to be looked at very carefully to ensure adequate containment and screening of light and glare. Staff suggests Methodist propose lighting mitigation which exceed the ordinances minimum standards. • Internal campus traffic. The neighborhood expressed a desire to see traffic on the internal roadway adjacent to their property lines (eastern side of Methodist’s property) minimized through the utilization of traffic calming techniques, improving Louisiana Entrance so that it becomes another main entrance, and additional signage as part of Phase I. This will be addressed during Final PUD. • Set the principles and policies identified in Methodist’s design story as a guiding force for the future development plan. At the July 22, 2003 PUD process neighborhood meeting a handout titled “The Methodist Hospital Campus Design Story” was presented (See attachment). The neighborhood requested that the policies and principles identified in this handout become the guiding force for planning and implementation for the future campus expansion projects. The idea being that these basic fundamental principals will provide a framework for the design of future phases. Therefore staff recommends Methodist’s campus design or future phases generally adhere to the principles set forth in the July 22, 2003 design plan document. A neighborhood representative has suggested stronger language. However, some of the policies and principles are beyond the scope of the PUD approval and staff does not believe they are all appropriate as conditions of this approval. • Traffic/Intersection at Excelsior Blvd. According to the neighborhood the entrance to the hospital off of Excelsior Blvd is very dangerous for both vehicles and pedestrians. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 14 of 21 The residents are interested in a redesign of this entrance to create a safer intersection and believe a traffic study for this area should be required. Methodist’s consultants have submitted a concept plan for redesigning this intersection and will be working with the County to determine feasibility. This will be further considered through Final PUD. • Building height. The height of the Heart & Vascular Center and ramp are of concern to the neighborhood. The east elevation of the building is proposed to be 70.5 feet in height, plus 18-foot tall penthouse for rooftop equipment. At the July 22, 2003 meeting the residents requested Methodist provide a pictorial representation, depicting a whole campus view from various locations, of the east elevations which also shows the proposed landscaping so they may better understand how the proposal will look. • Landscaping design. The neighborhood is requesting the applicant install adequate landscaping to screen views and act as a buffer between uses. Ideally landscaping that exceeds the City’s ordinance requirements is preferred. Currently, landscape plans for the south side appear to meet requirements and will be further refined through Final PUD. Plans for the north side have not yet been submitted. • Construction limits. The timing, staging, noise and vibration impacts are of concern to the residents. The applicant has offered to provide the residents with contacts throughout the construction process so that concerns or questions may be addressed. A phasing plan will be required as part of the final PUD process. Conditions limiting construction activity will also be adopted through the Final PUD process. During the public hearing the neighborhood requested that a public hearing be held during the final PUD. The Planning Commission did not make this a condition. However, they suggested that further consideration be given to the neighborhood comments. The Council should determine if an additional public hearing is warranted for Final PUD. If a sign variance is requested, a public hearing will be required. Excelsior Blvd Reconstruction & Other Traffic Improvements: Hennepin County has identified various construction projects for Excelsior Blvd. One project from TH 100 to Dakota is scheduled to begin 2005 or 2006. Timing on the other Excelsior Blvd projects, one from Dakota to Meadowbrook Rd and the other from Meadowbrook Road to Blake Road are still up in the air. Concerns have been raised at the neighborhood meetings regarding the safety, speed and other road conditions along Excelsior Blvd between Dakota Ave and Methodist’s Campus. Methodist staff and consultants and City staff will be working with the County to determine potential near-term solutions to improve safety in the Excelsior Blvd. entrance area. Any recommendation could become part of the Final PUD approval. The residents and Methodist will also have the opportunity to provide their input to Hennepin County during their public process for the reconstruction of Excelsior Blvd. The EAW recommends several traffic improvements, some of which are currently being further reviewed by MnDOT. Some issues with necessary improvements in the Hwy 7 and Louisiana area still need to be worked out with MnDOT. Also, Methodist Hospital will be required to pay St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 15 of 21 its fair share for the required improvements. These issues have been addressed in the conditions of approval. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the Preliminary PUD for the existing hospital and Phase I including the Heart & Vascular Center and parking ramp subject to the conditions in the resolution. Attachments: Location Map Resolution Preliminary PUD plans (supplement) “The Methodist Hospital Campus Design Story” (supplement) Submitted by: Julie Grove, Associate Planner Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 16 of 21 Location Map XCELSIOR BLVD OWBROOK BLVD LOUISIANA CIR LOUISIANA AVE S39TH BRUNSWIC ALABAMA 39TH ST W DAKOTA AVE SCOLORADO AVE SBROOKVIEW LA MEADOWBROOK MANOR PARK Methodist Hospital St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 17 of 21 RESOLUTION NO. 03-___ A RESOLUTION APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) UNDER SECTION 36-367 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING FOR PROPERTY ZONED R-C MULTI-FAMIY RESIDENTIAL LOCATED AT 6700 EXCELSIOR BOULEVARD METHODIST HOSPITAL WHEREAS, an application