The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003/10/20 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA October 20, 2003 7:30 p.m. 6:30 p.m. – Special Study Session – City Manager Recruitment Process 7:15 p.m. – Special Meeting – Certification of Delinquent Accounts 7:20 p.m. – Economic Development Authority Meeting 1. Call to Order a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll Call 2. Presentations 3. Approval of Minutes a. City Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Document b. City Council Study Session minutes of October 7, 2003 Document c. Housing Summit Minutes of September 29, 2003 Document Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar NOTE: The Consent Calendar lists those items of business which are considered to be routine and/or which need no discussion. Consent items are acted upon by one motion. If discussion is desired by either a Councilmember or a member of the audience, that item may be moved to an appropriate section of the regular agenda for discussion. Action: Motion to approve the agenda as presented and to approve items listed on the consent calendar (Alternatively: Motion to add or remove items from the agenda, motion to move items from consent calendar to regular agenda for discussion and to approve those items remaining on the consent calendar). 5. Boards and Commissions 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public hearing to consider renewal of Premises Permit Application – Hopkins Raspberry Festival Association, Inc., operating at Al’s Bar, 3912 Excelsior Boulevard Document Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve resolution authorizing renewal of premises permit. y 6b. Public Hearing and first reading of Ordinance to vacate alley north of Block 7 Oak Park Village originally platted in 1887 Rearrangement of St. Louis Park plat Document Request initiated by the City to vacate an alley north of EDA property on northeast quadrant of Walker Street and Louisiana Avenue. CASE NO. 03-63-VAC Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve first reading of ordinance vacating alley north of Block 7 Oak Park Village originally platted in 1887 Rearrangement of St. Louis Park (Block 165) plat and set second reading for November 3, 2003. 6c. 2004 Budget And Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 Document This report considers the approval of the 2004 budget and property owner service charges for Special Service District No. 1. Recommended Action: Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2004 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charge to Hennepin County. 6d. 2004 Budget And Property owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 Document This report considers the approval of the 2004 budget and property owner service charges for Special Service District No. 2. Recommended Action: Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2004 Operating Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 and directing staff to certify the annual service charge to Hennepin County. 6e. 2004 Budget And Property owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 Document This report considers the approval of the 2004 budget and property owner service charges for Special Service District No. 3. Recommended Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the Action: 2004 Operating Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 and directing staff to certify the annual service charge to Hennepin County. 6f. Public Hearing to Consider 2004 Fees Document Proposed revisions to fee schedule to reflect adjustments to fees charged for programs and services approved by ordinance. Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve 1st reading and set second reading for November 3, 2003 Motion to set public hearing for November 3, 2003 to consider Rates for Water, Sewer and Stormwater Utilities for 2004. 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Snow Removal Parking Revisions Document This report considers continuing the past practice of exempting some areas from the snow parking ban and issuing permits allowing for on street parking during the snow parking ban. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the three (3) attached resolutions which rescind resolutions 97-115 and 97-116; exempt various commercial and residential areas from the parking ban; and authorize parking permits and set fees for 2003 as directed by Council at the October 13 Study Session. 8b. 1st Reading of an Ordinance Amending Section 1-19 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances relating to fees and the process whereby fees are established Document Proposed revisions to reflect statutory requirements to set fees by ordinance. Recommended Action: Motion to approve 1st reading and set second reading for November 3, 2003 8c. Revisions to the City’s Adopted Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway Systems Document This report considers revising the City’s officially adopted sidewalk, trail, and bikeway systems. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the attached resolution which makes minor revisions to the official Sidewalk and Trail Systems and designates attached Exhibit A as the official Trail and Sidewalk Map of the City. 8d. First Reading on application of Bruce and Kathy Cornwall for proposed zoning ordinance amendments to define ornamental features and amend setbacks and standards for flagpoles, birdbaths and other ornamental features. Document Case No. 03-45-ZA Recommended Action: Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance amendment that would further define ornamental features and provide some flexibility regarding their placement in yards subject to certain conditions and set Second Reading for November 3, 2003. 8e. Special Permit Amendment for Colonial Terrace Apartments for a major parking lot expansion with a variance to modify the Special Permit which is not in compliance with the parking requirements. Document 5621 & 5635 Minnetonka Blvd Case No. 03-35-CUP & 03-36-VAR Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the special permit amendment with variance, subject to conditions in the resolution 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 October 20, 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 final payment to Tekton Construction for the completion of work on entry signage and site improvements Document 4b Motion to accept for filing the Planning Commission Minutes of September 17, 2003 Document 4c Motion to accept for filing the Planning Commission Minutes of October 1, 2003 Document 4d Motion to accept for filing the Human Rights Commission Minutes of August 20, 2003 Document 4e Motion to accept for filing the Human Rights Commission Minutes of September 17, 2003 Document 4f Motion to accept Vendor Claims for filing (Supplement) AGENDA SUPPLEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 20, 2004 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”. AGENDA CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA Council Chambers October 20, 2003 – 7:15 p.m. 1. Call to order 2. Public Hearing Public Hearing on the Levying of Assessments for Delinquent Fees and Charges This action adds to the responsible party’s 2004 property taxes any delinquent City utility charges and other fees Recommended Action: Mayor to close the public hearing. Motion to adopt resolution to assess delinquent water, sewer, refuse and other fees and charges. 3. Adjournment SPECIAL MEETING City of St. Louis Park October 20, 2003 Public Hearing on the Levying of Assessments for Delinquent Fees and Charges This action adds to the responsible party’s 2004 property taxes any delinquent City utility charges and other fees Recommended Action: Mayor to close the public hearing. Motion to adopt resolution to assess delinquent water, sewer, refuse and other fees and charges. Background: The City Council is authorized to direct the assessment of delinquent utility accounts, nuisance abatements, false alarm fees, tree removal/injection and other miscellaneous charges after holding a public hearing. The public hearing is scheduled for Monday, October 20, 2003 at 7:15 PM in Council Chambers. Accounts remaining delinquent and unpaid at the close of business on November 21, 2003 will be sent to the County for inclusion with next year’s property tax bill. This process follows the same schedule each fall and is developed from the County’s deadline for filing certified totals near the end of November. The Process Prior to the Hearing: In advance of the public hearing date, individual letters are mailed to property owners advising them of the assessment and their right to be heard before Council. This year, approximately 1400 letters were sent to property owners which is an increase of approximately 17% over last year. Balances past due as of September 30th are considered delinquent. Individuals have until Friday, November 21st to pay the outstanding amount or contact the City to make payment arrangements. The deadline to submit a request for a Public Hearing appearance was Wednesday, October 15th. The City has not received any requests for a Public Hearing appearance as of that date. The majority of property owners pay their assessments prior to the deadline or allow the amounts to be certified to their property tax bills. There are several hundred property owners who do contact the City with questions about their outstanding balance, the certification process and/or payment arrangements. Analysis: The following delinquent charges for 2003 with prior year comparisons are eligible for assessment. The amounts shown do not include interest or the $26.50 per account administrative fee. Number of Accts in 2003 Outstanding amt in 2003 Outstanding amt in 2002 Variance between years (dollars) Variance between years (percent) Utility Accounts 897 257,514$ 206,421$ 51,093 24.75% Tree Removal/Injection 16 8,239 8,877 -638 -7.19% Grass/Weed Cutting 9 324 520 -196 -37.69% False Alarm/Misc.63 15,491 10,300 5,191 50.40% Total 281,568$ 226,118$ 55,450 24.52% Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Jodi Bursheim, Assistant Finance Director Jean McGann, Director of Finance Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 03-146 LEVYING ASSESSMENT AND REASSESSMENT FOR DELINQUENT UTILITY ACCOUNTS, TREE REMOVAL/INJECTION, NUISANCE ABATEMENTS, FALSE ALARM FEES AND OTHER MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES WHEREAS, the City Council has heretofore determined by ordinance the rates and charges for water, sewer and refuse services of the city and has provided for the abatement of tree removal/injection, grass/weed cutting and other miscellaneous charges to a home or business shall be at the expense of the owners of the premises involved; and WHEREAS, all such sums become delinquent and assessable against the property served under Section 6-158, Section 6-206, Section 9-103, Section 9-110, Section 11-2004 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code and Minnesota Statutes 18.023, 18.271, 443 and 429; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk has prepared an assessment roll setting forth an assessment against each tract or parcel of land served by water, sewer and refuse services of the City or charged for the costs of abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees and other miscellaneous charges which remain unpaid at the close of business on November 21, 2003; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that said assessment roll is hereby adopted and approved, and there is hereby levied and assessed or reassessed against each and every tract of land described therein an assessment in the amounts respectively therein abating grass/weed cutting, tree removal/injection, false alarm fees and other miscellaneous charges which remain unpaid at the close of business on November 21, 2003; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk is hereby authorized to deliver said assessment or reassessment roll to the Auditor of Hennepin County for collection of the assessment in the same manner as other municipal taxes are collected and payment thereof enforced with interest from the date of this resolution at the rate of six point zero four percent (6.04 %) per annum. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 1 of 9 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 7, 2003 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:32 p.m. The following Councilmembers were present at roll call: John Basill, Jim Brimeyer, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Also present were the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Scott); Community Development Director (Mr. Harmening); Planning and Zoning Supervisor (Ms. Jeremiah); Planning Consultant (Mr. Ingraham); and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). 2. Presentations: None 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of September 15, 2003 The minutes were approved with the following change: From Councilmember Sanger: Page 4, paragraph 1, line 4, the minutes should read: from 2” to 3”. 3b. City Council Study Session minutes of September 22, 2003 The minutes were approved with the following change: From Councilmember Sanger: Page 2, following paragraph 5, add: However, there was general consensus not to allow anything over six feet of height within three feet of the property line. 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 Motion to approve Second Reading of proposed Ordinance Code text amendments related to Snow Removal Parking Restrictions, adopt Ordinance No. 2251-03, approve summary, authorize publication, and rescind Resolutions 97-115 and 97-116 and adopt their replacements. (This item was moved to the Regular Agenda as 8d). 4b Motion to adopt Resolution 03-140 appointing election judges for the Municipal and School Board General Election to be held November 4, 2003 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 2 of 9 4c Motion to adopt Resolution 03-141 approving a minor amendment to the Planned Unit Development for the construction of an interim parking lot in an open area south of the medical building at 3900 Park Nicollet Blvd., subject to conditions in the resolution 4d Motion to Approve Standstill Agreements Regarding Renewal Process and Use of MCN Channel 6 4e Motion to adopt Resolution No. 03-142-authorizing the installation of stop signs at Brunswick Avenue & W. 41st Street and Alabama Avenue & W. 42nd Street 4f Motion to approve Resolution No. 03-143 adopting revised procedures for city Boards & Commissions 4g Motion to approve Resolution 03-144 for final payment to Hardrives, Inc. for completion of Phase II work on Excelsior Blvd. 4h Motion to approve Resolution 03-145 for final payment to American Liberty Construction for the completion of the Louisiana Oaks Park building 4i Motion to designate BCG Construction the lowest responsible bidder and authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $92,966.90 for Park Commons Drive Sidewalk Construction & Lighting Installation – City Project No. 03-11 4j Motion to accept for filing the Board of Zoning Appeals Minutes of August 28, 2003 4k Motion to accept for filing the Planning Commission Minutes of September 3, 2003 4l Motion to accept Vendor Claims for filing (Supplement) 4m Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to amend a contract with WSB and Associates, Inc. to provide professional services for the Lamplighter Pond Flood Improvement Project – City Project No. 00-18 4n Motion to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to execute a third amendment to the amended and restated contract for private redevelopment between the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority, the City of St. Louis Park, and Meridian Properties Real Estate Development, LLC (TOLD Development Company) relating to the installation of a passive methane venting system in Wolfe Park and/or the adjacent Wolfe Parkway Councilmember Omodt requested Item 4a be moved from the Consent Agenda to the Regular Agenda as Item 8d. It was moved by Councilmember Omodt, seconded by Councilmember Velick, 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 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public: None St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 3 of 9 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. The request of Minnehaha Creek Watershed District for a Conditional Use Permit for the excavation of approximately 1,200 cubic yards of sediment from Twin Lakes Park Pond at 4750 26th St. W. Case No. 03-48-CUP 4750 26th St. W. Resolution No. 03-136 Planning and Zoning Supervisor Janet Jeremiah presented a Staff report. Ms. Jeremiah stated that Staff is recommending the CUP also cover future maintenance activities, provided they are in conformance with the conditions of the CUP and with certain notice requirements. Councilmember Sanger asked why the sediment dredging would be required so often. Jim Hafner, Project Manager for the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (“MCWD”), said the frequency of dredging depends on the surrounding drainage area and there appears to be a lot of sediment build up within the storm sewer pipes that drain to this area. Mr. Hafner is not sure how often dredging would have to be done. Mr. Hafner said a restriction on the hours of operation would not be a problem. Mr. Hafner stated that the MCWD will work with their contractor to ensure daily clean up of the streets. Councilmember Sanger said she would like to change Condition 3 to state that the hours of operation shall be between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; and the remainder of Condition 3 may be deleted. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Brimeyer, to adopt Resolution No. 03-136 approving the Conditional Use Permit for the excavation of sediment from Twin Lakes subject to conditions included in the resolution; and the hours of operation shall be from 7:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The motion passed 7-0. 8b. The request of City of St. Louis Park for a Major Amendment to an existing Special Permit for the excavation of approximately 2500 cubic yards of soil for the creation of a dry pond within the townhome property located at 5920 26th St. W. Case No. 03-51-CUP 5920 26th St. W. Resolution No. 03-137 Ms. Jeremiah presented a Staff report. Ms. Jeremiah said Staff has indicated the need to replace 21 trees in order to meet the tree replacement requirement, and a new landscape plan will be submitted prior to the start of work. Councilmember Sanger inquired if the residents for the affected properties are responsible for the costs associated with this project, and Ms. Jeremiah said no, they are not responsible. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution No. 03-137 approving the Conditional Use Permit for the excavation of soil St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 4 of 9 at the townhome property located at 5920 26th St. W subject to conditions included in the resolution. The motion passed 7-0. 8c. 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. Case Nos. 03-37-CP and 03-38- PUD 3601, 3633 and 3663 Park Center Boulevard. Resolution No.’s 03-138 and 03-139 Community Development Director Tom Harmening introduced Greg Ingraham, Planning Consultant. City Manager Charlie Meyer said Mr. Ingraham has been asked to help in the Public Works Department, he will do some of the work Carlton Moore had been doing. Mr. Ingraham presented a report regarding the request of SilverCrest Properties. He said the Applicant is proposing a 14-story senior high rise. Mr. Ingraham said a shading analysis complies with the City Code, however, the Applicant’s proposed building would not comply with the shading ordinance in regard to the property directly across the street, that is, King Controls, 5100 West 36th Street. Mr. Ingraham reported that the Applicant has made an application to amend a provision of the solar shading ordinance. Given the concern for adequate parking, Councilmember Basill asked if there is a commitment that the building will remain as a senior housing building, and Mr. Ingraham said no. Councilmember Sanger inquired about proof of parking, and Mr. Ingraham said the Applicant can address that. Councilmember Omodt commented that the elevation drawing appears not to be to scale; and Councilmember Basill agreed. Councilmember Basill wants to be sure the building does not shade the recreation park, especially the grassy area where people picnic and sun themselves. Mr. Ingraham said there would be shading but relatively late in the afternoon. Peter Pfister, Pfister and Associates, is the project architect, and he presented visuals depicting shading. Mr. Pfister anticipates shading would begin at about 3:00-4:00 p.m. around June 21st on the hillside area. Mike Gould, SilverCrest Properties, said the covenants will run with the land and it will always be a senior facility, and the average age of residents in the facility will be 70 years of age when it opens. Mr. Gould believes the parking to be adequate, and there will be alternative parking options for residents. Mr. Gould stated not only will a covenant run with the land on every deed or mortgage passed to a resident owner but it will state the minimum age to be 55 or older to occupy the building. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 5 of 9 Ms. Jeremiah said a condition shall be stated in the resolution that would require the City Attorney to review the association documents at Final PUD to ensure that the covenants discussed would be included—that will be added to the resolution. Councilmember Basill favors the project because more senior housing is needed in St. Louis Park, however, he is concerned because the maximum density is a little over, the floor area ration is a bit over, the height is a bit over, and there are parking, setback and shading issues. He asked: At what height could this building be at and still be financially feasible to build and market? Mr. Gould said he cannot provide a precise answer tonight. Councilmember Basill noted that with each floor that is dropped, we come into greater compliance. Councilmember Omodt shares the same concerns as Councilmember Basill agreed and said he is most concerned about height. Councilmember Omodt is concerned about shading on King Controls, and he does not favor changing the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate shading. Councilmember Sanger would prefer a variance type approach of a PUD modification rather than make an ordinance change. Councilmember Brimeyer agrees, and he said perhaps the Council should review the shading ordinance as a separate discussion from this issue. In regard to density, Councilmember Brimeyer reminded the Council that this is what was agreed to some time ago. Councilmember Brimeyer is concerned about inadequate parking and proof of parking may be a solution. One condition to consider, he said, would be that if parking within the perimeter of this build became problematic, proof of parking would kick in and the other two facilities would be available for parking. Councilmember Brimeyer said, do remember that the end result of this project would be owner-occupied senior housing, which would allow some single-family homes to become available for families, and families with children, which has been the Council’s and the City’s goal. For Councilmember Brimeyer, the shading is a non-issue. Councilmember Basill said he is most concerned about height. Ms. Jeremiah said there already is joint parking and access agreements between all three of the properties. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to adopt Resolution No. 03-138 approving amendments to the City’s Comprehensive Plan subject to Met Council approval. Councilmember Santa said she wants it stated in the resolution that the City Attorney will review the association documents, and Ms. Jeremiah said that would be in the PUD. Councilmember Basill wants the proof of parking to be included. He asked if the resolution could be passed but defer the final height to the Final PUD. Ms. Jeremiah said the Comprehensive Plan amendment actually speaks to allowing the 14 stories. Councilmember Brimeyer said he is comfortable with that. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 6 of 9 It was moved by Councilmember Basill to make an amendment to the motion to amend the Comprehensive Plan, to hold the height of this project open—he would like to defer the Comprehensive Plan amendment at this time. City Attorney Tom Scott said this sounds like a motion to table or postpone it to a date certain in the future. Ms. Jeremiah suggested stating that “height is subject to PUD approval” and, therefore, defer to PUD. An alternative, said Ms. Jeremiah, would be to remove any reference to number of stories or height and feet and just say “height is subject to PUD approval.” It was moved by Councilmember Basill to make an amendment to Councilmember Brimeyer’s motion that the height is subject to PUD approval. Councilmember Omodt seconded the motion. Mayor Jacobs said he is treating Councilmember Basill’s amendment as a friendly amendment. Mr. Scott said it is not a friendly amendment, it is a new motion to amend the main motion, therefore, a vote is in order for Councilmember Basill’s amendment, which would require a simple majority of four. Councilmember Basill said the sole purpose of his amendment is to keep the height in discussion going forward, i.e., to keep it open until more is known. Mr. Meyer asked if the City can reasonably expect the developer to leave this evening’s meeting with any understanding whatsoever of what their project is? Mr. Meyer said if the City is unable to provide that guidance then, perhaps, the City is not ready to adopt preliminary approval. Mr. Gould said SilverCrest will have to gather information to determine what various numbers of stories will or will not work for them. Mayor Jacobs said he is comfortable with 14 stories. Councilmember Brimeyer does not support Councilmember Basill’s amendment—as it is only off by three or four feet. Councilmember Sanger wants a clear Comprehensive Plan amendment. Councilmember Velick is in agreement with Councilmembers Brimeyer and Sanger, and said the difference between 13 and 14 stories is not significant. As stated earlier, it was moved by Councilmember Basill to make an amendment to Councilmember Brimeyer’s motion that the height is subject to PUD approval. Councilmember Omodt seconded the motion. The motion failed 2-5. (Councilmembers Brimeyer, Sanger, Santa, Velick, and Mayor Jacobs opposed). St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 7 of 9 It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to adopt Resolution No. 03-138 approving amendments to the City’s Comprehensive Plan subject to Met Council approval. The motion passed 5-2. (Councilmembers Basill and Omodt opposed). It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution No. 03-139 approving the Preliminary Planned Unit Development, subject to the conditions included in the resolution; and to include the discussion of the proof of parking issue, further evaluation of the parking, all covenants and agreements and so forth proposed be reviewed by our legal staff. The motion passed 5-2. (Councilmembers Basill and Omodt opposed). 8d. Motion to approve Second Reading of proposed Ordinance Code text amendments related to Snow Removal Parking Restrictions, adopt the ordinance, approve summary, authorize publication, and rescind Resolutions 97-115 and 97-116 and adopt their replacements. Ordinance No. 2251-03 Councilmember Omodt said he understood the fees associated with this ordinance would return to the Council as a separate motion with all fees for the year. He said Council discussed the possibility of not having a fee of $100 for extra parking permits. He thinks $100 is excessive, and he would like to make a motion. It was moved by Councilmember Omodt, Page 10, Therefore, Be It Resolved, Item 2, that this winter season the fee shall be $25, not $100. Major Jacobs asked for a second to the motion; and he, too, thought the fee structure would be dealt with separately. Mr. Meyer said it is his understanding that the fee being proposed here is for 2003 because none exists for 2003, and the Council will look at a fee resolution for 2004, which has been proposed to come back to Council; the 2003 fee is in place until December 31, 2003. Mr. Meyer said Council will probably consider a fee resolution for 2004 at the next Council meeting. Councilmember Sanger wonders if there is a need to vote on the fee issue tonight. She said more information is needed on the fee structure. Councilmember Sanger would like a Staff report for the next Council meeting. Mr. Meyer commented that if one were to get a parking permit now through December 31, 2003, it would be for the season. Councilmember Brimeyer seconded Councilmember Omodt’s motion. Teresa Hoglund, 6619 West 16th Street, spoke previously about parking permits. Ms. Hoglund said she would like to reiterate that she has five adults living in her home. She St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 8 of 9 can get only one car in her garage, and during bad weather no other cars are able to park in her driveway due to it being at an angle. Ms. Hoglund cannot afford to pay money for extra permits. She said $25 is reasonable, $50 is pushing it, and $100 is way too much to ask. Ms. Hoglund prefers an odd-even parking ban. Mayor Jacobs said he believed the motion on the table is to approve the ordinance but set the fee at $25. Councilmember Sanger commented that, for the long term, she would favor an odd-even parking ban. Councilmember Brimeyer said he would like to make a motion to table just this resolution until Council has a chance to look at the fee structure. It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer to approve Second Reading of proposed Ordinance Code text amendments related to Snow Removal Parking Restrictions, adopt Ordinance No. 2251-03, approve summary, authorize publication, and delay further action on Resolutions 97-115 and 97-116. Councilmember Basill said there was a motion and a second by Councilmember Omodt; and Councilmember Basill asked: If we make that motion, doesn’t he have to retract that first motion? Councilmember Omodt said that the intent of his original motion was to amend the fee but he was fine with Councilmember Brimeyer’s motion as stated. Councilmember Omodt’s recollection of a previous discussion was that this would definitely come back to Council as a separate action. He wants to make sure it does. Councilmember Omodt said he doesn’t know if he entirely agrees with Councilmember Sanger about this being the kind of thing to prohibit convenience parking. Councilmember Omodt said the fee should be relative to the cost of issuing it, the cost of servicing it. Councilmember Sanger said there is a cost to the City, which is to go back to plow around cars that are parked on the street. Councilmember Brimeyer clarified that his motion adopts everything everything from the main motion but delays action on the resolution dealing with Section 30-158 of the City Code, that is the fee section. Councilmember Omodt seconded Councilmember Brimeyer’s motion. The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Mayor Jacobs announced the groundbreaking for the skate park, which took place today. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3a - Council Minutes of October 7, 2003 Page 9 of 9 Mr. Harmening announced the Excelsior & Grand project was recognized in Twin Cities Business Monthly as the Best of Business 200 for a suburban project, and also recognized by the Minnesota chapter of the American Planning Association. 10. Adjournment Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 9:33 p.m. _____________________________________ _____________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3b - Study Session Minutes of Oct. 7, 2003 Page 1 of 2 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION October 7, 2003 The meeting convened at 9:38 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers John Basill, Jim Brimeyer, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer), City Attorney (Mr. Scott), Parks and Recreations Director (Ms. Walsh), Environmental Coordinator (Mr. Vaughan), Parks Superintendent (Mr. Beane), and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). 1. Boulevard Trees During budget discussions, Staff proposed turning back boulevard trees, and is now presenting recommendations for a transition from City Staff maintaining the boulevard trees to residents maintaining boulevard trees. Tonight, Staff is also presenting a revised tree ordinance for Council’s consideration. Mr. Vaughan reported that tree removal is expected to continue into the winter season. Mr. Meyer said tree trimming is a major task, and he would like to stay within budget parameters. One of Mr. Meyer’s objectives is to maintain a reduced tree trimming crew. Councilmember Sanger said a priority should be placed on diseased trees, and she suggested that perhaps tree trimming maintenance could be initiated on a per neighborhood basis, i.e., a neighborhood could hire a contractor to get a better price. There was Council consensus to follow Staff’s recommendations regarding the subsidy policy as stated in the October 7th Staff report. Mr. Vaughan stated that there are three classes of trees: diseased, hazardous, and general trimming. There was Council consensus to follow Staff’s recommendations regarding Staff’s proposal. 2. Outdoor Skating Rinks Ms. Walsh briefly discussed skating rinks. Ms. Walsh said she would like to open three more skating rinks. Councilmember Omodt asked Ms. Walsh if it would be possible to keep picnic tables out for skaters to use. Ms. Walsh said that could be done. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3b - Study Session Minutes of Oct. 7, 2003 Page 2 of 2 Most of the Council would like Staff to flood three more rinks, however, Council does not want to add additional Staff to do that. Ms. Walsh commented that the City will shave ice on the rinks on a weekly basis. 3. Off-Leash Dog Area Ms. Walsh provided a brief update on the pursuit to gain access to property that is owned by the City of Minneapolis for an off-leash dog area, and St. Louis Park has been working cooperatively with the City of Edina. Ms. Walsh reported that the City of Minneapolis is not interested in working with St. Louis Park to fence the site and market it as an off-leash area. Ms. Walsh asked Council if they would like to have her pursue other sites in St. Louis Park. The response from the Council was divided. Staff will explore other sites. Mr. Meyer stated that the off-leash area would need to be a fairly large area, i.e., about two acres. 4. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:18 p.m. ________________________________ _________________________________ City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 3c - Housing Summit Minutes of Sept. 29, 2003 Page 1 of 1 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL HOUSING SUMMIT September 29, 2003 The meeting convened at 6:00 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers John Basill, Jim Brimeyer, Paul Omodt, Susan Sanger, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Present from the Housing Authority were William Gavzy, Judith Moore, and Anne Mavity. Present from the Planning Commission were Lynne Carper, Phillip Finklestein, Ken Gothberg, and Carl Robertson. Present from the School Board were Jerry Timian, Keith Broady, Portia Byrd, Debra Bohn, Julie DiGravina, Jim Yarosh, and Barbara Pulliam. Staff present: Director of Community Development (Mr. Harmening), Planning Supervisor (Ms. Jeremiah), Planning Coordinator (Ms. Erickson), Housing Supervisor (Ms. Schnitker), Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Larsen), Housing Secretary (Ms. Klesk), Director of Inspections (Mr. Hoffman), and Organizational Development Coordinator (Ms. Gothberg). Also present was Bill Gleason from Gleason Printing. HOUSING SUMMIT The City Council, Planning Commission, Housing Authority, School Board and community members met to discuss housing production and housing types, home ownership and rental ratio, existing housing stock, housing preservation and move-up housing. Housing Authority staff gave a presentation outlining the topic issues. A third Steering Committee meeting will be held later in October and the third large group “check-in” meeting will be held some time in late January 2004. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4a - Final Payment Tekton Const Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. 03-157 RESOLUTION ACCEPTING WORK ON ENTRY SIGNAGE AND SITE IMPROVEMENTS CITY PROJECT NOS. 00-19 & 02-11 CONTRACT NO. 113-02 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 August 19, 2002, Tekton Construction Company, Inc. has satisfactorily completed the entry signage and site improvements, as per Contract No. 113-02. 2. The Director of Public Works has filed his recommendations for final acceptance of the work. 3. The work completed under this contract is accepted and approved. The City Manager is directed to make final payment on the contract, taking the contractor's receipt in full. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4b - Planning Comm Minutes 9-17-03 Page 1 of 3 OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA September 17, 2003 -- 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Lynn Carper, Ken Gothberg, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian, Michelle Bissonnette (arrived at 6:10) MEMBERS ABSENT: Phillip Finkelstein STAFF PRESENT: Julie Grove, Janet Jeremiah, Nancy Sells 1. Call to order - Roll Call Chair Robertson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes of September 3, 2003 Commissioner Gothberg moved to approve the minutes of September 3, 2003. The motion passed 5-0. 3. Hearings: A. Case Nos. 03-35-CUP and 03-36-VAR--Request for Special Permit Amendment for Colonial Terrace Apartments for a major parking lot expansion with a variance to modify the Special Permit which is not in compliance with the parking requirements for property located at 5621 & 5635 Minnetonka Boulevard Associate Planner Julie Grove presented a staff report. Ms. Grove reported that the applicant is not only requesting an amendment to the Special Permit but also a variance to allow changes to the property without bringing parking into conformance with the Special Permit or current Code requirements. Ms. Grove said prior to Council approval, the applicant shall meet the following: Revise the site plan to meet parking lot design standards including but not limited to drive aisle widths and concrete curbs, i.e., change the drive aisle width from 24 feet to 25 feet, a 6” curb is to be placed on the periphery of the parking lot, and a curb island be placed at the end of parking rows. Revise lighting plan to meet City lighting standards. Revise plan sheets C4-1 and C8-1 per the Inspection Department’s requirements. Revise landscape plan to provide more trees along the south side of the proposed parking lot per Zoning Administrator approval, however, staff is recommending that no additional internal landscaping be added because it would reduce the number of parking stalls that could be added. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4b - Planning Comm Minutes 9-17-03 Page 2 of 3 Ms. Grove said tree replacement requirements are met. Ms. Grove said the applicant has met the criteria for a variance. Staff is recommending approval of the Special Permit Amendment and variance to modify the Special Permit, which is not in compliance with the parking requirements, based on the findings in the staff report and subject to the conditions listed in the staff report. Commissioner Morris asked what has Public Works indicated as far as allowing a holding pond to be built on top of their storm sewer? Ms. Grove said Public Works has indicated no problems or concerns with the storm sewer, and they know how deep of an excavation it will require. On a recent visit, Commissioner Morris said he observed that apartment tenants’ vehicles were parked in an area behind a private residence. He advocates a parking plan that distinctly differentiates the parking lot, the parking stalls, and the alley, e.g., more of a closed drive. Commissioner Morris said that to access the last two or three parking stalls on the northeast, technically the turning lane is the alley, and in some cities those types of turning maneuvers are not allowed. Commissioner Morris advocates a distinctive driveway be paved from the parking lot into the alley and a distinctive curbing or demarcation between the public alley and the abutting property owner’s property be installed to discourage off-site parking. Having made these comments, Commissioner Morris said he is supportive of the applicant’s request. Planning and Zoning Supervisor Janet Jeremiah asked if Commissioner Morris was suggesting that the City should require the encroachments to be removed from the alley so that there is more of a continuous alley? Commission Morris said yes, to distinguish between the alley and the parking lot so that people have to make a defined turn into the parking lot. Ms. Jeremiah clarified that this would require removal of encroachments that were apparently installed by the adjacent single-family properties. Staff is comfortable with those remaining as long as the apartment owner continues to allow access through his property. If that ever changes, the encroachments would have to be removed at that time. Mr. Morris indicated he was comfortable with that approach. Chair Robertson asked what today’s parking requirements are, and Ms. Grove said two parking stalls per apartment, i.e., 120 stalls for this 60-unit building; currently, Colonial Terrace has 50 parking stalls. Ms. Jeremiah said a 10% transit reduction might apply for this particular case, and Ms. Grove affirmed that would be the case. Chair Robertson asked what motivated the applicant to make this request? James Soderberg, Colonial Terrace Apartments, said his company is doing a major renovation and he thought it would be a good time to get funds together to work on the parking lot, however, he did not realize it would be so expensive. Mr. Soderberg said his company specializes in renovating apartment properties. Mr. Soderberg said the Fire Department St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4b - Planning Comm Minutes 9-17-03 Page 3 of 3 and inspectors requested that additional parking stalls be added on-site. Mr. Soderberg said there are 54 units and not 60, although 60 were originally approved. Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. With no one wishing to speak, Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Gothberg commented that he is pleased when apartment building owners upgrade and make improvements to their properties. It was moved by Commissioner Gothberg to recommend approval of the Special Permit Amendment and variance subject to conditions as recommended by staff. The motion passed 6-0. 4. Unfinished Business 5. New Business A. Consent Agenda B. Other New Business 6. Communications A. Recent City Council Action - September 15, 2003 B. Other 7. Miscellaneous 8. Adjournment Chair Robertson adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Respectfully submitted by: Linda Samson Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Administrative Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4c - Planning Comm Minutes 10-1-03 Page 1 of 4 OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA October 1, 2003 -- 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Lynne Carper, Phillip Finkelstein, Ken Gothberg, Carl Robertson, Jerry Timian Dennis Morris arrived at 6:10 p.m. STAFF PRESENT: Janet Jeremiah, Nancy Sells 1. Call to order - Roll Call Chair Robertson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes of September 17, 2003 Commissioner Carper moved to approve the minutes of September 17, 2003. The motion passed 6-0. 3. Hearings: None 4. Unfinished Business A. Case No. 03-45-ZA--Recommendation on application of Bruce and Kathy Cornwall for proposed zoning ordinance amendments to define ornamental features and amend setbacks and standards for flagpoles, birdbaths and other ornamental features. Planning Consultant Greg Ingraham presented an overview. Mr. Ingraham said staff has prepared two versions of the proposed ordinance: Version A, which reflects the Planning Commission’s study session directions to allow an 8x8 exemption within a three-foot yard area and to allow ornamental features, movable items, to be located pretty much anywhere. Version B reflects the Council’s direction from a recent study session, to state a three-foot minimum yard area and everything within the three-foot yard area must meet fence height requirements of six feet in the rear yard and 3 ½ feet in the front yard. Mr. Ingraham said an arch exemption could be written into the ordinance. Commissioner Carper said he is concerned the Council will codify what currently exists with a little more clarification in terms of what a structure is. Commissioner Carper wonders if that would be flexible enough for what is needed. He thinks Version A is St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4c - Planning Comm Minutes 10-1-03 Page 2 of 4 closer to what citizens are looking for in terms of flexibility for some additional height. Commissioner Carper thinks Version A should be the preferred approach the Planning Commission recommends to the Council; although he agrees with Council’s clarification regarding vegetation. Commissioner Gothberg asked if the Planning Commission is considering two motions: one relative to the Cornwall’s proposed ordinance and one relative to what the Planning Commission recommends as changes to the ordinance. Planning and Zoning Supervisor Janet Jeremiah said it would be at the Planning Commission’s discretion; noting that it is not necessary to make a separate motion regarding the ordinance proposed by the applicant because the proposed motion recommends approval subject to conditions which amend the applicant's proposal. Commissioner Gothberg thinks if something is within the fence height recommendations or requirements, it should be able to go anywhere in the yard; for anything taller than the fence height, a three-foot setback makes absolute sense. Commissioner Gothberg favors flexibility in regard to arches, even semi-pergolas or trellises (an enclosure over a pedestrian walkway) as opposed to the 8x8 allowance for each lot line. Commissioner Bissonnette said she agreed with Commissioner Gothberg’s comments. Commissioner Morris favors Version A, and he accepts Council’s suggestion to allow a form of entry trellis, something that is ornamental to the front walk that would be exempt, i.e., no review needed. Commissioner Timian said as there are no health and safety issues involved he wonders about the need to address this issue through the zoning ordinance; suggesting that perhaps the issue could be deleted from the zoning ordinance. Commissioner Timian added that Version A is a good compromise. Commissioner Finkelstein said the issue is one of balance, and Version A is the best way to go, at least initially, because a plain and flexible rule will not work. He favors Version A, provided measurement changes are made in regard to hedges. Chair Robertson said he is aligned with Commissioner Gothberg. He said he does not like Item 5 of the recommendation, page 3, which is: “Allow one eight foot wide and up to eight foot tall ornamental structure encroachment into the three foot yard area per lot line." Chair Robertson said he would avoid the term arch because it denotes a certain form, anything that is a covered walkway would work. He prefers to strike Item 5 due to its vagueness and allow an exception for anywhere on the property, including property lines, for covered linteled arbor, trellis, and walkways. Otherwise, he is comfortable with Version A. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4c - Planning Comm Minutes 10-1-03 Page 3 of 4 Commissioner Timian is concerned about striking Item 5 as it was the result of much discussion, and he suggested adding Chair Robertson’s suggestion as a friendly amendment. Commissioner Finkelstein asked: If Item 5 were deleted, how would Versions A and B differ? Mr. Ingraham said the result of striking Item 5 and adding an arch exemption would be a hybrid between A and B. There would be less flexibility compared to Version A. It was moved by Commissioner Gothberg to recommend approval of an ordinance amendment, Version A, with Item 5 modified to allow covered walkways, i.e., one arch pergola, or trellis over any walkway per lot line as opposed to the eight-foot wide and up to eight-foot tall blanket exemption. Commissioner Carper said he would like the definition of ornamental structures to include the following sentence from Version B: These do not include tree shrubs and other vegetation. He said that clarification is good and can be easily added. Chair Robertson said he accepts that as a friendly amendment to the motion. The motion passed 6-1-0. (Commissioner Timian opposed). 5. New Business A. Consent Agenda Commissioner Timian departed at 6:30 p.m. B. Other New Business i. Case No. 03-63-VAC--Request of City of St. Louis Park to vacate alley north of Block 7 Oak Park Village originally platted in 1887 Rearrangement of St. Louis Park plat Ms. Jeremiah presented a staff report. Commissioner Finkelstein reported that he was contacted by the owner of Reddy Rents, and she stated she has no objections to the vacation request. For the record, Commissioner Bissonnette said if the EDA property is developed, the intersection needs a stoplight. Ms. Jeremiah provided an update on the stoplight. She said the City now has the agreement of MnDOT for signal installation and some other improvements. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4c - Planning Comm Minutes 10-1-03 Page 4 of 4 Commissioner Gothberg said in regard to future development, a close eye needs to be kept on the steep hillside as well as the access into the property, there is a need to be concerned about traffic backups. It was moved by Commissioner Morris to recommend approval of alley vacation. The motion passed 6-0. 6. Communications A. BOZA minutes 8/28 B. BOZA agenda 9/25 7. Miscellaneous 8. Adjournment Chair Robertson adjourned the meeting at 6:35 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Respectfully submitted by: Linda Samson Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Administrative Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4d - HRC Minutes of 8-20-03 Page 1 of 4 City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Minutes – August 20, 2003 Westwood Room – City Hall Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Present Commissioners: Kristin Siegesmund, Kristi Rudelius-Palmer, Colleen Clark, Julie Kirsch, Annie Gaffney, Kristen Edsall, Cassie Boddy. Approval of Minutes Ms. Boddy stated that her first name was spelled Cassie, not Cassy, and the minutes should reflect that. It was motioned by Ms. Kirsch to approve the minutes. Motion passed 7-0. Approval of Agenda Ms. Rudelius-Palmer added an update on the audit committee to new business. Commissioner Reports Ms. Rudelius-Palmer reported that she will be traveling in the next few weeks to work on human rights education. She added that she is working on promoting peace sites and is currently working on a peace garden with a peace pole planting in October. Ms. Kirsch inquired where the site was located and she replied that it is right off of Cedar Lake Rd near the Jewish Community Center. She reported that the annual meeting of the MN Human Rights Commission will be held on September 19 and the theme is focused on the board of education with a speaker from the Institute on Race and Poverty. Other topics include working with schools and getting the website established. Ms. Rudelius- Palmer stated that she would like to begin a serious focus on getting the St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission on a website, possibly the city’s. Ms. McDonell stated that the Organizational Development Coordinator for the city will be having a visitor from Japan who is studying diversity and inquired if there was a commissioner who would be willing to meet with him. Ms. Gaffney volunteered. Ms. Siegesmund noted that there is a price break if three or more people attend the state’s conference on the 19th. Ms. McDonell stated that there are funds in the budget for the commissioners to attend seminars and conferences. Ms. Kirsch and Ms. Gaffney expressed their interest in attending. Ms. McDonell inquired if Ms. Clark would be interested in attending as a representative from the schools. Ms. Clark replied that she did not want to miss school as the conference was on a Friday. Old Business Election of a new Vice Chair St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4d - HRC Minutes of 8-20-03 Page 2 of 4 Ms. McDonell stated that Mr. Armbrecht had mentioned his interest in the position but that he did not feel it would be fair to vote on in his absence. The commission did not feel that there was a problem voting in Mr. Armbrecht’s absence. It was motioned by Ms. Rudelius-Palmer, seconded by Ms. Kirsch, to nominate Mr. Armbrecht for Vice Chair. Motion passed 7-0. Vision St. Louis Park Diversity Indicater Ms. McDonell stated that this item was connected with the Audit Committee Report as this was the topic that they worked on. They talked about helping with the Vision Committee to finish their last indicator which was ‘Do Diverse Populations Feel Welcome?’. They met in a subcommittee meeting with Peter Leatherman with Decision Resources, Ltd. and talked about focus groups to obtain that information. He recommended doing a written survey that was hand delivered to those populations at targeted sites and organizations. Ms. McDonell stated that they had a $5,000.00 budget and the survey falls closely within that amount. She was in favor of the written survey because they could also have other groups review it at the same time. Ms. McDonell suggested that the survey not be distributed only to different races and nationalities but to others as well who might feel they are diverse. She felt that they have to work with various groups and organizations to show an incentive for diverse poplulations to fill out the survey. Past experience has shown that there may be more particiaption if people are not required to attend a meeting. Ms. Siegesmund felt that ESL would be a good resource for the survey. She stated that she was in favor of the written survey because it maintains aninimity. Ms. McDonell stated that the outreach efforts in this survey would be the responsibility of the commission. The deadline for the survey is December. She estimated that they had about two months to create the survey and about 1-2 months to get it out to the community. Ms. Rudelius- Palmer reported that they had talked about going out to retail stores and having commissioners present to do surveys right on the spot. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer reported that the Housing Authority is planning a survey to go out to the public housing units and she suggested the Vision survey could be included. Ms. McDonell reminded the commission that there was a limit on the size of the survey. Ms. Siegesmund inquired why the survey needed to be completed by December and Ms. McDonell replied that the money was set in the budget for the current year but funds for consultants will be cut the next year. She stated that the commission needed to decide if they wanted to use this consultant and also to begin planning what questions should be used. Ms. Edsall stated that the audit committee had some preliminary ideas. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer volunteered to contact the Institute of Race and Poverty in regards to a survey as they are very experienced in obtaining this type of information. Ms. Siegesmund felt they needed to get going on this as soon as possible and did not wish to wait until mid-September. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer would like to motion to accept the concept of the survey and to make a commitment to finish the survey by December. She stated that she can contact the Institute in the next week and see if they could work in that time frame and with that amount of money to develop and process the survey. Ms. Gaffney inquired if a reputable consultant was found, if they could make an advance payment by December. Ms. McDonell indidcated that she would look into it. Ms. Gaffney felt that winter is not the best time to conduct a survey and suggested the springtime. Ms. McDonell explained that there was a greater risk factor in conducting business with advance payments. Ms. McDonell suggested that the subcommittee meet and decide on a consultant if a second bid is obtained. The subcommittee could meet in two weeks. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4d - HRC Minutes of 8-20-03 Page 3 of 4 Ms. Edsall felt that after being on the subcommittee for several months and not reaching substantial results, that they need to move on this item as quickly as possible. She would like to see the commission members scour the community for meeting places where people would be gathering. She felt that wintertime was a good time because everyone is indoors and therefore accessible. Ms. Siegesmund made a motion that the subcommittee be authorized to make a decision in the next weeks and to get started on the survey. The motion was seconded by Ms. Clark. The motion passed 7-0. Ms. Siegesmund would like the subcommittee to make a list of tasks to be completed. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer would like two phases to be addressed with first being the question piece and the other of how the survey will be taken forward. Ms. Siegesmund shared a story about a case she is working on involving a St. Louis Park resident and a racial dispute with another individual. The commissioners then shared other stories and views they have experienced in the community regarding racism. Ms. Edsall would like to see a meeting with the neighborhood leaders which could in turn give the whole neighborhood an educational opportunity. Update on Minneapolis INS/City Separation Ordinance The item was tabled as Mr. Armbrecht was not present to give the update. New Business Human Rights Award Ms. McDonell had given the commission members copies of last year’s documents. Ms. Siegesmund suggested putting a list of past recipients in the flyer. Ms. Gaffney had made a flyer the previous year and she had included information on categories and a blurb from an article Mr. Armbrecht had written. Ms. Edsall inquired if there was anything to change on the form from last year. Ms. Siegesmund had concerns that the nomination form be clear on what constitutes human rights. Ms. McDonell suggested that question number two be removed as it is vague. Ms. Edsall suggested inserting a question such as ‘How did this person impact human rights? Examples are: etc.’ Ms. McDonell stated that the commission needs to set the deadline. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer would like to have an article in the Sun Sailor in early December. The commission set the deadline for Friday, November 14, 2003. They briefly discussed ways to distribute flyers and forms to get more nominations. Ms. Siegesmund would like a question to be added to the nomination form that would be as follows: How did the nominee improve understanding and cooperation of human rights. The commission agreed with the suggestion. Ms. McDonell suggested giving the past recipients a category. Annie volunteered to work on the flyer and the commission decided to list the past recipients on the back. Ms. McDonell stated that she will bring the contact list to the next meeting. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer would like to also bring back the past recipients for the recogniton. Human Rights Award Questions Ms. Edsall proposed questions that relate to the Declaration of Human Rights. She suggested thinkng of questions that would fit under certain categories. Ms. Siegesmund stated the importance of a meaningful survey. Ms. McDonell allowing the same type of questions used in the other Vision outcomes to be used in the diversity outcome so that they could compare with the rest of the city as a whole. Ms. Edsall would like to achieve a sense of new residents St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4d - HRC Minutes of 8-20-03 Page 4 of 4 knowing where to go when they move into the city. Ms. Siegesmund inquired what they want the survey to be, a self help survey or something else. She felt that there would be a broad brush over the survey is questions are asked about accessing services and it may not give them the information they need. Ms. McDonell suggested the survey ask questions on how residents view others. She added that it was the job of the consultant to form the questions but the responsibility of the commission to choose what information they were looking for. Ms. Edsall would like the commission to review the Faribault survey as it reveals some interesting facts. Set Agenda for next Meeting The following items were placed on the agenda: Website Outreach for Human Rights Award Human Rights Essay Contest Vision Diversity Indicator – set tasks Recruiting Recognition for Cassie Boddy Ms. Siegesmund stated that she was very impressed not only with the work that Ms. Boddy has done on the commission but at the high school as well. Ms. Boddy was presented with a gift from the commission. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Kim Olson, Recording Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4e - HRC Minutes of 9-17-03 Page 1 of 4 City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Minutes – September 17, 2003 Westwood Rm – City Hall Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. Present Commissioners: Kristin Siegesmund, Colleen Clark, Matthew Albrecht, Julie Kirsch, Kristi Rudelius-Palmer Staff: Martha McDonell, Staff Liaison Guest: Seema Maddali Approval of Minutes It was motioned by Mr. Armbrecht, seconded by Ms. Kirsch, to approve the minutes with the following changes: • Change Human Rights Award Questions Title to Audit Subcommittee • Minor grammer corrections • Correct commissioner’s report to reflect the focus of the MN Human Rights Commission’s annual meeting was Brown vs. Board of Education The motion passed 5-0. Approval of Agenda Introductions were made among the commission members. Seema Maddali, a St. Louis Park resident, was present. She stated that she would like to join the Human Rights Commission and feels that she can add diversity to the group. Ms. McDonell added an update on the commission’s budget to the agenda under staff report. Mr. Armbrecht added commissioner reappointments to new business. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer added new action ideas under new business Commissioner Reports Ms. McDonell reported on the status of the commission’s budget. She reported that they are over budget on booths but have only spent about half of their overall budget. She clarified the source of funding for the consultant working on the Vision Diversity Indicator was money set aside by the city. Ms. Siegesmund inquired about the funds for awards. Ms. McDonell clarified the amount spent and that the plaques used are not nearly as expensive as some used in the past. Ms. McDonell reported that Professor Katsuya Endo, Ph.D. from Japan had visited and was researching diversity in other cultures. He is a professor in Japan and is tackling the issue of diversity and discrimination. He met with Ms. McDonell, Ms. Gaffney, former commissioner Mr. Herb Isbin, and the city’s Organizational Development Coordinator, Ms. Gothberg. He St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4e - HRC Minutes of 9-17-03 Page 2 of 4 commented that it was one of the most beneficial meetings he had attended. Ms. McDonell reported that Mr. Endo also experienced several cultural differences at other meetings that had surprised him and that he had not been aware of. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer reported on her recent trip to Colombia on human rights and human security issues. She stated that heads of several national human rights institutions were present and the conference went well. Old Business State Conference Ms. McDonell confirmed that Ms. Rudelius-Palmer, Ms. Kirsch, Ms. Gaffney, and herself are attending. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer reported that MN Department of Human Rights annual meeting will be on December 5th. They will be piggybacking the theme of Brown vs. Board of Education. They will be also launching a campaign called Educate to Eliminate and will be having several forums and a public service announcement. Minneapolis INS/City Separation Mr. Armbrecht recapped the ordinance that was passed in Minneapolis. He stated there were no new updates and he has tried to contact both Lorin Kramer, Police Dept., and Paul Omodt. He thought that perhaps it would be a good idea to present this at a City Council study session. Ms. Siegesmund thought the intent was to prevent staff from demanding documentation from those with out it and decreasing the fear felt when going to ask for city services. Ms. McDonell recommended that the commission make a decision as a group and research the after effects of the ordinance in Minneapolis. Mr. Armbrecht volunteered to collect the follow- up information from Minneapolis and will present it at the next commission meeting and they can move forward from there. Ms. McDonell emphasized that the city focuses on providing many services such as fire protection, police protection, health and human services, etc. and that whether you live or work in St. Louis Park. Ms. Siegesmund felt that they need to establish a reason for passing such an ordinance because it is in the city’s best interest if people are not afraid to interact with employees or to follow city ordinances. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer felt that point should be addressed at the City Council study session and felt they need to research if all parties that were involved with the ordinance in Minneapolis were on board with it. Mr. Armbrecht would put something together and circulate it prior to the next meeting. Advertising for the Human Rights Award Ms. McDonell reported that she and Ms. Gaffney have been working on the award. Ms. Gaffney redid the poster/flyer. Ms. McDonell stated that they would be sent out with the forms. The commission reviewed the list of persons the information was sent to the year before. Ms. McDonell encouraged the commissioners to take flyers with them and post in community places. Ms. Gaffney researched printing companies in the area and distributed a list of them to the commissioner’s. She inquired if they could help call the printing companies to see if they would donate larger posters. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4e - HRC Minutes of 9-17-03 Page 3 of 4 Ms. Siegesmund felt that the library would be a good place to post a large flyer. Ms. Gaffney suggested the post office and Mr. Armbrecht suggested coffee houses. Mr. Armbrecht inquired about getting something published in the Sun Sailor. Ms. Siegesmund volunteered to contact the Sun Sailor and Ms. McDonell would try to get an article into the Park Perspective. Audit Committee Mr. Armbrecht reported that they met with Peter from Decision Resources, Ltd. He stated that they had narrowed down several question which they passed along to Decision Resources and a draft will be drawn up by the first of October. The commission discussed locations to distribute the survey and Ms. Siegesmund emphasized focusing on immigrant groups. Ms. Rudelius- Palmer clarified that the Minnesota Institute on Race and Poverty had agreed to review the survey. Mr. Armbrecht stated that they would also have a paragraph describing the Human Rights Commission. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer inquired if they had business cards with the human rights line on it that they could pass out. Ms. McDonell felt that was a very good idea to pass them out with the survey. Ms. Siegesmund inquired about translation and what languages would be needed. The commission debated whether to read the survey aloud to citizens or to have individuals read the survey. Ms. Siegesmund pointed out the cost of printing it in so many languages. Ms. McDonell reported that they did not need to spend the funds for the survey by December. She had spoken with the finance department and found that if a project was on-going the funds could be held over to the next year. Ms. Siegesmund felt that it would be reasonable to set a goal of completing the survey by spring or the end of the school year. Ms. McDonell felt the audit subcommittee has done very well. New Business LMHRC – Election of Directors Ms. McDonell stated that Ms. Rudelius-Palmer is currently serving on the League of MN Human Rights Commission and that elections for area directors are coming up. It was mtion by Ms. Siegesmund, seconded by Ms. Gaffney, to reaffirm Ms. Rudelius-Palmer as their director for the LMHRC. The motion passed 5-0. Website Mr. Armbrecht inquired if any commissioners were knowledgeable and willing to work on the website. Ms. McDonell informed the commission only had to create the desired and the city’s website designer would create the page. Ms. Siegesmund suggested advertising for new members. Ms. Maddali suggested that the calendar be posted. Ms. Siegesmund stated that she needed to leave the meeting and thanked Ms. Maddali for attending the meeting. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer inquired about getting the human rights brochure on the website. Ms. McDonell replied that she and Ms. Gaffney are currently working on it. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer suggested posting pictures from the Parktacular Parade as well as the work plan. Ms. Gaffney inquired if the commission would want to put the human rights pledge on the website. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer would like to see the hate crimes response plan on it as well. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 4e - HRC Minutes of 9-17-03 Page 4 of 4 2004 Student Essay Contest Ms. McDonell reported that the theme is Brown vs. the Board of Education. Ms. Gaffney offered to update the essay flyer. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer would like to have the flyer completed by the time they attend the state conference. Ms. McDonell inquired how much information to send in the teacher packets. The commission chose to include the following: definition of human rights, categories of human rights(civil, economic, environmental), the Human Rights Act and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer would like to use the human rights passports. Mr. Armbrecht hoped they may be able to put an article in the student newspapers or teachers newsletter. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer suggested that Ms. Clark ask her teachers if they have a newsletter. She suggested referencing the previous year’s winner and actual essay in the teacher packets. Mr. Armbrecht inquired about incentives for the students to participate. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer suggested having the previous essay winner visit the schools and read her essay. Mr. Armbrecht would like to see reference materials and videos included in the teacher packets. Ms. Kirsch liked the idea of the essay tying in with Martin Luther King, Jr. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer thought it could be a welcome back idea after winter break and also suggested having the video “Road to Brown” available at the library. Ms. McDonell stated that they had $700 in the budget if they would like to purchase books for a human rights library that can be made available to the public. Recruit New Commissions Mr. Armbrecht proposed tabling the item until the next meeting. Re-Appointment of Student member Ms. Clark stated that she would like to serve another year. Commissioner Residency Ms. McDonell stated that the City Council will be looking at whether commissioners must live in St. Louis Park to serve on a board or commission. She suggested that a letter be sent to the Council that states the commission is in favor of allowing non-residents to participate. Ms. Rudelius-Palmer felt that it would support the Vision and audit committee on welcoming individuals to St. Louis Park. New Action Ideas Ms. Rudelius-Palmer is interested in utilizing a program called kindness points and demonstrated to the commission. She felt it would be worthwhile to begin utilizing if there are funds remaining and suggested utilizing it in elementary school. She informed the commission about an upcoming peace pole planting. Adjournment It was motioned by Ms. Gaffney, seconded by Ms. Clark, to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed 5-0. Respectfully submitted, Kim Olson, Recording Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6a - Premises Permit Renewal Page 1 of 2 6a. Public hearing to consider renewal of Premises Permit Application – Hopkins Raspberry Festival Association, Inc., operating at Al’s Bar, 3912 Excelsior Boulevard Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve resolution authorizing renewal of premises permit. Background: The Hopkins Raspberry Festival Association, Inc. has submitted an application for renewal of a Gambling Premises Permit at Al’s Bar, 3912 Excelsior Boulevard in St. Louis Park. This organization has operated in the City since April of 2002. Normally, a premises permit is issued by the State Gambling Board for a two-year period. In this case, however, the approval given in 2002 was for addition of a new location to their already existing permit. That permit is due for renewal in December of this year. Following this approval, they will be back on the regular two-year cycle. All requirements for issuance of the license have been met. Notification was made to property owners within 350 feet of the establishment and no calls have been received in response to that mailing. The Police Department has conducted a background check on the organization and its officers. The City Council must act to approve or deny the renewal before it is submitted to the State Gambling Control Board. If approved, a copy of the resolution passed by the Council will be submitted to the State. Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Cynthia D. Reichert, City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 03-______ A RESOLUTION APPROVING ISSUANCE OF A PREMISES PERMIT FOR LAWFUL GAMBLING Hopkins Raspberry Festival Association, Inc. At Al’s Bar, 3912 Excelsior Boulevard WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes Chapter 349 and St. Louis Park Ordinance Code Chapter 15 , provide for lawful gambling licensing by the State Gambling Control Board; and WHEREAS, a licensed organization may not conduct lawful gambling at any site unless it has first obtained from the Board a premise permit for the site; and WHEREAS, the Board may not issue or renew a premises permit unless the organization submits a resolution from the City Council approving the premises permit; therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the City of St. Louis Park City Council that the applicant listed above meets the criteria necessary to receive a premises permit, and the application is hereby approved. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: __________________________________ City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6b - Alley Vacation Walker & LAS Page 1 of 6 6b. Public Hearing and first reading of Ordinance to vacate alley north of Block 7 Oak Park Village originally platted in 1887 Rearrangement of St. Louis Park plat Request initiated by the City to vacate an alley north of EDA property on northeast quadrant of Walker Street and Louisiana Avenue. CASE NO. 03-63-VAC Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve first reading of ordinance vacating alley north of Block 7 Oak Park Village originally platted in 1887 Rearrangement of St. Louis Park (Block 165) plat and set second reading for November 3, 2003. Background: The alley in question is situated just northeast of EDA owned property located on the northeast quadrant of Louisiana Avenue and Walker Street. The EDA is currently working with a buyer/developer who is interested in constructing an office building on the EDA property. This use is consistent with the existing zoning and comprehensive plan designations for the property. It is also consistent with the recommendations of a land use study that has been adopted into the comprehensive plan redevelopment chapter. The prospective buyer of the property has asked the City to vacate the alley as part of the process. Due to grade differences, the alley was never developed. Existing Conditions: The photo on the left (A) was taken from several feet east of Louisiana looking southeast. As can be noted from the photo, the alley right of way is located on the side of a hill. The photo on the right includes the north/south section of the subject alley. Part of this alley is on top of the hill, the remaining along the side of the hill. Alley Looking SE A Looking north St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6b - Alley Vacation Walker & LAS Page 2 of 6 The alley was dedicated as part of the Rearrangement of St. Louis Park plat dated 1892. Half of the 15-foot wide alley will revert to either side. This alley vacation will be followed by a subdivision proposal that divides Block 7 (attaching the northern “handle” section to Park Tavern) and incorporates half of the vacated alley. The subdivision will also dedicate as street right of way that portion of Walker Street that was constructed over the southern portion of Block 7. Public Works has reviewed the proposed vacation and reports that there are no City utilities located within the alley. A copy of the vacation request has been forwarded to utility companies. Center Point Energy responded stating they have no objections to the vacation. Xcel Energy has stated there is power in the alley and has required that an easement be retained. The future replat of the property requires a dedication of an easement in this location. The Planning Commission reviewed the request on October 1, 2003, and recommended approval of the vacation. LOUISIANA AVE SW AL KE R ST R E P U B LIC A V E # SUBJECTALLEY EDAProperty Block 7 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6b - Alley Vacation Walker & LAS Page 3 of 6 Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the proposed ordinance vacating the alley. Attachments: Rearrangement of St. Louis Park section of alley (Block 165) Plat Map Proposed Ordinance Prepared By: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6b - Alley Vacation Walker & LAS Page 4 of 6 Original Rearrangement of St. Louis Park plat drawing St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6b - Alley Vacation Walker & LAS Page 5 of 6 Recent Plat Map St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6b - Alley Vacation Walker & LAS Page 6 of 6 ORDINANCE NO.___________ AN ORDINANCE VACATING ALLEY NORTH OF BLOCK 7 OAK PARK VILLAGE THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: Section 1. A petition initiated by the City of St. Louis Park has been duly filed with the City Clerk, requesting vacation of the alley described below. The City Clerk has furnished a copy of said petition to the newspaper, the St. Louis Park Sailor, on October 9, 2003 as required by the municipal code, has conducted a public hearing upon said petition and has determined that the alley is not needed for public purposes, and that it is for the best interest of the public that said alley be vacated. Section 2. The following described alley as now dedicated and laid out within the corporate limits of the City of St. Louis Park, is vacated: North of Block 7 Oak Park Village originally platted in 1887 Rearrangement of St. Louis Park plat for alley only reserving, however, to the City of St. Louis Park any and all easements that may exist in, over, and across the described property for storm sewer, sanitary sewer, water main, and public utility purposes. Section 3. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this ordinance in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Sec.4. This Ordinance shall take effect fifteen days after its publication. Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2003 Reviewed for Administration City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6c - SSD1 2004 Budget & Charges Page 1 of 3 6c. 2004 Budget And Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 This report considers the approval of the 2004 budget and property owner service charges for Special Service District No. 1. Recommended Action: Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2004 Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 and directing staff to certify the annual service charge to Hennepin County. Background On June 3, 1996, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special Service District No. 1. Annually, the City Council must adopt a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board (Advisory Board) approved the proposed 2004 budget and service charges by ballot following their July 24, 2003 meeting. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on September 25 and October 9, 2003. The public hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the meeting. Special Service District No. 1 Financial Position As of June 30, 2003, the Special Service District No. 1 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of $129,496. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. The proposed 2004 operating budget is $126,000. In 2003, the Advisory Board approved a plan to reduce their operating budget to the 50% target amount over the next few years. Maximum Service Charge Restrictions/Budgeting Parameters In accordance with Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 96-87 (original service charge resolution), the service charge increase annually is limited by an inflationary adjustment. This adjustment is based upon the applicable consumer price index (CPI) percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The maximum allowable CPI increase is 5% from the previous year’s service charge. Since the service charges are proposed to remain the same for 2004, the inflation adjustment allowance will not apply. Proposed 2004 Budget and Service Charges The Advisory Board recommended approval of the 2004 budget amount of $126,000 compared to $126,000 in 2003. The Advisory Board approved the 2004 service charge amount of $101,000 compared to $101,000 in 2003. However, only $50,500 will be collected from the property owners in 2004, with the remaining $50,500 coming from the operating reserve fund balance. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6c - SSD1 2004 Budget & Charges Page 2 of 3 2004 City Portion of Service Charge The Parks Department incurs service charges for the City property located at 5005 W. 36th St. (Recreation Center/Wolfe Park), which is in Special Service District No. 1. The proposed fee for 2004 is $24,808. The 2003 service charge was $24,808 with 50% ($12,404) being paid from the reserves to lower the fund balance. Recommendation Staff is not aware of any issues associated with this item and recommends Council approve the resolution as requested. Attachments • 2004 Proposed Budget (Supplement) • 2004 Proposed Service Charges (Supplement) • Resolution Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator Through: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6c - SSD1 2004 Budget & Charges Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 03-148 RESOLUTION APPROVING 2004 BUDGET AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT No. 1 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2067-96, the City Council created Special Service District No. 1 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 96-87, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2006 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 96-87, the maximum service charge to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, an increase in the annual service charge for 2004 meets the requirements set forth in the inflation adjustment cap; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 96-87, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 30, 2003. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2004 Budget for Special Service District No. 1 of $126,000 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 1 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2004 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 1 is $101,000 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6d - SSD2 2004 Budget & Charges Page 1 of 3 6d. 2004 Budget And Property owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 This report considers the approval of the 2004 budget and property owner service charges for Special Service District No. 2. Recommended Action: Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2004 Operating Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 and directing staff to certify the annual service charge to Hennepin County. Background On December 1, 1997, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special Service District No. 2. Annually, the City Council must adopt a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board (Advisory Board) approved the proposed 2004 budget and service charges by ballot following their July 24, 2003 meeting. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on September 25 and October 9, 2003. The pubic hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the meeting. Special Service District No. 2 Financial Position As of June 30, 2003, the Special Service District No. 2 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of $30,520. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. The proposed 2004 operating budget is $33,000. Maximum Service Charge Restrictions/Budgeting Parameters In accordance with Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 97-165 (original service charge resolution), the service charge increase annually is limited by an inflationary adjustment. This adjustment is based upon the applicable consumer price index (CPI) percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The maximum allowable CPI increase is 5% from the previous year’s service charge. Since the service charges are proposed to remain the same for 2004, the inflation adjustment allowance will not apply. Proposed 2004 Budget and Service Charges The Advisory Board recommended approval of the 2004 budget amount of $33,000 compared to $43,600 in 2003. The Advisory Board approved the 2004 service charge amount of $33,600 compared to $33,600 in 2003. The District will use budget reserve fund balance to cover any difference between budgeted expenditures and anticipated revenues being collected. 2004 City Portion of Service Charge St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6d - SSD2 2004 Budget & Charges Page 2 of 3 The Facilities Division incurs service charges for the City owned property where the bus shelter is located at 3929 Excelsior Blvd., which is in Special Service District No. 2. The proposed fee for 2004 is $103. The 2003 service charge was $103. Recommendation Staff is not aware of any issues associated with this item and recommends Council approve the resolution as requested. Attachments • 2004 Proposed Budget (Supplement) • 2004 Proposed Service Charges (Supplement) • Resolution Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator Through: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6d - SSD2 2004 Budget & Charges Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 03-149 RESOLUTION APPROVING 2004 BUDGET AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT No. 2 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2093-97, the City Council created Special Service District No. 2 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 97-165, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2008 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 97-165, the maximum service charge to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, an increase in the annual service charge for 2004 is not proposed and therefore is not subject to the inflation adjustment cap; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 97-165, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 30, 2003. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2004 Budget for Special Service District No. 2 of $33,000 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 2 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2004 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 2 is $33,600 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6e - SSD3 2004 Budget & Charges Page 1 of 3 6e. 2004 Budget And Property owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 This report considers the approval of the 2004 budget and property owner service charges for Special Service District No. 3. Recommended Action: Close Public Hearing. Motion to approve resolution setting the 2004 Operating Budget and Property Owner Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 and directing staff to certify the annual service charge to Hennepin County. Background On April 15, 2002, the City Council approved a resolution imposing a service charge for Special Service District No. 3. Annually, the City Council must adopt a service charge for the District following a public hearing on the proposed charge. The Special Service District Advisory Board (Advisory Board) approved the proposed 2004 budget and service charges by ballot following their July 24, 2003 meeting. The notice of public hearing was published in the Sun Sailor on September 25 and October 9, 2003. The pubic hearing notice was sent to all property owners within the District more than ten (10) days prior to the meeting. Special Service District No. 3 Financial Position As of June 30, 2003, the Special Service District No. 3 had an anticipated year-end fund balance of $59,401. Staff and the Advisory Board have agreed that the operating reserve should be maintained at a level of at least 50% of the annual operating budget. The proposed 2004 operating budget is $60,000. Maximum Service Charge Restrictions/Budgeting Parameters In accordance with Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 02-043 (original service charge resolution), the service charge increase annually is limited by an inflationary adjustment. This adjustment is based upon the applicable consumer price index (CPI) percentage increase for the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan area. The maximum allowable CPI increase is 5% from the previous year’s service charge. Since the service charges are proposed to remain the same for 2004, the inflation adjustment allowance will not apply. Proposed 2004 Budget and Service Charges The Advisory Board recommended approval of the 2004 budget amount of $60,000 compared to $60,000 in 2003. The Advisory Board approved the 2004 service charge amount of $61,500 compared to $61,500 in 2003. However, only $46,500 will be collected from the property owners in 2004, with the remaining $15,000 coming from the operating reserve fund balance. 2004 City Portion of Service Charge St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6e - SSD3 2004 Budget & Charges Page 2 of 3 The City incurs service charges for the property located at 4760 and 4500 Excelsior Blvd., which is undeveloped and owned by the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority. The proposed fee for 2004 is $7,113, with $1,453 being paid by the operating reserves to lower the fund balance. The 2003 service charge was $8,566. Recommendation Staff is not aware of any issues associated with this item and recommends Council approve the resolution as requested. Attachments • 2004 Proposed Budget (Supplement) • 2004 Proposed Service Charges (Supplement) • Resolution Prepared by: Scott Merkley, Public Works Coordinator Through: Mike Rardin, Public Works Director Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6e - SSD3 2004 Budget & Charges Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 03-150 RESOLUTION APPROVING 2004 BUDGET AND SERVICE CHARGES FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT No. 3 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 2224-02, the City Council created Special Service District No. 3 (the “District”). The specific properties located within the District are identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 02-043, the City Council is authorized to impose service charges within the District on a multi-year basis through and including the year 2012 for taxes payable in said year; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2.04 of Resolution No. 02-043, the maximum service charge to be imposed in any year will be subject to adjustment calculations based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) data for the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area; and WHEREAS, an increase in the annual service charge for 2004 is not proposed and therefore is not subject to the inflation adjustment cap; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 3 of Resolution No. 02-043, the Service Charges shall be payable and collected at the same time and in the same manner as provided for payment and collection of ad valorem taxes; and WHEREAS, the City is required by Statute to certify assessments to the County by November 30, 2003. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park as follows: 1. The 2004 Budget for Special Service District No. 3 of $60,000 is hereby approved as recommended by the Special Service District No. 3 Advisory Board. 2. The authorized 2004 Service Charge for Special Service District No. 3 is $61,500 in the amounts and against the properties specified on Exhibit “A” attached to this Resolution. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 1 of 11 6f. Public Hearing to Consider 2004 Fees Proposed revisions to fee schedule to reflect adjustments to fees charged for programs and services approved by ordinance. Recommended Action: Mayor to close public hearing. Motion to approve 1st reading and set second reading for November 3, 2003 Motion to set public hearing for November 3, 2003 to consider Rates for Water, Sewer and Stormwater Utilities for 2004. Background: MS 16B.685 enacted in 2001, requires municipalities to report expenses associated with construction and development fees. This law is intended to ensure that fees charged are fair, reasonable, and proportionate to the actual cost of the service for which the fee is imposed. In addition, each municipality must adopt management and accounting procedures to ensure that fees are maintained and used only for the purpose for which they are collected. During the past year members of the Finance Department and our consultant, Springsted and Assoc., have worked closely with departments to complete a thorough analysis of all fees which are called for by ordinance and referenced in the city code. Direct costs as indirect costs such as administrative support, supervisory labor costs, depreciation, benefits, cross-departmental participation were identified and included part of the cost analysis for each fee. All fees which are called for by ordinance have been studied and adjustments are presented in the attached ordinance. The Finance Department staff will continue to evaluate service and program fees set administratively by Department Directors and will make appropriate recommendations for changes to those fees as needed. Study Session Discussion At the study sesion of October 13, 2003, Council held a discussion regarding proposed fees for 2004 and the process that will be used to adopt fees. During that discussion fee amounts for two programs were discussed: Snow Permit Parking – The October 7, 2003, adoption of the new snow ordinance eliminated the 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. restriction on the hours of the parking ban. Consequently, the two resolutions relating to the exempt parking areas and snow permit fees need to be revised to remove the reference to the 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. restriction. In submitting the revised 97-116, Staff proposed leaving the $100 fee unchanged for 2003, but raising it to $125 in 2004 to account for inflation over the past six years. Council had delayed action on the resolutions and requested that further discussion take place on the proposed fee amount for the current season (2003-2004), as well as the next snowfall season (2004-2005). St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 2 of 11 At the study session councilmembers present at the meeting reviewed a summary of snow parking permits issued by the city since 1997. They also discussed the intent of the fee and confirmed their intent that the purpose of the fee is not to cover city costs, but to serve as a deterrent to persons wishing to leave cars on the street during a snow emergency. Following discussion, staff was directed to present to council for approval the resolutions as submitted at the October 7th meeting ($100 fee) and to revise the fee ordinance to reflect a seasonal cycle for the snow parking permit with an increase (to $125) effective September 1, 2004 for the 2004-2005 season. Restaurant Tobacco Disclosure Surcharge – Council also discussed the fee proposed to recover costs of administering the restaurant smoking disclosure program adopted by Ordinance #2246- 03. The license surcharge amount for restaurants that would like to participate in the optional disclosure program to permit the smoking of tobacco products is proposed to be $700 for the 2004 license year. Costs incurred by the City to operate this program annually are to be fully recovered through the surcharge. The actual amount could vary depending on the number of restaurants participating. For the initial year staff is estimating that 20 restaurants would participate and result in the following expenditures: • Staff time (regular & O.T.) for sample collection/processing and education- $5400 • Disclosure Notices, printing/misc $1000 • Tri-City Laboratory staff time for analysis- $400 • Gas Chromatography equipment lease and service contract- $7200 $14,000 divided by 20 $700 Fee Setting Process On January 2, 2002, Council adopted code provisions regarding setting of fees. Chapter 1: General Provisions of the Municipal Code requires fees to be reviewed and reestablished annually at a public hearing. A notice was published informing interested persons of our intent to consider fees. That notice also included a reference to utility rates which are not being considered at this public hearing. A second public hearing will be held on November 3 to consider rates for water, sewer and stormwater utilities which are still under study by the Finance Director. By that date our staff will have completed 5-year forecasts of these Utility Enterprise Funds to ensure rates are sufficient over the long term. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 3 of 11 Recommended action: Staff recommends that council act to approve first reading of an ordinance setting fees for 2004 and set second reading for November 3, 2003; and also act to call for a public hearing to be held on November 3, 2003 to consider utility rates for 2004. Attachment: Ordinance Setting 2004 Fees Prepared by: Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 4 of 11 ORDINANCE NO. _____ - 03 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING FEES CALLED FOR BY ORDINANCE FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2004 THE CITY COUNCIL OF ST. LOUIS PARK ORDAINS: Section 1. Fees called for within individual provisions of the City Code are hereby set by this ordinance for calendar year 2004. Section 2. The Fee Schedule as listed below shall be included as Appendix A of the City Code and shall replace those fees adopted October 7, 2002 by Resolution #02-102 which is hereby rescinded. Section 3. This ordinance shall take effect January 1, 2004. CHAPTER 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS 1-14 Administrative Penalties First Violation $25 Each Subsequent in Same Season add $10 to previous fine CHAPTER 3: ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES 3-59 Liquor License Non-intoxicating on-sale $750 Non-intoxicating off-sale $100 Intoxicating on-sale $7,500 Sunday Sale $200 Club (per # members) 1 - 200 $300 201 - 500 $500 501 - 1000 $650 1001 - 2000 $800 2001 - 4000 $1,000 4001 - 6000 $2,000 6000+ $3,000 Wine $2,000 Intoxicating off-sale $200 Temporary (On & Off sale) $50/day New License Investigation $1,000 Store Mgr Investigation $500 CHAPTER 4: ANIMALS 4-88 Animal Impound Initial impoundment $35 2nd offense w/in year $20 3rd offense w/in year $30 4th offense w/in year $60 Boarding per day $10 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 5 of 11 CHAPTER 6: BUILDINGS & REGULATIONS 6-32, 6-67 Plan Review Building Permits 65% of Permit Fee Single Family Interior Remodel Permits 35% of Permit Fee Plumbing Permits 35% of Permit Fee Mechancial Permits 35% of Permit Fee Electrical Permits 35% of Permit Fee Sewer and Water Permits 35% of Permit Fee 6-32 Building and Fire Protection Permits Valuation Base Fee Plus For Each Additional (or fraction thereof) Up to $500.00 $35.50 - $500.01 to $2,000.00 $35.50 $2.25 $100 over $500.01 $2,000.01 to $25,000.00 $69.25 $14.00 $1000 over $2,000.01 $25,000.01 to $50,000.00 $391.25 $10.10 $1000 over $25,000.01 $50,000.01 to $100,000.00 $643.75 $7.00 $1000 over $50,000.01 $100,000.01 to $500,000.00 $993.75 $5.60 $1000 over $100,000.01 $500,000.01 to $1,000,000.00 $3,233.75 $4.75 $1000 over $500,000.01 $1,000,000.01 and up $5,608.75 $4.25 $1000 over $1,000,000.01 6-32 Electrical permit Installation, replacement, repair $40 + 1.75% of job valuation Single family: one appliance $40 6-32 Mechanical Permit Installation, replacement, repair $40 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Replace furnace, boiler or furnace/AC $55 Install single fuel burning appliance with piping $55 Install, replace or repair single mechanical appliance $40 6-32 Plumbing Permit Installation, replacement, repair $40 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Repair/replace single plumbing fixture $40 Water treatment (softener or drinking system) $15 6-32 Sewer and Water Permit (all underground private utilities) Installation, replacement, repair $40 + 1.75% of job valuation Single Family Exceptions: Repair/replace sewer or water service $40 6-32 Tent Permit Tent over 200 sq. ft. $75 Canopy over 400 sq. ft. $75 6-35 After Hours Inspections $50 per hour (minimum 2 hrs) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 6 of 11 6-69 Certificate of Occupancy For each condominium unit completed after building occupancy $100 Change of Use (does not apply to 1 & 2 family dwellings) Up to 5,000 sq ft $250 5,001 - 25,000 sq ft $400 25,001 to 75,000 sq ft $600 above 75,001 sq ft $800 6-69 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy $50 6-103 Building Moving $500 6-177 Certificate of Property Maintenance Change in Ownership Single Family Dwellings $185 Duplex (2 family dwellings) $250 Condominium Unit $115 All other buildings Up to 5,000 sq ft $250 5,001 - 25,000 sq ft $400 25,001 to 75,000 sq ft $600 above 75,001 sq ft $800 6-187 Temporary Certificate of Property Maintenance $50 6-213 ISTS Permit (sewage treatment system install or repair) $125 CHAPTER 8: BUSINESS LICENSING 8-33 General License Fees Commercial entertainment $250 Environmental emission $175 Food and Beverage Class H+ $875 Large grocery store (25,000 s.f +.) $875 Small grocery store (to 25,000 s.f.) $750 Class H $600 Class M $400 Class L $175 Class V - Food vending machine $15 Public Sanitary Facilities Class I $750 Class II $350 Class III $250 Massage Therapy Establishment $175 Lodging (Hotel/Motel) Building Fee $100 Unit Fee $6 Multiple-Family Rental Housing Building Fee $100 Unit Fee $6 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 7 of 11 Tobacco products & related device sales $450 Vehicle Parking facilities Parking ramp $125 Enclosed Parking $175 Dog Kennel $125 Billboards $125 per billboard 8-33 Temporary Use Permits Temporary Outdoor Retail Sales $100 Circuses, Carnival and Amusement Rides $250 Petting Zoos $50 Commercial Film Production Application $50 8-37 Insurance Requirements Solid Waste $1,000,000 General Liability Tree Maintenance & Removal $1,000,000 General Liability Vehicle Parking Facility $1,000,000 General Liability Circus $1,000,000 General Liability Mechancial Contractors $1,000,000 General Liability 8-66 Contractor Solid Waste $175 Tree Maintenance $50 Mechanical $85 8-67 Exam Fees (Competency) Mechanical per test $25 Renewal - 3 year Mechanical $15 8-138 Solid Waste - Vehicle Decal $15 8-163 Tree Maint & Removal - Vehicle Decal $5 8-191 Late fee 20% of license fee (minimum $25) 8-192 Transfer of Ownership $50 8-258 Restaurant Smoking Area Surcharge $700 8-349 Sexually Oriented Business Investigation fee (High Impact) $500 High Impact $4,500 Limited Impact $125 8-428 Pawnbroker License Fee $2,000 Per Transaction Fee $1.50 Investigation Fee $1,000 Penalty $50 per day 8-514 Temporary Food Service 3+ Days $125 1 - 3 Days $75 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 8 of 11 Prepackaged food only $35 8-572 Solicitor/Peddler Registration $50 8-602 Dog License Dog License - 1 year $15 Dog License - 2 year $25 Dog License - 3 year $35 Penalty for no license $35 Interim License $7 8-661 Courtesy bench $35 per bench CHAPTER 12: ENVIRONMENT 12-1 Food and Beverage Equipment Permit Installation (Used equipment valued as new) $50 +1.75% permit valuation Plan Review Fee 35% of Permit Fee 12-1 Public Swimming Pools Permit Fees Building permit fees apply 12-2 Private Swimming Pools Permit Fees Building permit fees apply 12-131 Noise Temporary Permit $50 CHAPTER 14: FIRE 14-103 Fireworks Display Permit Actual costs incurred CHAPTER 16: LAW ENFORCEMENT 16-34 Criminal Background Investigation (Volunteers & Employees) $5 CHAPTER 18: OFFENSES & MISC PROVISIONS 18-153 False Alarm First $0 Each subsequent in same year $90 Late payment fee 10% CHAPTER 21: PLANNING 21-33 Official Map Amendment $500 CHAPTER 22: SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 22-33 Special pickup (refuse/recycling/yard waste) $15 each St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 9 of 11 22-34 Extra Cart 30 Gallon $40 each 60 Gallon $44 each 90 Gallon $48 each 22-35 Extra refuse stickers $2.25 quarterly 22-37 Refuse/Garbage Service Rate 30 Gallon $32.78 quarterly 60 Gallon $43.35 quarterly 90 Gallon $53.93 quarterly 90+ Gallon $64.50 quarterly 22-37 Missed Pickup - Resident Credit 30 Gallon $32.78 quarterly 60 Gallon $43.35 quarterly 90 Gallon $53.93 quarterly 90+ Gallon $64.50 quarterly 22-37 Yard Waste Credit $3.00 Quarterly 22-37 Extended absence 31% credit for the # of weeks absent (per table below) Number of Weeks Absent 30 Gallon 60 Gallon 90 Gallon 90+ Gallon 1 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 2 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 3 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 4 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 5 $3.90 $5.20 $6.40 $7.70 6 $4.70 $6.20 $7.70 $9.20 7 $5.50 $7.20 $9.00 $10.80 8 $6.30 $8.30 $10.30 $12.30 9 $7.00 $9.30 $11.60 $13.80 10 $7.80 $10.30 $12.90 $15.40 11 $8.60 $11.40 $14.10 $16.90 12 $9.40 $12.40 $15.40 $18.50 13 $10.20 $13.40 $16.70 $20.00 14 $10.90 $14.50 $18.00 $21.50 15 $11.70 $15.50 $19.30 $23.10 16 $12.50 $16.50 $20.60 $24.60 17 $13.30 $17.60 $21.90 $26.10 18 $14.10 $18.60 $23.10 $27.70 19 $14.90 $19.60 $24.40 $29.20 20 $15.60 $20.70 $25.70 $30.80 21 $16.40 $21.70 $27.00 $32.30 22 $17.20 $22.70 $28.30 $33.80 23 $18.00 $23.80 $29.60 $35.40 24 $18.80 $24.80 $30.90 $36.90 25 $19.50 $25.80 $32.20 $38.50 26 $20.30 $26.90 $33.40 $40.00 22-37 Late payment penalty 10% of amount due (quarterly) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 10 of 11 CHAPTER 24: STREETS, SIDEWALKS & OTHER PUBLIC PLACES 24-92 Record deed transfer with Henn Cnty $120 + Recording cost 24-122 Street, Alley, Utility Vacations $300 24-153 Installation/repair of sidewalk, curb cut or curb and gutter $100 per 100 linear feet (minimum $100) 24-251 Work in Public Right of Way Hole in Roadway/Blvd $100 each Trenching in Roadway $400 per 100 linear feet (minimum $400) $200 per 100 linear feet (minimum $200) Trenching in Boulevard CHAPTER 26: SUBDIVISIONS 26-42 Subdivisions/Replats Preliminary Plat $500 plus $50 per lot Final Plat $250 Combined Process and Replats $750 plus $25 per lot Exempt and Admin Subdiv $250 26-158 Residential Subdivider Fee - Trails $225 CHAPTER 30: TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES 30-44 Permit to exceed vehicle weight limitations $30 each 30-158 Snowfall parking permit No off-street parking available No charge Off street parking available $100 January 1, 2004 through August 31, 2004 Off street parking available $125 September 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 Caregiver parking $25 30-160 Permit parking No charge CHAPTER 36: ZONING 36-33 Conditional Use Permit $1,500 Major Amendment $1,000 Minor Amendment $500 36-33 Variances Residential $300 Commercial $500 36-33, 36-36 Special Permit Major Amendment $1,000 Minor Amendment $500 36-34 Zoning Map Amendments $1,000 36-34 Zoning Text Amendments $1,000 36-34 Comprehensive Plan Amendments $1,000 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 6f - Fee Schedule Page 11 of 11 36-34 Filing Fee Single Family $50 Other Uses $120 36-34 Time Extension $75 36-367 Planned Unit Developments Preliminary PUD $1,250 Final PUD $750 Prelim/Final PUD Combined $1,500 PUD – Major Amendment $1,000 PUD – Minor Amendment $500 36-80 Erosion Control Plan Application and Review $150 36-81 Tree Replacement Cash in lieu of replacement trees $90 per caliber inch 36-162 Zoning Permit Accessory Structures, 120 ft or less $25 36-339 Traffic Management Plan Administrative Fee $0.10 per sq ft of gross floor 32-361 Parking Lot Permit Installation/Reconstruction $75 36-362 Sign Permit Installation of permanent sign $75 Installation of permanent sign w/ footing insp. $100 Erection of Temporary sign $30 Erection of Real Estate, constuction sign 40+ ft $30 36-364 Fence Permit Installation $15 Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council November 3, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8a - Snow Removal Parking Permit Fees Page 1 of 4 8a. Snow Removal Parking Revisions This report considers continuing the past practice of exempting some areas from the snow parking ban and issuing permits allowing for on street parking during the snow parking ban. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the three (3) attached resolutions which rescind resolutions 97-115 and 97-116; exempt various commercial and residential areas from the parking ban; and authorize parking permits and set fees for 2003 as directed by Council at the October 13 Study Session. BACKGROUND: On September 2, 1997, as necessitated by the adoption of a revised snow ordinance, Council also adopted two resolutions relating to the new parking ban. Resolution 97- 115 authorized the establishment of exempt parking areas, and 97-116 authorized the issuance of parking permits beyond the free permits authorized in Section 10-315(2)(d) [since re-codified as 30-158(2)(d)]. The fee for these additional permits, which allow for on street convenience parking, was set at $100 per permit. The October 7, 2003, adoption of the new snow ordinance eliminated the 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. restriction on the hours of the parking ban. Consequently, the two resolutions relating to the exempt parking areas and snow permit fees need to be revised to remove the reference to the 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. restriction. Resolutions for that purpose were included in the October 7 Council report. Staff proposed leaving the $100 permit fee unchanged for the 2003–2004 snow season, but raising it to $125 for the 2004-2005 snow season to account for inflation over the past six years. At the October 7 meeting, concerns were raised regarding the rationale used to set the permit fee amount at $100 in 1997. Council referred this for further discussion to the October 13 Study Session where they directed staff to leave the permit fee at $100 for the 2003-2004 snow season and then raise it to $125 for the 2004-2005 snow season. The proposed caregiver permit fee of $25 appeared acceptable. Attachments: Resolution Rescinding Resolution No. 97-115 & No. 116 - Adopt Resolution No. 97-115 and No. 97-116 (supplemental) Resolution Exempting Streets from Snowfall Parking Ban - Adopt Exhibit A - Map #4 (supplemental) Exhibit A - Map #5 (supplemental) Parking Permits and Fee Resolutions - Adopt Prepared By: Mark Hanson, Operations Superintendent Mike Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8a - Snow Removal Parking Permit Fees Page 2 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 03-151 RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 97-115 & 97-116 EXEMPTING STREETS FROM THE 8:00 A.M. TO 5:00 P.M. SNOWFALL PARKING BAN AND ESTABLISHING PERMIT FEES WHEREAS, the City Council established a list of streets and a permit system exempt from the 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. snowfall parking ban in 1997 by Resolutions 97-115 and 97-116; and WHEREAS, the City Council now deems it necessary to eliminate the 8:00 am. to 5:00 p.m. restriction on the hours of the parking ban, WHEREAS, due to these changes in the snow parking ordinance, Resolutions 97-115 and 97-116 are no longer current or valid. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the City Council rescinds Resolutions 97- 115 and 97-116. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8a - Snow Removal Parking Permit Fees Page 3 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 03-152 RESOLUTION EXEMPTING STREETS FROM SNOWFALL PARKING BAN WHEREAS, Section 30-158 of the City Code relating to snow removal parking authorizes the City Council to establish by resolution streets that are not subject to the snowfall parking ban; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it necessary to exempt various streets from the parking ban, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that pursuant to Section 30-158 of the City Code, the streets set forth on Exhibit “A” hereto and incorporated herein by reference are exempted from the three (3”) snowfall parking ban. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8a - Snow Removal Parking Permit Fees Page 4 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 03-153 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE OF AND ESTABLISHMENT OF FEES FOR PARKING PERMITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 30-158 OF THE CITY CODE WHEREAS, Section 30-158 of the City Code relating to snow removal parking restrictions allows the City Council to issue and to establish fees for parking permits when a residential dwelling does not have adequate off-street parking or does not have any off-street parking and permits for more than two (2) vehicles is determined to be appropriate; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to authorize the issuance of these permits and to adopt a fee intended to recover the City administrative cost associated with permit issuance plus those extra costs incurred in plowing around and cleaning up after those vehicles parked on the streets, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that pursuant to Section 30-158 of the City Code that: 1. The City Manager or his designee is authorized to issue parking permits allowing on- street parking adjacent to the permittee’s residence when the snowfall parking ban is in effect. 2. The fee for a parking permit through December 31, 2003 for one (1) vehicle for the winter season is established to be $100.00. 3. The fee for a parking permit through December 31, 2003 for one (1) caregiver vehicle for the winter season is established to be $25.00. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8b - Fee Setting Process Page 1 of 2 8b. 1st Reading of an Ordinance Amending Section 1-19 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances relating to fees and the process whereby fees are established. Proposed revisions to reflect statutory requirements to set fees by ordinance. Recommended Action: Motion to approve 1st reading and set second reading for November 3, 2003 Fee Setting Process On January 2, 2002, Council adopted code provisions regarding setting of fees. Chapter 1: General Provisions of the Municipal Code requires fees to be reviewed and reestablished annually at a public hearing. Current code language states that fees called for in the code are set by resolution of council and listed as Appendix A to the city code. Recent changes to Minnesota Building Codes and Statutes, however, require that fees called for by ordinance must also be set by ordinance. The basic process as laid out in the general provisions section of our code remains essentially the same, but the instrument (document) which must now be used to authorize fees will be in the form of an ordinance rather than a resolution. Attachment: Ordinance Amending Section 1-19: Fees Submitted by: Cynthia Reichert, City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8b - Fee Setting Process Page 2 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. _________-03 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 1-19 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK CODE OF ORDINANCES RELATING TO FEES AND THE PROCESS WHEREBY FEES ARE ESTABLISHED THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK DOES ORDAIN: SECTION 1. Section 1-19 of the St. Louis Park Code of Ordinances is amended to read in its entirety as follows: Sec. 1-19. Fees. (a) Set by resolution. Ordinance. Fees called for within individual provisions of this Code are set by resolution ordinance of the city council and listed as appendix A of this Code. (b) Annual review. Fees called for within individual provisions of this Code will be reviewed and reestablished annually by the city council. A notice of public hearing will be published once in the official newspaper no later than seven days prior to the hearing. (c) New fees. New fees called for by any ordinance subsequently adopted may be adopted by resolution ordinance of the council at second reading and codified into appendix A at the time of the next annual review by the council. (d) Administrative fees. Department directors are given authority to set fees for other programs and services performed by their division. SECTION 2. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be effective fifteen (15) days after its passage and publication. ADOPTED this 3rd day of November, 2003, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. Reviewed for Administration City Manager Mayor Attest: Approved as to Form and Execution: City Clerk City Attorney St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8c - Sidewalk and Trail Revisions Page 1 of 4 8c. Revisions to the City’s Adopted Sidewalk, Trail, and Bikeway Systems. This report considers revising the City’s officially adopted sidewalk, trail, and bikeway systems. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the attached resolution which makes minor revisions to the official Sidewalk and Trail Systems and designates attached Exhibit A as the official Trail and Sidewalk Map of the City. BACKGROUND: On July 5, 2000, Council established and adopted a system of walks, trails, and bikeways in the City. After adoption on July 5, several errors were found and subsequently corrected on August 21, 2000. Again during late 2001, Council considered several changes to these systems and on December 3, 2001 approved Resolution 01-136 revising these systems. Since 2000 staff has been implementing these adopted systems. Again, some interest has been expressed by various residents and Councilmembers in making several minor system changes. These possible changes/corrections were reviewed with and discussed by Council at the Study Session of October 28, 2002 and October 13, 2003. Of those possible changes, Council wished to delay consideration of Kilmer area and Highway 100 area changes, but wanted to hear more about sidewalk and trail connections in the Lake Forest Neighborhood so asked staff to host meetings in that area to obtain resident input. Those meetings were held during April and May of this year. In addition, Hennepin County officials also provided input on these changes. A meeting was held October 16, 2003 updating France Avenue residents about the proposed sidewalk along the west side of that street. It appears the two (2) changes proposed in the Lake Forest area (France Avenue sidewalk and Regional Trail connection at Cedar Lake Road pedestrian bridge) have widespread support although some directly affected residents are opposed. Recommended Changes: Based on earlier Council input and the resident meetings held earlier this year, the following changes to the City system of walks and trails are recommended: I.D. # System Action Route Side Begin/End Approx. Length (Ft) Approx. Cost ($) 1 Sidewalk Add France Ave W W26th St/north City Limits 2,225 $120,000 2b Trail Add Cedar Lake Road S S end of JCC Ped ridge/ Cedar Lake Trail 650 $75,000 4a Sidewalk Remove W36th Street N Wooddale Ave/37th St 500 ($20,000) 4b Trail Add W36th Street N Wooddale Ave/37th St 940 $64,600 5 Trail Add Excelsior Blvd S TH 100/Yosemite Ave 100 $7,000 6a Bikeway Add Yosemite Ave NA Excelsior Blvd/W 41st St 940 $4,000 6b Bikeway Add W41st Street NA Yosemite Ave/ Brookside Ave 940 $4,000 7 Sidewalk Add Zarthan Ave W W16th Street/I-394 SFR 750 $0 8 Sidewalk Add Ford Rd E Ford Lane/Shelard Pkwy 450 $18,000 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8c - Sidewalk and Trail Revisions Page 2 of 4 10 Sidewalk Remove Brookside Ave E Jackley Park/South City limits 1,132 ($20,386) Actions: Staff is recommending the changes described above be incorporated into the previously established systems. The easiest way to do this is to rescind Resolution No. 01-136 and Exhibit A and adopt a new Resolution and Exhibit A (revised to reflect the changes recommended above). The attached Resolution and Exhibit A, dated October 2003, does this. Attachment: Resolution 01-136 (Rescind) New Resolution (Adopt) Exhibit A – dated October 2003 (Adopt) Prepared by: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8c - Sidewalk and Trail Revisions Page 3 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 01-136 RESOLUTION REVISING CITY WIDE SIDEWALK AND TRAIL SYSTEMS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park officially revised the City sidewalk and trail systems on August 21, 2000 by adopting Resolution No. 00-110 and Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, in reviewing these previously officially established systems, the City Council desires to make minor revisions; and WHEREAS, Exhibit A dated December 2001, as attached, reflects those corrections and depicts the sidewalk and trail systems desired to be established by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that: 1. Resolution No. 00-110 dated August 21, 2001, be rescinded. 2. The City hereby establishes the sidewalk and trail systems shown on Exhibit A dated December 2001 as official City trail and sidewalk systems. 3. The City will maintain and remove snow from these established sidewalk and trail systems in accordance with Ordinance requirements. Attest: Adopted by the City Council December 3, 2001 City Clerk Mayor Reviewed for Administration: City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8c - Sidewalk and Trail Revisions Page 4 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 03-154 RESOLUTION REVISING CITY WIDE SIDEWALK AND TRAIL SYSTEMS WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park officially revised the City sidewalk and trail systems on December 3, 2001 by adopting Resolution No. 01-136 and Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, in reviewing these previously officially established systems, the City Council desires to make minor revisions; and WHEREAS, Exhibit A dated October 2003, as attached, reflects those corrections and depicts the sidewalk and trail systems desired to be established by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that: 1. Resolution No. 01-136 dated December 3, 2001, be rescinded. 2. The City hereby establishes the sidewalk and trail systems shown on Exhibit A dated October 2003 as official City trail and sidewalk systems. 