for approval of a Planned Unit Development (PUD) was received on June 30, 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, the Planning Commission reviewed the Preliminary PUD concept at the meeting of August 6, 2003 , and WHEREAS, notice of public hearing on the Preliminary PUD was published in the St. Louis Park Sailor on July 24, 2003, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission opened the public hearing at the meeting of August 6, 2003 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the Preliminary PUD on a 4-0-1 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. BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Park Nicollet Health Services has made application to the City Council for a Planned Unit Development under Section 36-367 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code within the R-C Multi- Family Residential district located at 6700 Excelsior Boulevard for the legal description as follows, to-wit: Par 1: That part of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of Section 20, Township 117, Range 21, described as follows: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 18 of 21 Commencing at the Southeast corner of said Northeast Quarter of Northeast Quarter, thence North to a point 90 feet South of the South line of Calhoun Street, thence West parallel with the South line of Calhoun Street and the same extended, to a point 111 feet West of the East line of Section 20, the actual point of beginning of the land to be described; thence continuing West on said parallel line to the West line of Mount St., extended; thence North along said line and the West line of Mound St. 202.5 feet; thence West parallel with the extension of the South line of Calhoun St., 644.9 feet to the Southeasterly line of right of way of the Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Paul Railway Co.; thence Southwesterly along said right of way line to the West line of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter of said Section; thence South to the Southwest Corner of the Northeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter; thence East along the South line of said Northeast Quarter of Northeast Quarter of said Section to the point of intersection with a line running parallel with the East line of said Section from the actual point of beginning; thence North along said parallel line to the actual point of beginning. Par 2: The Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter that part of the North 1/2 of the Southeast Quarter which lies North of the center line of Excelsior Boulevard, Section 20, Township 117, Range 21 excepting therefrom that part which lies East of a line described as follows: Commencing at a point on the East line of said Section 90 feet South of the South line of Calhoun Street; thence West parallel with the South line of Calhoun Street and the same extended to a point 111 feet West of the East line of said Section the actual point of beginning of the line to be described; thence South parallel with the East line of Section 20 to the center line of Excelsior Boulevard and except that part lying Southerly and Westerly of a line drawn from a point in the West line of the Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter distant 425 feet South of the Northwest corner thereof to a point in the South line of said Southeast Quarter of the Northeast Quarter distant 480 feet West of the Southeast corner thereof; thence along said line projected Southeasterly to the intersection with a line drawn 411 feet West of, measured at a right angle to and parallel with the East line of the North 1/2 of the Southeast Quarter; thence South along last said parallel line to the center line of Excelsior Boulevard and there terminating. Subject to a power line easement over a strip of land 35 feet in width as set forth in the record, Book 1045 of Deeds, page 41, the center line of which strip was described as follows, to wit: Beginning at a point 17 1/2 feet West of the Southeast corner of said Section 20, thence North parallel to East section line and equidistant therefrom to the South line of Excelsior Boulevard sometimes called Hopkins Road; thence Northwesterly to a point on the North line of said Excelsior Boulevard 128 1/2 feet West of said East section line; thence North and parallel to said section line to a point 128 1/2 feet West of said Section line and 14 feet South of the South line of said Lot 14, Block 78, in the Village of St. Louis Park all as shown by plat on file herein of which a certified copy shall be filed with the Registrar of Titles. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 19 of 21 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 03-44-PUD) and the effect of the proposed PUD on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The City Council has determined that the PUD will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor with certain contemplated traffic improvements will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values. The Council has also determined that the proposed PUD is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan and that the requested modifications comply with the requirements of Section 36-367(b)(5). 4. The contents of Planning Case File 03-44-PUD are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. Conclusion The Preliminary Planned Unit Development at the location described is approved based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. The Preliminary PUD exhibits shall be amended prior to signing to accurately reflect property lines and ownership and shall be subject to approved plan changes through the final PUD process. 