3. The City will maintain and remove snow from these established sidewalk and trail systems in accordance with Ordinance requirements. Attest: Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Clerk Mayor Reviewed for Administration: City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8d - Ornamental Features Page 1 of 7 8d. First Reading on application of Bruce and Kathy Cornwall for proposed zoning ordinance amendments to define ornamental features and amend setbacks and standards for flagpoles, birdbaths and other ornamental features. Case No. 03-45-ZA Recommended Action: Motion to approve First Reading of an ordinance amendment that would further define ornamental features and provide some flexibility regarding their placement in yards subject to certain conditions and set Second Reading for November 3, 2003. Background: Bruce and Kathy Cornwall, residents at 4320 Brook Avenue, are requesting an ordinance amendment that would define ornamental features and amend standards for placement of such structures in yards or eliminate the standards entirely. The Cornwalls have existing nonconforming trellis and fence structures, which have been the subject of a neighbor complaint. The Cornwalls are requesting that existing nonconforming ornamental features would be "grandfathered" and allowed to remain. Due in part to current staff work load and also to ensure an objective review, since the issue has been the subject of a complaint and enforcement action, the City has retained Greg Ingraham to review the proposed amendment and make recommendations. Mr. Ingraham is the Principal of Ingraham and Associates, a planning and landscape architecture firm. On August 20, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and heard testimony regarding the proposed ordinance amendment. The Planning Commission closed the public hearing and deferred formal consideration until they could hold a Study Session on the item. The Planning Commission discussed the proposed amendment at length during a Study Session on September 17, 2003. The City Council also discussed this item at a Study Session on September 22, 2003. Subsequent to both Study Sessions, a Council member suggested an alternative that would provide some additional flexibility compared to the alternative proposed during the Council Study Session. However, it would not provide as much flexibility as suggested by the Planning Commission during their Study Session. The third alternative would exempt an arch over a pedestrian path or sidewalk from having to meet either the setback requirement or fence height limitation. Other types of ornamental features or structures would have to meet either the setback or be within the fence height limitations. Mr. Ingraham prepared two versions of an ordinance amendment for Planning Commission consideration. The ordinance versions were based on the Commission and City Council study session input and Council member alternative. On October 1, 2003 the Planning Commission reviewed the ordinance options and recommended approval of an amendment that would allow ornamental structures up to property lines provided they comply with fence height limitations. The Planning Commission also recommended allowing one height exemption for a covered walkway (arch, pergola or trellis) per lot line. The Planning Commission also recommended specific language exempting vegetation from the ordinance limitations. At their October 13, 2003 study session the City Council reviewed the Commission recommendation and suggested minor additions. The additions include requiring the finished side of the structure to face the neighboring property (similar to fences), a ten foot by ten foot maximum size for walkway structures in the required yard area and clarification of walkway locations. The attached ordinance amendment contains the Commission recommendation with the suggestions from the Council study session. Attachments: October 14, 2003 Memo from Greg Ingraham Prepared by: Janet Jeremiah, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager To: St. Louis Park City Council From: Greg Ingraham, Planning Consultant – Ingraham & Associates Inc. Reviewed by: Janet Jeremiah, Planning and Zoning Supervisor Date: October 14, 2003 Re: Ornamental Accessory Structures – Ordinance Revisions The recommended revisions to the ornamental accessory structure regulations are based on input from the public, the Planning Commission, the City Council and city staff, as well as the staff research on ornamental structure regulations and Cornwall’s proposed amendment. The Planning Commission reviewed ordinance options at their October 1, 2003 meeting and recommended approval of revised ornamental structure regulations. The City Council reviewed the Commission recommendation at the October 13, 2003 study session and discussed minor revisions and additions. The attached ordinance amendment includes the Commission recommendation and Council suggestions. The recommended ordinance revision does not provide as much flexibility as requested by the Cornwalls, but the regulations would be more flexible than current ordinances. The proposal is more complicated to explain and administer than current ordinances. Specifically, the recommended ordinance revision: A. Defines ornamental structures. B. Lessens the minimum required yard area from four feet to three feet. This is consistent with most residential garage minimum yard area requirements. C. Allows ornamental structures to be located in the required three-foot yard area as long as they are no taller then the allowed fence height. (six foot tall within the side and rear yards and 3 ½ feet tall within the front yard) D. Allows arches and other similar structures to be located within the required yard area as long as they are located over a pedestrian walkway (up to ten feet wide and ten feet tall). Standards for the walkway are included. Staff feels that this is in conformance with City and Livable Communities principles and is a good compromise between the existing regulations and the larger amount of flexibility proposed by the Cornwalls. Attachments: Recommended ordinance revision. ORDINANCE NO.______ AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING BY AMENDING SECTIONS 36-4, 36-73 AND 36-78 PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY ORNAMENTAL STRUCTURES 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. 03-45-ZA). . Sec. 2. The St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, Sections 36-4, 36-73 and 36-78 are hereby amended by deleting stricken language and adding underscored language. Section breaks are represented by ***. Section 36-4 Definitions. *** Ornamental structures are built or placed in the landscape for decorative or horticultural purposes and are accessory to and detached from the principal structure. They do not have solid walls or a solid roof. These include but are not limited to trellises, arbors, arches, pergolas, gateways, flagpoles, fountains, birdbaths, birdhouses, and yard sculptures. These do not include trees, shrubs or other vegetation. *** Sec. 36-73. Yard encroachments *** Any yard (a) The following shall not be encroachments on yard requirements provided all structures are located entirely upon the private property of the party requiring or requesting the construction of the structure, the encroachment is within height limitations of this Code, no permanent structure is placed in an easement without first obtaining approval of an encroachment agreement and ornamental structures are constructed so the finished side is facing towards the neighboring properties, exposing the structural side to the party requiring or requesting the structure: (1) Yard lights and the nameplate signs for one-family and two-family dwellings in the R-1, R-2 and R-3 districts. (2) Floodlights or other sources of light illuminating authorized illuminated signs, or illuminating parking areas, loading areas, or yards for safety and security purposes if these meet the regulations of section 36-363. (3) Flagpoles, birdbaths and other ornamental features detached from the principal building which are a minimum of four feet from any lot line. Ornamental structures that are a minimum of three feet from any lot line. Maximum 15 foot height limit except as allowed for flagpoles per Section 36-78. (4) Ornamental structures within the three foot yard area up to six feet tall in the rear and side yards and up to three and one-half feet tall in the front yard. (5) Arbors, pergolas, arches, gateways or similar open structures over purposeful pedestrian walkways that extend between properties, between front and back yard areas, or from the public right-of-way to a house or garage. Maximum one such structure per lot line with a maximum ten foot height and ten foot width within the required three foot yard area. (4) (6) Railroad feeder tracks which provide access to buildings and structures in the C-1, C-2, O, I-P and I-G districts. No loading or unloading may be done from railroad cars on any feeder track in any front yard. (5) (7) Canopies no more than 12 feet wide are permitted in the R-4, R-C, C-1, C-2, O, I-P and I- G districts if they are open at the sides, comply with provisions of section 36-76 and provide 14 feet of clearance if located over any access roadway or fire lane. (6) (8) Enclosed pedestrian walkways must meet the following standards: a. The walls of the walkway shall conform with the class I exterior materials requirements of this chapter. b. Such walkways may be no more than 16 feet wide and 12 feet in height from floor to ceiling. c. A clearance of 16 feet six inches is required if the walkway is above a traveled roadway. d. The properties connected by the walkways must submit documents that indicate their agreement to build the arrangement for maintenance of the walkway, and under what conditions the walkways might be removed. e. The location of any pedestrian walkway shall be approved by the director of public works and community development director. Approval shall not be granted for any walkway that does not provide a satisfactory means to access any utility or public trail lying under or adjacent to the walkway. (7) (9) Driveways, parking areas, and pedestrian sidewalks subject to the requirements of sections 36-162 and 36-361. (8) (10) Fences and retaining walls subject to the requirements of section 36-74 and provided the retaining walls are necessary to correct grade differences and height is minimized via terracing where feasible. Where a fence is attached to a retaining wall structure, the retaining wall shall be included in the fence height measurement. Principal building – any yard (b) The following shall not be encroachments on yard requirements for principal buildings provided no permanent structure is placed in an easement without first obtaining approval of an encroachment agreement: (1) Balconies, bays and window wells not exceeding a depth of three feet or containing an area of more than 20 square feet. (2) Chimney, flues, belt courses, leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, cornices, eaves, and gutters; provided they do not extend more than three feet into a required yard; and provided such encroachment is no closer than four feet from all lot lines. Building overhangs shall also comply with the state building code. (3) Terraces and steps which do not extend more than 2 1/2 feet above the height of the ground floor level of the principal building, awnings, and door hoods provided they are a minimum of two feet from any lot line. (4) Uncovered porches, stoops, patios or decks which do not extend above the height of the ground floor level of the principal building and are a minimum of two feet from any interior side or rear lot line and 15 feet from any front lot line and do not encroach on any side yard abutting a street. (5) Open covered porches that do not contain either windows or screens and are a minimum of five feet from any interior side lot line, nine feet from any side yard line abutting a street, 25 feet from any rear lot line and 20 feet from any front lot line. Porches shall be open between the floor and the ceiling. All railings shall be open utilizing posts and spindles. Accessory buildings rear or side yard (c) The following shall not be encroachments on rear and side yard requirements for accessory buildings: cornices, eaves and gutters; provided they do not extend more than eight inches into a required yard; and provided such encroachment is no closer than 16 inches from all lot lines. Building overhangs shall also comply with the state building code. Rear or side yard (d) The following shall not be encroachments on side and rear yard requirements provided no permanent structure is placed in an easement without first obtaining approval of an encroachment agreement: (1) Heating, ventilating and air conditioning equipment in side yards abutting a street and rear yards, but is an encroachment in interior side yards. None of that equipment shall extend more than six feet from the principal structure and the equipment shall be screened from view. (2) Railroad spurs and sidings for loading and unloading of railroad cars in the I-P and I-G districts. Rear yard (e) The following shall not be encroachments on rear yard requirements provided no permanent structure is placed in an easement without first obtaining approval of an encroachment agreement: (1) Balconies, Ddetached outdoor picnic shelters, gazebos and recreational equipment that are a minimum of three feet from the rear and side lot lines. (2) Swimming pools, whirlpools, saunas and tennis courts provided they are a minimum of five feet from the rear lot line, are enclosed by a privacy fence that screens the view from neighboring properties, and any associated accessory structures such as the required fence, decks, patios, and heating equipment meet all Code requirements including subsections (a), (b), and (d) of this section, section 36-74 and section 36-162. *** Sec. 36-78. Height limitations. (a) Height limitations set forth elsewhere in this ordinance shall be increased by 50 percent when applied to the following structures: (1) Art objects in non-residential districts and accessory to permitted principal non-residential uses (churches, schools, parks, etc.) in residential districts. (2) Belfries. (3) Chimneys. (4) Church spires. (5) Communication towers. Heights in excess of those allowed under this section shall be permitted only by conditional use permit granted by resolution of the city council determining that such structure would not be dangerous and would not adversely affect adjoining or adjacent property. This determination will be made based on the following conditions: a. Distance from abutting residential property. b. Tower design and collapse radius. c. Aesthetic considerations such as color and design. (6) Cooling towers. (7) Cupolas and domes which do not add additional floor area. (8) Elevator penthouses. (9) Fire and hose towers. (10) Flagpoles. (11) Monuments. (12) Observation towers. (13) Smokestacks. (b) Parapet walls extending not more than three feet above the limiting height of the building. (c) Water towers are exempt from height limitations. Sec. 3. The contents of Planning Case File 03-45-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. (Signature Block) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 1 of 14 8e. Special Permit Amendment for Colonial Terrace Apartments for a major parking lot expansion with a variance to modify the Special Permit which is not in compliance with the parking requirements. 5621 & 5635 Minnetonka Blvd Case No. 03-35-CUP & 03-36-VAR Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the special permit amendment with variance, subject to conditions in the resolution Zoning: R-4, Multi-Family Residential Comprehensive Plan Designation: RM, Medium Density Residential Background: James Soderberg is applying on behalf of Colonial Terrace Apartments for an amendment to their existing Special Permit with a variance. The apartments are located south of Minnetonka Blvd, just west of the intersection on Lake St. and Vernon Avenue. The applicant has been working on renovations and repairs to the apartments and as part of this is requesting to reconstruct and expand their parking lot in the rear of the building. The existing lot is accessed off of an alley that runs directly behind the apartment building (See the attached plans). This alley can be accessed off of Lake St. W or Minnetonka Blvd, however the entrance off of Minnetonka is gravel and is not very visible from the street. In 1963, the City Council approved a special permit to allow the construction of 2 – 30 unit apartment buildings attached by a parking garage. Eighty-three (83) parking stalls were approved under the special permit. A portion of these spaces were to be located in lots to the west and south of the apartment buildings, some were internal garage spaces and others were to be located on the top deck of the parking garage. Access was to be located on Minnetonka Blvd off of the parking lot to the west of the building and directly in front of the buildings. These accesses were never constructed, nor was the parking lot to the west. Also, The applicant has stated the spaces on the top deck of the parking garage have not been used as long as he can remember and does not believe the garage is structurally safe to accommodate vehicles. Staff does not have record of vehicles parking on the top of the garage during the past twenty years. Today, there are approximately 50 parking spaces available in a substandard lot south of the building. Subsequent to the construction of the project (sometime between 1970 & 1975), Minnetonka Boulevard was widened. This widening took a substantial portion of the front yard and rendered the approved site plan access undesirable from a transportation perspective. The proposal is to construct a new expanded lot in approximately the same location and add approximately 19 parking spaces for a total of 69 spaces (the new lot would hold 39, and the remainder would be internal garage spaces). A new drainage pond is proposed to the west of the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 2 of 14 lot to meet storm water requirements. A number of trees are proposed to be removed. Site work did begin prior to submission of an application for this project. Approximately 14 trees were removed at that time. All site work has ceased and the remaining trees and tree stumps have been inventoried for a tree replacement protection plan. On September 17, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing and voted 5-0 to recommend approval of the special permit amendment with variance subject to conditions included in the proposed resolution and variance. Issues: • Does the proposal meet the conditions for amending Special Permits? • Are other Zoning Ordinance requirements met? • Does the variance request to allow modification of a property that is not in conformance with the Special Permit meet the necessary criteria for granting a variance? • Are there any other issues? Issues Analysis: Ø Does the proposal meet the conditions for amending Special Permits? Section 36-36 of the Zoning Code states that Special Permits issued for land uses that are now conditional uses are continued in full force and effect. It also states that the property covered by a Continued Special Permit shall comply with all provisions of the Special Permit that were in effect at the time of adoption of our most recent Zoning Code (December 31, 1992). Provided the property is in compliance, the property may be expanded, altered or modified provided such change complies in all respects with applicable provisions of the Zoning Code and does not result in an expansion or intensification of any existing non-conformities. Finally, any existing non-conformities shall be brought into greater or complete compliance with other provisions of the ordinance to the extend reasonable and possible, except that greater or complete compliance is not required for non-conformities involving lot area, lot width, required yards, building height, floor area ratio, ground floor area ratio, density, and usable open space. Compliance with the Existing Special Permit: In reviewing the applicant’s proposal, staff has found that the location of the existing parking lot and access are not in compliance with the approved plans. Nor is the required number of parking spaces in compliance. 83 spaces were approved, however, approximately 50 spaces exist today and approximately 69 spaces are proposed. An amendment to the special permit and a variance to permit modification to property that is not in compliance with the approved special permit is being requested at this time. There are existing nonconformities on the property. The existing parking lot is substandard and does not meet our ordinance requirement for design standards, lighting and landscaping. This is addressed under Zoning Ordinance requirements below. Ø Are Zoning Ordinance requirements met? St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 3 of 14 The existing parking area does not meet current design standards including curbs, curbed islands, landscaping and lighting. The proposed lot would bring the lot into greater compliance with current standards. Parking lot design: The proposed parking lot expansion meets ordinance design requirements in terms of drive aisle widths, curb islands, and concrete curbs around the periphery of the parking lot. Internal landscaping is required for parking areas exceeding 9,000 square feet. However, if the total number of parking spaces provided is nonconforming and is less than 90% of the parking requirement, landscaping is not required. The proposed increase in parking spaces (69 spaces) is approximately 83% of the required 83 parking spaces, and only 58% of the current parking Code requirement. Therefore staff and the Planning Commission does not recommend internal landscaping be required. Lighting: Three light fixtures are proposed in the new lot. The parking lot lighting requirements are proposed to be met. Tree Removal: Several trees are proposed to be removed as part of this project. A portion of these were removed prior to obtaining approvals. The ordinance requires replacement of significant trees that are lost due to construction activities. The total diameter inches of significant trees lost must be determined in order to calculate the number of replacement trees required. Typically, the tree diameter is measured at 4 ½ feet above the ground, however the diameter of trees previously removed were measured using the remaining stump. Approximately 67 caliper inches are proposed to be replaced, which meets tree replacement requirements. Staff and the Planning Commission do recommend that tree protection fencing be installed around the drip line of the trees to be saved to protect them from damage during construction. Storm Water Requirements: Storm water calculations have been approved by the Public Works Department. Number of Parking Spaces: As stated, the proposed spaces are non-conforming with the approved special permit. A variance is being request. See variance analysis below. Ø Does the variance request to allow modification of a property that is not in conformance with the Special Permit meet the necessary criteria for granting a variance? The proposed parking lot expansion would provide approximately 69 parking spaces on this site. The special permit approved 83, therefore a variance is being requested to modify a property that is not in conformance with the continued special permit. Currently, 50 spaces exist on site. 1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of the lot, or where by reason of exceptional topographic or water conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional conditions of such lot, the strict applications of the terms of this ordinance would result in peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in developing St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 4 of 14 or using such lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the zoning district in which said lot is located. Approximately 22 of the previously approved 83 spaces were located on top of the existing parking garage with access directly off of Minnetonka Blvd. The applicant indicated that this area has not been used for as long as he can remember. The top of the garage may not be structurally capable of having cars parked on it. This would have to be verified by a certified engineer. As stated, earlier, staff has no record of vehicles parking on top of the garage for the past 20 years. Therefore utilizing these spaces is not a viable alternative for more parking spaces. In addition, there is no longer access to this space off of Minnetonka Blvd, a County road. Due to the proximity of the intersection to the east and as a result of the Minnetonka Blvd. widening project, a new access would not be approved by the County. According to the ordinance the taking from the road widening project does constitute a hardship and is grounds for a variance. The original special permit approved a parking lot with 16 spaces directly west of the apartments, with access directly off of Minnetonka. This parking lot and access were never built and a new access today onto Minnetonka Blvd is unlikely to be approved by the County. Currently this area is an open area that contains a patio/picnic area and grill. The grades slope down, approximately 6 feet towards the alley. Thus it would require substantial grading to construct a parking lot in this area. The applicant is proposing to add more trees to this area, which would provide more of a buffer between the apartment and the single family home to the west. There are a substantial number of significant trees and grade changes to the south and west of the proposed parking lot. A number of trees have been or are proposed to be removed for this parking lot expansion. Staff and the Planning Commission do not recommend extending the proposed parking lot further south or west because it would require the removal of several more significant trees. These trees, particularly those south of the proposed lot, provide a buffer to screen the single family homes west of the apartment from the commercial property to the south. At staff’s recommendation, the applicant has proposed to install more trees than originally proposed south of the parking to add to the buffer. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been met. 2. Conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and so do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located. The combination of site features (i.e. topographic changes, landscape features..), and no direct access to a public street are peculiar to this property. They also make it difficult to develop alternative options for parking expansions. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been met. 3. The granting of the variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 5 of 14 The property is currently approved for a 60 unit multi-family apartment building. The access off of Minnetonka Blvd and the parking lot west of the buildings, as originally approved, were never built. Staff does not believe the County would approve a new access in this location today because it is located on a curve and is in close proximity to the Lake St. intersection. This limits the option to build a parking lot that conforms to the approved special permit. The apartment building is in need of additional parking for their tenants. The proposed plan would provide approximately 69 parking spaces, which would be at least one space per apartment unit. This would bring the property into greater conformance with the required amount of parking spaces and appears necessary to preserve the viability of the apartment to use, which is allowed in the Zoning District. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been met. 4. The granting of the variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, or endanger the public safety. The proposed parking lot expansion will provide more parking spaces for the tenants. This will decrease the amount of residents parking on the public streets north of Minnetonka Blvd. The proposed expansion would also bring the parking lot into compliance with the Zoning Ordinance’s design and lighting requirements, which will increase the safety. Staff believes the variance will not impair light and air to surrounding properties, nor would it increase the danger of fire or endanger the public in any way. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been met. 5. The granting of the variance will not unreasonably impact on the character and development of the neighborhood, unreasonably diminish or impair the established property values in the surrounding area, or in any other way impair the health, safety, comfort, or morals of the area. The proposed parking lot would bring parking into greater compliance with today’s ordinance standards and will improve the current substandard parking situation. As stated previously, staff recommends more trees to added south of the proposed lot so that the single family properties continue to be screened from the commercial property to the south. Staff does not believe the new parking lot will diminish property values or impair health, safety, comfort, or morals of the area. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been met. 6. The granting of the variance will not be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan. This property is guided for medium density residential, allowing a variety of housing types including 3 story apartment buildings such as the applicant’s. The applicant’s property is approximately 2 acres in size, thus it meets the maximum density requirement of 30 units per acres as permitted in this land use category. Staff believes the expanded parking lot is necessary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 6 of 14 to bring the property into closer conformance with the continued special permit and intent of the parking ordinance. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been met. 7. The granting of the variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty. As mentioned under condition #1, the original parking spaces as approved under the special permit are no longer available as alternatives. The proposed plans bring the parking lot into greater conformance with today’s parking lot requirements and the expansion is necessary to provide additional parking spaces. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been met. Ø Are there any other issues? A storm sewer runs northwest along the applicant’s property. A portion of the proposed parking lot is over this easement. Parking lots and other structures that are not on permanent foundations are permitted to be built over easements. Fire Lanes are located on both sides of the alley behind the apartment. The Fire Department has indicated there have been times that vehicles have been parked in these fire lanes. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend as a condition of approval that vehicles cannot be parked in these fire lanes. As stated previously there is an alley right-of-way south of the apartment buildings. Currently traffic on the alley is diverted south around a grassy area, just south of a single family house at 5639 Minnetonka Blvd. Traffic must enter onto the applicant’s property to continue travelling along the alley. The applicant is not proposing to change this. Staff and the Planning Commission does not have a problem with this provided the applicant continues to allow the public to enter their property to access the alley. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend this as a condition of approval. During the public hearing the applicant stated that the apartment buildings currently have 54 units as opposed to the 60 as originally approved. Due to the fact the current parking requirements are not met for this apartment complex, staff and the Planning Commission recommend as a condition that additional units cannot be added. Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of the Special Permit Amendment and variance to modify the Special Permit which is not in compliance with the parking requirements based on the findings in the staff report, subject to the conditions in the resolution. (The amendments to the original resolution are underlined.) Attachments: • Location Map St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 7 of 14 • Proposed Resolution • 1963 Special Permit Approved Plans (Supplement) • Development plans & application (Supplement) Prepared by: Julie Grove Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 8 of 14 Location Map Subject Property Minnetonka Blvd Lake St.Vernon AveWebster Ave St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 9 of 14 VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. 03-155 A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 36-36OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT THE MODIFICIATION OF A SPECIAL PERMIT WHICH IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R-4 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT AT 5621 AND 5635 MINNETONKA BOULEVARD BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. Jim Soderberg (Colonial Terrace SLP, LLC) has applied for a variance from Section 36- 36 of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit the modification of a Special Permit not in compliance with the parking requirements for property located in the R-4 Multi-Family Residential District at the following location, to-wit: Tracts B and F, Tract E except that part which lies Northeasterly of a line 38.28 feet in length extending from a point in the Southeasterly line of said Tract E distant 4.53 feet Southwesterly from the most Easterly corner thereof to a point distant 1.62 feet Southwesterly from, as measured perpendicular to the Northeasterly line of said Tract E. 2. On September 17, 2003, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, received testimony from the public, discussed the application and recommended approval of a variance. 3. The Planning Commission has considered the effect of the proposed variance upon the health, safety and welfare of the community, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, light and air, danger of fire, risk to the public safety, the effect on values of property in the surrounding area, and the effect of the proposed variance upon the Comprehensive Plan. 4. Because of conditions on the subject property and surrounding property, it is possible to use the property in such a way that the proposed variance will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to the adjacent property, unreasonably increase the congestion in the public streets, increase the danger of fire, endanger the public safety, unreasonably diminish or impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 10 of 14 5. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property and do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which such land is located. 6. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant. It will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difficulty. 7. The Zoning Ordinance Section 36-405(c)(2) states a governmental taking constitutes a hardship for the purpose of a variance. 8. The contents of Planning Case File 03-36-VAR are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision of this case. 9. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this variance shall be deemed to be abandoned, revoked, or canceled if the holder shall fail to complete the work on or before one year after the variance is granted. 10. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this variance shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the variance is granted is removed. CONCLUSION The application for the variance to permit the modification of the Special Permit not in compliance with the parking requirement is granted based upon the finding(s) set forth above. 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 October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 03-36-VAR:res-ord St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 11 of 14 RESOLUTION NO. 03-156 Amends and Restates Resolution No. 2303 A RESOLUTION AMENDING AND RESTATING RESOLUTION NO. 2303 ADOPTED ON APRIL 29, 1963 AND GRANTING AMENDMENT TO EXISTING SPECIAL PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-36 OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO ALLOW EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING PARKING LOT AT 5621 AND 5635 MINNETONKA BOULEVARD FINDINGS WHEREAS, Jim Soderberg (Colonial Terrace SLP, LLC) has made application to the City Council for an amendment to an existing special permit under Section 36-36 of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code to allow expansion of the existing parking lot at 5621 and 5635 Minnetonka Boulevard within a R-4 Multi-Family Residential Zoning District having the following legal description: Tracts B and F, Tract E except that part which lies Northeasterly of a line 38.28 feet in length extending from a point in the Southeasterly line of said Tract E distant 4.53 feet Southwesterly from the most Easterly corner thereof to a point distant 1.62 feet Southwesterly from, as measured perpendicular to the Northeasterly line of said Tract E. WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the information related to Planning Case Nos. 63-6-SP and 03-35-CUP and the effect of the proposed parking lot expansion 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 and the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan; and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance; and WHEREAS, a special permit was issued to permit the construction of two 30 unit apartment buildings attached by a parking garage regarding the subject property pursuant to Resolution No. 2303 of the St. Louis Park City Council dated April 29, 1963 which contained conditions applicable to said property; and WHEREAS, due to changed circumstances, amendments to those conditions are now necessary, requiring the amendment of that special permit; and WHEREAS, it is the intent of this resolution to continue and restate the conditions of the permit granted by Resolution No. 2303, to add the amendments now required, and to consolidate all conditions applicable to the subject property in this resolution; St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 12 of 14 WHEREAS, the contents of Case Nos. 63-6-SP and 03-35-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. CONCLUSION NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Resolution No. 2303 (document not filed) is hereby restated and amended by this resolution which continues and amends a special permit to the subject property for the purposes of permitting expansion of the existing parking lot within the R-4 Multi-Family Residential District at the location described above based on the following conditions: The special permit to permit the construction of two 30 unit apartment buildings attached by a parking garage at the location described is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. The tract of land above described is not less than one and five tenths acres in area. 2. Said lands are located in an R-3, R-4 or R-B Use District. 3. That said lands will be better developed and more efficiently utilized under a proper plan as provided in Section 6:176.1 of the St. Louis Park Zoning Ordinance. 4. The owners of said lands have submitted their application for a special permit under Section 6:176.1 accompanied by a preliminary plan for the development of said lands. 5. The plan conforms to the requirements of the use district in which it is located and with respect to the requirements of Section 6:176.1, Subdivision 1 through 10 further shows: (a) That said tract of land will have not less than 200 feet of frontage on a public right-of-way. (b) That the project will be served by the City sewer and water system and will have fire hydrants installed as necessary for fire protection. (c) That no building within the project will be nearer than its height to rear or side property lines which abut upon an R-1 or R-2 Use District. (d) That no buildings within the project will be nearer to another building than one- half the sum of the heights of the two buildings. (e) That private roadways within the project will have an improved surface twenty (20) feet or more in width and will be so designed as to permit the City fire trucks to provide protection to each building. (f) That no part of private roadways has been used in calculating the required off- street parking space. (g) That no buildings will be located less than fifteen (15) feet from the back of the curb line along the internal street pattern. (h) That the off-street parking requirements will be 1.3 spaces per dwelling unit. (i) That needs for recreational purposes have been considered and are adequately covered in the said plan and no provision therefore is required. 6. That the project be developed and constructed in conformance with the elevation, perspective, floor plan, and final plan submitted by the applicant and marked exhibits "A", "B", and "C" respectively filed with the City Clerk. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 13 of 14 7. That the applicant deed to the City a storm sewer and drainage easement along rear service drive. 8. The special permit shall be amended on October 20, 2003 to allow expansion of the exiting parking lot, to incorporate all of the preceding conditions and add the following conditions: a. The site shall be used, developed and maintained in accordance with the official Exhibits: Exhibit D – Survey, Exhibit E – Site Plan, Exhibit F – Grading & Erosion Control Plan, Exhibit G – Utility Plan, Exhibit H – Tree Preservation Plan, Exhibit I – Landscape Plan. b. Prior to any site work, applicant shall obtain a Watershed District permit, if required, and shall install required silt and tree protection fencing. c. Prior to beginning any additional site work, the applicant shall comply with the following: i. Obtain a building permit, utility permits and/or other permits required by the City, which may impose additional conditions. ii. Obtain an erosion control permit from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District and forward a copy of permit to the City. iii. Sign assent form and Final PUD official exhibits. iv. Grading plans shall comply with all of the requirements of the Public Works Department. v. Meet all Fire Department emergency access requirements. vi. Submit financial surety to cover 125% of the cost of tree replacement & repair, cleaning public streets. vii. Tree protection fencing must be installed and maintained throughout construction. d. The developer shall comply with the following conditions during construction: i. 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. ii. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. iii. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. iv. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in order to mitigate the impact of construction on surrounding properties. e. A maximum of 69 off-street parking spaces shall be maintained at all times and there shall be no parking in Fire Lanes as required by the Fire Marshall. f. The owner shall continue to allow public access through the private parking lot or restore alley right-of-way to allow public access throughout the alley right-of- way. g. The owner shall inspect the pond once a year and clean the catch basins, pond, parking lot and paved areas as needed. h. A maximum of 54 units is permitted. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 102003 - 8e - Colonial Terrace Apts CUP & Variance Page 14 of 14 i. The developer/owner shall pay an administrative fine of $750.00 per violation of any condition of this approval. Under the Zoning Ordinance, this permit shall be revoked and cancelled if the building or structure for which the conditional use permit is granted is removed. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council October 20, 2003 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 03-35-CUP:res-ord