2. At least 30 days prior to final PUD consideration by the Planning Commission, applicant shall submit complete final PUD application materials, which shall comply with conditions of approval of the preliminary PUD and with issues identified in the staff report including but not limited to: a. Submit final plans for internal traffic circulation improvements and any near-term changes to the Excelsior Blvd. entrance area. b. Submit revised tree removal and landscape plans as recommended by staff. c. Submit alternative materials for the design of the penthouse elevations and continue to work with staff on the ramp design. c. A lighting plan and photometrics plan meeting ordinance requirements must be submitted. These shall include details for the interior and the roof of the parking ramp. d. A Phasing and construction staging plan that addresses the issues identified in the staff report shall be submitted. e. Submit sign variance applications or a plan for bring signage into compliance. f. A plan must be submitted for bringing the nonconformities on the site into compliance. g. Floodplain calculations must be submitted. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 20 of 21 3. Prior to Final PUD approval by the City Council the following issues shall be resolved: a. A determination is made whether MnDOT will allow certain infrastructure improvements in the Hwy 7 and Louisiana Avenue area (e.g. Louisiana & Lake St and on Louisiana Ave at Hwy 7.) b. The City and applicant agree to a cost sharing formula for any off-site infrastructure improvements, which may be required in whole or as part of the Methodist Hospital expansion proposal. c. Variance approval for signage or plan approval for bringing signage into compliance. d. A plan must be approved for bringing the nonconformities on the site into compliance. e. City Attorney shall review off-site parking agreements to ensure parking remains available prior to Phase II construction. 4. Final PUD approval and development is contingent upon developer meeting all conditions of final approval including all Minnehaha Creek Watershed District requirements. 5. Prior to any site work, the developer shall meet the following requirements: a. A copy of the Watershed District permit shall be forwarded to the City. b. Any other necessary permits from other agencies shall be obtained (i.e. Hennepin County). c. Sign assent form and Final PUD official exhibits. d. Obtain the required demolition permit, erosion control permits, utility permits and other permits required by the City, which may impose additional conditions. e. A development agreement shall be executed between the developer and the City, which covers at a minimum, sidewalk construction and maintenance, repair and cleaning of public streets, construction conditions, off site infrastructure improvements and cost share formulas, off-site parking, and criteria for administrative amendments to the PUD. f. Submit financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the costs of sidewalk installation and repair/cleaning of public streets, and tree replacement. g. Reimbursement of City attorney’s fees in drafting/reviewing such documents. 6. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements, the developer shall comply with the following: a. Meet any Fire Department emergency access requirements for during construction. c. Building materials samples shall be submitted to and approved by City. d. An irrigation plan meeting the ordinance regulations shall be submitted to and approved by the community development department. 7. A PUD ordinance modification to allow the existing hospital building to be 8 stories rather than the required 6 as shown on the signed official exhibits is contingent upon final approval. 8. A PUD ordinance modification to allow the 6 story/74 foot (elevation 974 feet) tall Heart & Vascular Center to include 18 foot tall penthouse for mechanical equipment (total St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8f - Methodist prelimin PUD Page 21 of 21 building and penthouse height of 92 feet, elevation of 992 feet 1 ½ inches) is contingent upon final PUD approval including approval of exterior materials. 9. Methodist’s campus design should generally adhere to the principles set forth in the July 22, 2003 design plan document. 10. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction: a. All City noise ordinances shall be complied with, including that there be no construction activity between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. on weekdays and 10 p.m. and 9 a.m. on weekends and holidays. b. Loud equipment shall be kept as far as possible from residences at all times. c. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. d. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. e. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in order to mitigate the impact of construction on surrounding properties. 11. The usable floor area of the Heart & Vascular Center is limited to no more than 6 stories (192,950sq. ft) as shown on the official exhibits. The 13,500 sq. ft. penthouse may only be used to store mechanical equipment. 12. The parking ramp may have no more than 500 parking spaces and four levels, two above ground level with a maximum elevation of 925 feet 4 inches (or 23.42 feet) including a 42 inch safety rail. A 2.5 foot high parapet screen wall is permitted on top of safety rail along the east elevation. 13. All signage on the site shall comply with the current zoning code including nonconforming signage brought into compliance or a variance approved prior to final PUD approval or issuance of any new sign permits as required any new permanent or temporary signs. 14. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 15. Phase II is approved in general concept only and is required to obtain future Preliminary and Final PUD approval. Pursuant to Section 36-367(e)(6) of the Zoning Ordinance, the City will require execution of a development agreement as a condition of approval of the Final P.U.D. The development agreement shall address those issues which the City Council deems appropriate and necessary. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8g - Dangerous Weapons Page 1 of 4 8g. Resolution establishing city policy regarding dangerous weapons on city property and Resolution requesting legislature to amend the MN Personal Protection Act. Recommended Action: 1. Motion to adopt resolution relating to public safety by prohibiting dangerous weapons on city property. 2. Motion to adopt resolution supporting an amendment to the 2003 Minnesota Personal Protection Act. Background: The City Council wishes to provide for the safety of the public and City employees by adopting rules which govern the carrying and possession of dangerous weapons on City property. The first attached resolution sets forth the Council policy controlling City property. The second attached resolution requests the State Legislature to amend the Minnesota Personal Protection Act of 2003 to clarify that the cities do have the authority under statute to provide for reasonable rules governing conduct on City property. Attachments: Resolution prohibiting dangerous weapons Resolution supporting amendment to Minnesota Personal Protection Act Prepared By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8g - Dangerous Weapons Page 2 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 03-____ A RESOLUTION RELATING TO PUBLIC SAFETY BY PROHIBITING DANGEROUS WEAPONS ON CITY PROPERTY WHEREAS, it is the policy of the City of St. Louis Park to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; to protect employees of the city of St. Louis Park from fear of serious injuries or death caused by dangerous weapons; to protect city employees by reducing the potential for discharge of firearms at city work sites; and to reduce the potential for discharge of firearms or use of other dangerous weapons in parks and other city property by prohibiting the carrying and possession of dangerous weapons where members of the public may be present in public areas or at public activities. WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 624.72, Subdivision 3, authorizes the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park to promulgate reasonable rules for the purpose of protecting the free, proper and lawful access to, egress from and proper use of public property, and for the purpose of protecting the conduct of public business therein or thereon, free from interference, or disruption or the threat thereof. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota: 1. These terms as used in this resolution shall have the following meaning: “City Property” means any park, playground, recreation center, town green, swimming pool, nature center, or other building or real property that is owned, operated or controlled by the city of St. Louis Park, except for streets, trails, or sidewalks. "Dangerous weapon" means any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded, or any device designed as a weapon and capable of producing death or great bodily harm, any combustible or flammable liquid or other device or instrumentality that, in the manner it is used or intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or great bodily harm, or any fire that is used to produce death or great bodily harm. 2. Effective immediately, no person shall be in possession or control of a dangerous weapon on City Property, whether or not that person has been issued a permit pursuant to Minnesota Statutes § 624.711, et. seq. 3. The prohibitions in paragraph 2 do not apply to the following individuals: any member of the armed forces of the United States while engaged in the performance of a duty in compliance with a statute, regulation, rule, or order duly promulgated and issued under the authority of the federal government; any member of the militia of the state while engaged in the performance of a duty prescribed by law; any licensed peace officer authorized by state law to possess or carry firearms; a person duly licensed and permitted to possess a firearm who is on duty performing security services as part of his or her employment as a security guard or protective agent; any federal agent who is authorized to carry a firearm; or any person possessing, transporting, or carrying a firearm in commerce in accordance with applicable federal law. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8g - Dangerous Weapons Page 3 of 4 4. The City Manager shall establish policies consistent with this resolution, including publishing or posting reasonable notice. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council _______________, 2003. ___________________________ ___________________________________ City Manager Mayor Attest: ___________________________ City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090203 - 8g - Dangerous Weapons Page 4 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 03 - ___ RESOLUTION SUPPORTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE 2003 MINNESOTA PERSONAL PROTECTION ACT WHEREAS, the Minnesota Legislature passed and the Governor signed into law the “Minnesota Personal Protection Act,” in which Minnesota residents, subject to application and qualification, shall be issued permits to carry guns; and WHEREAS, the Act provides the owners of private properties may post signs and regulate the ability of permit holders to carry concealed guns; and WHEREAS, the Act makes it a crime for permit holders to carry firearms on school property; and WHEREAS, some individuals and organizations have interpreted the law to prohibit cities from restricting permit holders from carrying concealed guns on municipal property; and WHEREAS, the Council is vitally concerned about the safety of its employees, and public safety of the users and visitors of City properties; and WHEREAS, the Council can find no rational justification to distinguish between access by permit holders to school property and private property, and access by permit holders to City property; and WHEREAS, the greater presence of weapons on City property may increase insurance premiums, and the cost of government services; and WHEREAS, time is of the essence for legislators to reconsider and amend the Act for the public safety of public employees and users of public facilities; and WHEREAS, until such time as the legislature acts to clarify that the City’s existing statutory right to reasonably regulate the use of City property still exists, the City will take reasonable steps to protect the safety of its employees and the public safety of the users of City property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota: That it supports an amendment to the Minnesota Personal Protection Act, to clarify that cities have the right to regulate the ability of permit holders to carry weapons on city property. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 2, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk