Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002/09/03 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - RegularAGENDA SUMMARY CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA September 3, 2002 – 7:30 p.m. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY – 7:20 1. Call to Order a. Pledge of Allegiance b. Roll Call 2. Presentations a. Proclamation – Food Safety Education Month b. Graduating Senior Class Presentation to Council 3. Approval of Minutes a. City Council Minutes of August 19, 2002 Document b. City Council Study Session minutes of August 19, 2002 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 - None 6. Public Hearings - None 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 7a Approve preliminary 2003 property tax levy, budget for the 2003 fiscal year, revisions to the 2002 adopted budget, and set Public Hearing date for on proposed budget and property tax levy Document Resolution approving the preliminary property tax levy and budget is required by Truth in Taxation legislation. Information contained in the resolution will be used in the individual tax notices prepared by the County. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the resolution establishing the preliminary tax levy and budget for 2003, approves revisions to the 2002 adopted budget and sets public hearing date for proposed budget and property tax levy. 7b Resolution authorizing an HRA levy Document Council authorization of HRA levy as approved on EDA agenda Recommended Action: Adopt resolution setting HRA levy for 2003 7c Contract for Patrol Officer and Support Services Agents 1/1/02 – 12/31/03 A two year agreement with LELS Local #206, Police Officer and Support Services Agent, for 2002 and 2003. Document Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor Services Inc. (Local #206) for our Police Officers and Support Services Agents, establishing terms and conditions of employment for two years: 1/1/02 – 12/31/03. 7d Request for a Conditional Use Permit and variance for a mixed use/residential- office building at 1155 Ford Road Document Case Nos. 02-41-VAR and 02-40-CUP 1155 Ford Road Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit and a resolution approving the variance subject to the conditions included in the resolutions 7e Preliminary and Final Plat for Vail in the Park at 3647 Sumter Ave. S. and 7850 37th Street W. Document Case No. 02-39-s Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the preliminary and final plat, subject to conditions in the resolution, and waiving the requirement for a development agreement. 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 9. Communications 10. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. To make arrangements, please call the Administration Department) at 952/924-2525 (TDD 952/924-2518) at least 96 hours in advance of meeting. ST. LOUIS PARK CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 3, 2002 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 the joint powers agreement with the school district for the purchase and maintenance of the playground equipment at Nelson Park. Document 4b Motion to accept for filing minutes of Board of Zoning Appeals June 27, 2002 Document 4c Motion to accept for filing minutes of Planning Commission August 7, 2002 Document 4d Motion to accept for filing minutes of Charter Commission May 15, 2002 Document 4e Motion to accept for filing minutes of Human Rights Comm June 19, 2002 Document 4f Motion to adopt a resolution revoking the current resolution and authorizing the removal of parking restrictions on the north side of Cedar Shore Drive from France Avenue, east to the City boundary; and reestablishing “No Parking” restrictions on the south side of Cedar Shore Drive from France Avenue, east to the City boundary Document 4g Motion to accept vendor claim report for filing (supplement) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 3a - Council Minutes August 19, 2002 Page 1 of 5 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA August 19, 2002 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:34 p.m. The following Councilmembers were present at roll call: Jim Brimeyer, Ron Latz, Chris Nelson, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Sally Velick, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Also present were the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Knetsch); Planning Coordinator (Ms. Erickson); Associate Planner (Ms. Grove); City Clerk (Ms. Reichert); and Recording Secretary (Ms. Samson). 2. Presentations 2a. Junior Naturalist Recognition Sara Kelser, Activities Specialist for Westwood Hills Nature Center, and Mayor Jacobs recognized the 32 Junior Naturalists for their work, all of whom are in the 7th to 12th grades. The Junior Naturalists logged 1,368 hours of volunteer work during this summer. 2b. St. Louis Park Ambassador Program Introductions Mayor Jacobs presented the St. Louis Park Ambassador Program representatives who, during their one-year reigns, will participate in approximately 70 community events. 3. Approval of Minutes 3a. City Council Minutes of August 5, 2002 The minutes were approved as presented. 4. Approval of Agenda and Items on Consent Calendar Councilmember Sanger requested Item 4i be moved from the Consent Calendar to the Regular Agenda. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to move Consent Calendar Item 4i to the Regular Agenda. The motion passed 7-0. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 3a - Council Minutes August 19, 2002 Page 2 of 5 4a Accept for filing the Planning Commission Minutes of July 17, 2002 4b Approve Ordinance No. 2230-02 amending reporting requirements for lawful gambling organizations, and authorize summary publication. 4c Approve Resolution No. 02-086 appointment of Special Service District No. 2 Advisory Board and Advisory Board Bylaws. 4d Bid Tabulation: Designated Tekton Construction Company, Inc. the lowest responsible bidder for two (2) entry signs and site landscaping and to authorize execution of a contract with the firm in the amount of $67,740.00 - City Project Nos. 00-19 & 02-11. 4e Approve Resolution No. 02-087 appointment of Special Service District No. 3 Advisory Board and Advisory Board By-laws. 4f Adopt Resolution No. 02-088 regarding Traffic Study #567 authorizing the installation of stop signs on Northbound and Southbound Nevada Avenue at W. 29th Street. 4g Adopt Resolution No. 02-089 regarding Traffic Study # 566 authorizing the installation of parking restrictions on Pennsylvania Avenue from 100 feet North of W. 13-1/2 Street, South to W. 13-1/2 Street. 4h Adopt Resolution No. 02-090 accepting Work On 2001 Sidewalk Improvement Project Phase “A” City Project No. 99-07a. 4i (Moved to regular Agenda as Item 8c) Adopting a Resolution that declares the petition adequate for the purposes of preparing a formal City Engineer’s Report on the feasibility and costs associated with a proposed alley improvement project in the 2900 block between Salem and Toledo Avenues, north of Minnetonka Boulevard. 4j Approve encroachment agreement with MSP Real Estate (Louisiana Oaks Apartments) for an encroachment of exterior stairs onto a City utility easement. 4k Approve encroachment agreement with Philip and Barbara Lindblad, 3025 Aquila Avenue South, for use of excess land along the Hutchinson Spur Trail for yard and garden purposes. 4l Accept Telecommunications Commission minutes of May 9, 2002 for filing It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to approve the Agenda and items listed on the Consent Calendar as amended. The motion passed 7-0. 5. Boards and Commissions - None 6. Public Hearings 6a. Public Hearing to consider granting license to sell wine and beer Chipotle Mexican Grill of Colorado, LLC dba Chipotle at 5480 Excelsior Blvd in St. Louis Park St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 3a - Council Minutes August 19, 2002 Page 3 of 5 City Clerk Cindy Reichert said Chipotle has submitted an application for a wine and beer license, and the Applicant has met all of the conditions for granting of a license. Ms. Reichert said the approval is contingent upon the passage of Chipotle’s request for a PUD (see Item 8b). Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. With no one wishing to speak, Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve a wine and beer license contingent upon receipt of planning approvals still under consideration. The motion passed 6-0-1. (Councilmember Latz abstained). 7. Requests, Petitions, and Communications from the Public - None 8. Resolutions, Ordinances, Motions 8a. Request by Cedar Trails Condominium Association for minor amendment to existing Special Permit to incorporate proposed plan for modification of existing pool building, Case No. 02-45-CUP 4400-4654 Cedar Lake Road Resolution No. 02-083 Planning Coordinator Judie Erickson stated that Cedar Trails Condominium Association is request to withdraw their plan for a community building and, instead, incorporate an addition to their existing pool building. It was moved by Councilmember Sanger, seconded by Councilmember Velick, to adopt Resolution No. 02-083 approving minor amendment to existing conditional use permit subject to conditions stated. The motion passed 7-0. 8b. Request by Frauenshuh Companies for a major amendment to the approved Planned Unit Development for Park Village/Tower Place to allow a change in an approved use. 5480 Excelsior Blvd. Case No. 01-36-PUD Resolution No. 02-084 Associate Planner Julie Grove stated that a traffic analysis by SRF Consultants was done, and SRF Consultants reported that there would be no negative impacts on the Park Village/Tower Place development or on the traffic surrounding the area. SRF Consultants recommended installation of additional signage to improve internal circulation. Ms. Grove said the outdoor seating area is proposed to remain unfenced, and outdoor consumption of beer in an unfenced area is permissible. Staff recommends St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 3a - Council Minutes August 19, 2002 Page 4 of 5 outdoor seating not exceed 10% of the restaurant floor area, which is a zoning ordinance and it is included as a condition in the resolution. Ms. Grove reported that Staff researched the intent of the original PUD, and the Applicant’s request does not conflict with the intent of the original PUD. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve Resolution No. 02-084 amending the Park Village/Tower Place Planned Unit Development to allow a change in the approved use from retail to restaurant subject to the conditions included in the resolution. The motion passed 6-0-1. (Councilmember Latz abstained). 8c. Petition for the purposes of preparing a formal City Engineer’s Report for a proposed alley improvement project in the 2900 block between Salem and Toledo Avenues. Resolution No. 02-085 Councilmember Sanger requested this item be discussed because this is an unusual alley paving request, i.e., an institution occupies a significant amount of the alley frontage. City Manager Charlie Meyer described the petition process. Mr. Meyer said, in this case, a minority of the property owners may present a valid petition to the City, and the City Council has the discretion to proceed with an alley assessment. Paul Rosholt, 2925 Toledo Avenue South, is one of two residents on the block with an 80-foot frontage, and one resident has a 100-foot frontage. Mr. Rosholt stated the petition is before the Council on a .37% margin—and St. George’s Church represents a 28.83% vote. Mr. Rosholt said the yes votes amount to 37.50% of the properties and approximately 36.20% is residential footage. According to Mr. Rosholt, it doesn’t seem right, and he has concerns about costs. He thinks the church would derive the greater benefit. Mr. Rosholt has additional concerns regarding traffic, and engineering concerns regarding elevation of the alley. Mr. Meyer said all property owners, homeowners and the church, would pay the same rate based on alley footage. Councilmember Sanger questioned if the daycare center located in the church should be treated as commercial. Councilmember Sanger inquired if the ordinance, as currently written, was intended to be applied to an alley that has a mix of residential and commercial. Mr. Meyer said, for tonight, Council will vote to accept or deny the petition. If the petition is accepted, then the public process will begin and there will be a neighborhood meeting. Mr. Rosholt said he does not know if all of his neighbors are opposed to the paving. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 3a - Council Minutes August 19, 2002 Page 5 of 5 It was moved by Councilmember Brimeyer, seconded by Councilmember Sanger, to Approve Resolution No. 02-085 declaring adequacy of petition and ordering preparation of a report to determine the feasibility of paving the alley located in the 2900 block between Salem and Toledo Avenues, north of Minnetonka Boulevard. The motion passed 7-0. 9. Communications Councilmember Velick thanked Staff and residents who participated in National Night Out. 10. Adjournment Mayor Jacobs adjourned the meeting at 8:15 p.m. City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 3b - Study Session Minutes August 19, 2002 Page 1 of 1 UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION August 19, 2002 The meeting convened at 8:24 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Jim Brimeyer, Susan Sanger, Ron Latz, Chris Nelson, Sally Velick, Susan Santa and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer), Finance Director (Ms. McGann); and City Clerk (Ms. Reichert) 1. 2002-2003 Budget Discussion Council and staff met to review the 2002 Revised and 2003 Proposed Budget document prior to the meeting of September 3, 2002 when the Council will be setting the preliminary levy for 2003. Ms. McGann stated that the city’s 2003 budget is balanced with a property tax increase of 1.9% resulting in an increase to the overall budget of 3.4%. Council discussed the effects legislative levy limits and aid formulas have on the city budget and also asked questions specific to St. Louis Park’s financial outlook for the coming year. Ms. McGann stated that though levy limits are set to expire at the end of 2003, she believed the legislature would be renewing the limits at the next legislative session. Councilmember Sanger asked if recent publicity received by a neighboring city regarding expenditure of public funds had affected city operations in any way. Mr. Meyer and Ms. McGann informed the council that they believed St. Louis Park was making expenditures responsibly and prudently and sufficient council authorization had been given for programs the city operates. Mr. Meyer informed the Council that cities may ask voters for levy in excess of the state limit at a general or special election. Voter-approved levies to exceed state levy limits are levied against net tax capacity, unless another general or special state law or local charter provision requires that it be levied against referendum market value. Special levy referendums must be held by August 31st to take effect the following year. Though Mr. Meyer was not recommending that the city move forward with a levy referendum, he felt it was important for the council to understand that the option exists. Further discussion on funding the City’s Capital Improvement Program will be held at a meeting in the near future and staff will be presenting several options for the council to consider at that time. 2. Adjournment - The meeting was adjourned at 9:15 p.m. City Clerk Mayor St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4A - Joint Powers Agreement for Nelson Park Page 1 of 4 4a Motion to approve the joint powers agreement with the school district for the purchase and maintenance of the playground equipment at Nelson Park. Background The City of St. Louis Park has a long history of cooperatively working with the school district to provide the best programs and facilities to the residents of St. Louis Park. The Parks and Recreation Department continues to jointly work with the school district on improvements that benefit both parties. This Joint Powers Agreement is continuing the relationship. Joint Powers Agreement Contents This agreement is for the joint purchase and maintenance of the playground equipment at Nelson Park. The residents who live around the park as well as the students at Peter Hobart School will use the equipment. The agreement states that the City provided $15,000 towards the purchase of the equipment, which is approximately half of the total cost. The school district will own the equipment and is responsible for the costs associated with maintenance, repair and replacement of the equipment. The equipment is located on park property because the school property isn't large enough to facilitate the structure. Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the agreement with the school district for the purchase and maintenance of the playground equipment at Nelson Park. Attachments: Joint Powers Agreement Prepared by: Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Parks and Recreation Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4A - Joint Powers Agreement for Nelson Park Page 2 of 4 JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT NELSON PARK PLAYGROUND AGREEMENT made this 3rd day of September 2002, by and between the CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK, a Minnesota Municipal Corporation ("City") and INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 283 ("District"). RECITALS A. The City owns the park property known as Nelson Park, located in St. Louis Park ("Nelson Park"); B. The District owns the property adjacent to Nelson Park which is used for the Peter Hobart Elementary School ("District Property"); C. The parties desire to provide for the joint use and improvement of the playground located on Nelson Park adjacent to the District Property with playground equipment. D. Minn. Stat. § 471.15, et seq., authorizes the City and District to enter into a joint powers agreement to improve, operate, and maintain recreational facilities. NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: 1. IMPROVEMENTS. The District has prepared plans and specifications for the design and construction of a playground to be located on Nelson Park. The plans and specifications have been approved by both the District and the City. The District shall bid the project, awarded the contract, and execute the contract documents for the construction of the playground. The District shall administer the contract and supervise the construction. 2. CONTRIBUTIONS. The District shall pay all costs associated with the construction of a playground and playground equipment on Nelson Park. The City is providing a portion of Nelson Park for the construction of the playground and is contributing $15,000.00 to the District toward the purchase of the playground equipment, demolition of old playground structure, disposal and installation of playground border. 3. GRANT OF LICENSE. The City as licensor hereby grants and licenses to the District as licensee and its agents and invitees non-exclusive rights of use, regulation and control of the playground portion of Nelson Park and all rights necessary to the District's performance of its various rights and obligations under this Agreement. The license created herein is coupled with an interest, and will terminate in accordance with. 4. USE. 4.1. The parties agree that the playground located on Nelson Park shall be treated as "school ground" as contemplated by the alcohol control provisions of Minn. Stat. § 624.701; that St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4A - Joint Powers Agreement for Nelson Park Page 3 of 4 the District's alcohol and tobacco policies and regulations, and any additions or amendments thereto, shall apply to the playground; that the area should be appropriately posted; and that the City may withhold access from groups for alcohol or tobacco violations. The City agrees to enforce applicable statutes and ordinances in and around the playground in the same way the City enforces applicable statutes and ordinances on other park and school property. 4.2 The parties agree that members of the general public shall have equal opportunity to use the playground regardless of affiliation with local recreation programs, the District, or the City. 5. OPERATION OF NELSON PARK. 5.1 The District is solely responsible for all costs for construction, operation, maintenance, repair, replacement or alteration of the playground and playground equipment at Nelson Park. 5.2 The District must receive written City approval for any future improvements or substantial alterations to the playground, or for removal of the playground equipment at Nelson Park. 5.3 The District pledges to promptly perform maintenance, repair, and replacement obligations set forth in this Agreement in a workmanlike manner. 6. INSURANCE. The District shall obtain an agreed amount blanket basis policy in respect to the playground, improvements and liability coverage for the playground with the City named as an additional insured on the policy. 7. HOLD HARMLESS AND INDEMNIFICATION. The District agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from and against any and all suits, demands, liabilities, costs and other expenses (including reasonable attorneys' fees), including but not limited to property damage and personal injury, including death, incurred by the City in connection with or arising out of the construction, operation, maintenance, repair or use of the playground or playground equipment, except to the extent that such suits, demands, liabilities, costs and other expenses occur as a result of the City's negligence. Nothing herein shall change or otherwise affect the liability limits established under Minn. Stat. Chapter 466, as amended. The liability limitations established in Minn. Stat. Chapter 466 shall apply to undertakings pursuant to this Agreement, and no individual or entity may seek to increase recovery beyond the statutory amounts set forth in Minn. Stat. Chapter 466 by attempting to aggregate the statutory amounts applicable to the District or the City. 8. DURATION OF LICENSE. (a) The license will be for a period of twenty (20) years commencing September 3, 2002 unless terminated sooner pursuant to Subparagraph (b). This Agreement shall annually renew thereafter. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4A - Joint Powers Agreement for Nelson Park Page 4 of 4 (b) This agreement may be terminated by either party upon 180 days' written notice. The District will not terminate the agreement for the primary reason of avoiding its obligations under Paragraphs 5 through 7 herein. If the City decides to terminate this Agreement within the first ten years of the term, the City will reimburse the District for costs paid by the District for the playground improvements. The amount of any such reimbursement will be reduced by five percent (5%) after each year the Agreement is in effect. There is no reimbursement obligation if termination occurs after ten years. THIS AGREEMENT executed by the parties the day and year first above written. CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK Reviewed for Parks and Recreation _________________________________ ____________________________________ Jeff Jacobs, Mayor Cynthia S. Walsh, Director of Parks & Recreation _________________________________ Charles W. Meyer, City Manager INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 283 BY: _________________________________ Attest: Its Chair _________________________________ AND: _______________________________ Cynthia D. Reichert, City Clerk Its Superintendent (seal) AND: _______________________________ Its Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4b - BOZA minutes 6-27-02 Page 1 of 7 MINUTES JUNE 27, 2002 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK The St. Louis Park Board of Zoning Appeals Committee conducted a regular meeting on Thursday, June 27, 2002, at St. Louis Park City Hall, 5005 Minnetonka Boulevard, St. Louis Park, Minnesota. Members Present: Chair James Gainsley Vice Chair Susan Bloyer Commissioner Ryan Burt Commissioner Tom Powers Members Absent: Commissioner Paul Roberts Staff Present: Marney Curfman, Community Development Intern. Janet Jeremiah, Planning & Zoning Supervisor Tara Olson, Community Development Secretary 1. CALL TO ORDER – ROLL CALL Chair Gainsley called the regular meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. 2. APPROVE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS COMMITTEE MINUTES Motion by Commissioner Roberts, seconded by Commissioner Powers, to approve the following minutes as presented with the following corrections: Page 4, remove-With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing. 1) Board of Zoning Appeals Committee public hearing and regular meeting minutes dated May 23, 2002. Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Burt, that the regular meeting minutes dated May 23, 2002 are approved with the above stated corrections. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer, Burt, and Powers. Voting No: None. 3. CONSENT AGENDA None St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4b - BOZA minutes 6-27-02 Page 2 of 7 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/COMMITTEE BUSINESS A. Case No. 02-25-VAR - The request of Jeffrey Hickstein for variances from the requirements of Section 36-163(f)(4) and 36-163(f)(5) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit an attached garage in a restricted square due to a rear lot line being common to a side lot line of an adjacent property, and to reduce the required rear yard depth. The applicant seeks an 8.8 foot rear yard setback and a 23.2 foot setback for a side yard abutting a public street, instead of the required 25 foot rear setback and 30 foot dimension for the restricted square on the property located in the “R-1” Single Family Residential District at 2856 France Avenue South. (Continued from May 23, 2002) Ms. Jeremiah stated that the applicant, Mr. Hickstein is interested in the option of a tuck-under garage. At this time, a survey, topographic plan and other details are needed for staff and Commission review so he has asked for the public hearing to be continued until September 26, 2002 to allow adequate time for him to prepare. City staff will advertise the alternative variance for a tuck-under garage at that time. Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Powers, that the variance be continued to Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of September 26, 2002. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer, Burt, and Powers. Voting No: None. B. Case No. 02-28-VAR - The request of George Murray for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-164(f)(5) of the Ordinance Code related to zoning to permit a side yard setback of 2 feet instead of the required 5 feet for an attached garage addition on the property located in the “R-2” Single Family Residential District at 2837 Ottawa Avenue South. (Continued from May 23, 2002) Ms. Jeremiah stated that the applicant, Mr. Murray is also considering his options and may withdraw his request for the variance if he can find that he has an adequate garage addition with a minimum 5-foot side yard setback. In the interim he has asked that we continue the public hearing on July 25, 2002, if he withdraws prior to that date the Commission will be notified. Motion by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Bloyers, that the variance be continued to Board of Zoning Appeals meeting of July 25, 2002. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer, Burt, and Powers. Voting No: None. C. Case No. 02-34-VAR – The request of Daniel Miller for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-163(f)(5) of the Ordinance Code related to zoning to permit a front setback of 25.2 feet instead of the required 28 feet for an attached garage addition on St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4b - BOZA minutes 6-27-02 Page 3 of 7 the property located in the “R-1” Single Family Residential District at 2229 Flag Avenue South. Ms. Curfman presented a report and concluded that all 7 findings have been met and recommends that the Board of Zoning Appeals approve the applicants’ request for a variance to permit a front setback of 25.2 feet for an attached garage addition. Chair Gainsley asked staff if there are additional lots in this area that are 2,000 square feet smaller than the R-1 standard? Ms. Jeremiah stated there are several lots similar to this one in the immediate vicinity. The lot directly to the north is a mirror image to the applicants. There’s a similar platting in the area south of 23rd Street and north of 22nd Street. However, this platting is unique to the golf course area. Chair Gainsley asked staff if these lots are considered particular because of the small lot size. Ms. Jeremiah stated that was correct. With no more questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing. Daniel Miller, applicant of 2229 Flag Avenue South, stated that his family would like to update the kitchen and dining room. In addition, the kitchen and dining room are small which makes family dinners and entertaining guests difficult. The proposal of moving the garage closer to the street would allow the expansion of a larger kitchen, dining room and additional storage space. Commissioner Bloyer asked Mr. Miller if he has the current measurements of his kitchen. Ms. Jeremiah stated that the estimated size on the submitted site plan shows 10 x 10 feet. Mr. Miller stated that the submitted plan is fairly close to scale and believes that 10 X 10 feet is a close estimate. With no more questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing. Commissioner Powers would like to thank staff for stating in the staff’s findings #3 the positive comments about move up housing and looking at the effects of the neighborhood. Motion by Commissioner Powers, seconded by Commissioner Burt, that the variance to permit a front setback of 25.2 feet instead of the required 28 feet for an attached garage addition is granted. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer, Burt, and Powers. Voting No: None. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4b - BOZA minutes 6-27-02 Page 4 of 7 Commissioner Bloyer would like to comment on staff’s findings #3 “… the variance is necessary to enjoy the right to improve the property and maintain usable open space in the rear.” She feels that that statement is broad. In addition, she would like the Commission to make a recommendation for the variance without staff’s findings #3. Chair Gainsley stated that he agreed with Commissioner Bloyer, he stated that the right to improve the property within the balance of reasonable use. Commissioner Powers stated that he agreed with Chair Gainsley’s statement but does like the wording staff has used in the staff’s findings #3 and would like to point out that City Council is also in favor of encouraging the improvement of property. At 7:23 p.m. Commissioner Powers temporary left the room. Chair Gainsley announced that a quorum is still present and will proceed with the meeting. At 7:29 p.m. Commissioner Powers re-entered the room. D. Case No. 02-35-VAR - The request of Walser Automotive Group for a variance from the requirements of Section 36-361(3)(l)(2) and 36-364(G)(1) of the Ordinance Code related to zoning to permit a front setback of 0 feet instead of the required 6 feet and no buffer yard for a parking lot on the property located in the “C-2” General Commercial District at 5501 Excelsior Blvd. Ms. Jeremiah presented a report and concluded that all of the 7 findings have been met and recommends that the Board of Zoning Appeals approve the applicants’ request for a variance to permit a 0 foot setback for parking and no landscape in the “C-2” General Commercial District 5501 Excelsior Boulevard subject to the following conditions: 1) Submit for City approval landscape and irrigation plans for the north side of the property and adjacent public right-of-way. 2) Obtain City approval of a private use of public land agreement and 3) Remove tower signs or gain approval of a separate variance to allow them to remain. Ms. Jeremiah noted that the last condition would be pursued regardless of whether or not it is included as a condition of this variance. Chair Gainsley stated that he feels it is not relevant to this variance and if the City would like to pursue this issue it should be done independently. Chair Gainsley stated that in the staff report a statement was made regarding the headlights will not shine into the residential area next door, how can staff verify that? Ms. Jeremiah stated that the vehicles will be projecting to the north and to the south so the lights that are shining to the south will project onto the building and the north lights will project onto a fence and a landscaped area between their property and Excelsior Boulevard right-of-way, so there are no residents to the north. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4b - BOZA minutes 6-27-02 Page 5 of 7 Chair Gainsley asked staff if a buffer yard were required would it be located between the applicant’s property and the property to the east. What is to the east? Ms. Jeremiah stated that he is correct, the buildings to the east are zoned residential and include institutional uses. We require the buffer yard between all parking lots and street right-of-ways for visual separation, aesthetics and headlights. In this case the headlights won’t be shining in the easterly direction from those parking spaces. Although there will be cars using the drive aisle and with the two-way circulation those headlights could potentially go east, but we never require landscaping in the curb cut area. The Catholic school and church property are located to the east, which is not a residence. Chair Gainsley asked staff if we were to grant a variance for the buffer yard does staff feel that will cause conflict in the future? Ms. Jeremiah stated there are not anticipated street improvements for this property. Commissioner Bloyer stated that she feels a parking variance shall also be warranted due to the limited amount of available space in the back parking lot. Ms. Jeremiah stated that the applicant didn’t apply for a parking variance which would require a new advertisement. If we were to grant a parking variance it could potentially run with the land and could be redeveloped and still potentially not meet requirements. You could tie the variance to this particular use but, it would be difficult in this case since there is an agreement with the property to the south that allows them to use any portion of the lot. We would need to know exactly how many spaces we would be granting the variance for, and at this time the applicant hasn’t requested that. They are just trying to do everything they can to improve the existing situation. Chair Gainsley asked staff that since an application wasn’t submitted for a parking variance the Board is unable to make recommendations on that issue? Ms. Jeremiah stated that was correct. With regard to the current request, this is the second variance to allow a portion of the parking to project into the road way easement. If you look at the north parking lot, we already have an encroachment on the southeast side of lot which was approved in 1992. And now they would like to do a similar thing on the north side of that lot. Chair Gainsley asked if there is any pedestrian traffic. Ms. Jeremiah stated that there is a sidewalk on the property that goes north to their parking lot entrance. However, if pedestrians were to continue north along that alignment they would run into a fence. Therefore, they must cross to the east. With no questions, Chair Gainsley opened the public hearing. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4b - BOZA minutes 6-27-02 Page 6 of 7 Don Schilling, Director of Facilities of Walser Automotive Group, stated that prior to purchasing the property the company knew that parking was going to be an issue. For sometime they have been exploring several different options for expansion. The proposal that is presented will allow a total of 10-12 additional parking spaces available. In addition the parking spaces are presently parallel to the sidewalk so vehicles could overhang onto the sidewalk. Also, if staff would prefer a sidewalk along the edge of the parking lot instead of green space they are willing to discuss those changes. With no questions, Chair Gainsley closed the public hearing. Commissioner Bloyer stated she would like removal of staff’s recommendation #3, stating “Remove tower signs or gain approval of a separate variance to allow them to remain.” Also, she doesn’t agree with staff’s findings #3, “Staff agrees that adequate parking is a substantial property right.” She stated that it is a requirement and would like to add a condition to staff’s recommendation that the applicant’s continue to pursue south parking possibilities. Commissioner Powers stated he agrees with staff’s recommendation in regards to removal of tower sign or gain approval for a separate variance. If they are not meeting codes they should have it removed or apply for a variance. Commissioner Bloyer stated that recommendation does not pertain to the application request of parking spaces. Commissioner Burt stated he agrees with removal of staff’s recommendation #3. Also, he asked if the recommendations will remain the same for the south property, he thought staff mentioned an evaluation will be done and some ownership issues, sounds like a variance may be needed for the south parking lot. Commissioner Powers asked staff if there would be a problem with removing staff’s recommendation #3? Ms. Jeremiah stated the applicant is in the process of exploring other options with regards to the sign so staff will continue to pursue that issue. The Commission does not need to include the recommendation as a condition of this variance resolution. Staff discussed with the City Attorney the idea of incorporating the sign variance and advertising it with this request as a City initiative. City Attorney stated it was fine for the Commissioners to discuss this issue but recommended the sign variance become a separate application for which the property owner would apply. With regard to parking on the south side, if you want them to do something definitive on the south side before they make further improvements on the north side, that would be important to know. Otherwise if you are just directing staff to continue working with the applicants on this issue, it can become record without becoming one of the variance conditions. Commissioner Powers stated he would not have a problem leaving staff’s recommendation, St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4b - BOZA minutes 6-27-02 Page 7 of 7 because he doesn’t see it as a problem, but also will entertain a motion for approval with the recommendation removed. Chair Gainsley stated he agrees with Commission Bloyer with the removal of staff’s recommendation #3. Motion by Commissioner Bloyer, seconded by Commissioner Burt, that the variance to permit a 0 foot setback for parking and no landscape in the C-2 General Commercial District subject to the following conditions: 1) Submit for City approval landscape and irrigation plans for the north side of the property and adjacent public right-of-way. 2) Obtain City approval of a private use of public land agreement. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Gainsley, Bloyer, Burt, and Powers. Voting No: None. 5. Old Business: None 6. New Business: None 7. Communications: None 8. Miscellaneous: None 9. Adjournment: Commissioner Bloyer moved and Commissioner Powers seconded the motion for adjournment. The regular meeting of the Board of Zoning Appeals adjourned at 7:49 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Tara Olson Community Development Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4c - Planning Commission Minutes 8-7-02 Page 1 of 5 OFFICIAL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA August 7, 2002 -- 6:00 P.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Phillip Finkelstein, Michael Garelick, Dennis Morris, Carl Robertson MEMBERS ABSENT: Michelle Bissonnette, Ken Gothberg, Jerry Timian STAFF PRESENT: Judie Erickson, Julie Grove, Nancy Sells 1. Call to order - Roll Call Vice-Chair Robertson called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. 2. Approval of Minutes of July 17, 2002 Commissioner Morris moved approval of the minutes of July 17, 2002. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Finkelstein and passed 4-0. 3. Hearings: A. Case Nos. 02-40-CUP and 02-41-VAR – Request by Shelard Homes, LLC, for a Conditional Use Permit and Variance for a mixed use/residential-office building at 1155 Ford Road Associate Planner Julie Grove presented a staff report. Ms. Grove said Shelard Homes is proposing a mixed use residential and commercial development on the northeast corner of Ford Road and Wayzata Boulevard. Ms. Grove reported that a CUP is required, and the applicant is requesting a variance for the building setback from the back of the curb line for parking lots and interior driveways. The dimension the applicant is requesting from the 15-foot setback is 3 feet 9 inches. Ms. Grove said color samples must be submitted prior to permit issuance. Commissioner Morris asked how emergency vehicles will access the building after construction. Ms. Grove said the fire department has reviewed and signed the site plan and no issues have been raised by the fire department. Commissioner Morris asked about hardi planking, and Ms. Grove said staff is accepting hardi planking as a Class II and not as a Class I. The proposal meets the 60% Class I requirement utilizing stucco and glass. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4c - Planning Commission Minutes 8-7-02 Page 2 of 5 Vice-Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. Kurt Volette of Elness, Swenson, Graham Architects, said the applicant is agreeable to all of the conditions. Commissioner Garelick asked if the color of the stucco will complement the surrounding buildings and Mr. Volette responded yes. Mr. Volette said at this time the property is slated to be rental property. John and Mary Frickstad, 450 Ford Road, #227, are opposed to the project because there already is a high volume of traffic in the Shelard Park neighborhood. Currently, the ratio of business to residential is reasonable but several new residential units will add too much traffic. They are concerned the residential property will not be highly valued due to the lack of an appealing view and, if true, the Frickstads are concerned about the potential negative impact on their property value. They expressed concern about any variance due to the lack of green space. Mrs. Frickstad thinks if the City grants a variance to one developer, it will be harder to say no to the next developer. Max Ellis, is the manager of Shelard Village, 400-420 Ford Road, and she stated a concern is the height of the five-story building, the number of units and accompanying parking spaces. Ms. Ellis asked if the five-story height will impact the open space. Commissioner Garelick said, according to staff’s report, there will be two penthouses, 20 three-bedroom, 37 two-bedroom, and four one-bedroom units. Vice-Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Finkelstein asked if a 3’9” variance is reasonable. Commissioner Robertson commented it is closer than desirable but it is not a hazard or infringement. Planning Coordinator Judie Erickson said the intent of a 15-foot setback is to minimize the impact of headlights upon residential units, however, in this case, the parking abuts the interior parking and office space and not any residential units; and Ms. Erickson thinks if the 3’9” variance is granted, it will not jeopardize safety. It was moved by Commissioner Morris, seconded by Commissioner Garelick, to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Variance subject to conditions as recommended by staff. The motion passed 4-0. B. Case No. 02-39-S—Request by Vail Place for Preliminary and Final Plat approval for Vail in the Park – 3647 Sumter Ave. S & 7850 W. 37th Street Ms. Grove presented a staff report. She said the applicant is requesting to build one two- story seven-unit apartment building on two existing parcels which are being platted as one. The units are considered to be affordable housing units. The units will be occupied by adults with mental illness. On January 24, 2002, BOZA approved seven variances for the proposed apartment building. Ms. Grove reported that staff requires a tree preservation plan be submitted, and staff will work with the applicant to determine St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4c - Planning Commission Minutes 8-7-02 Page 3 of 5 appropriate tree species. Staff needs revised elevations regarding Class I materials. The Minnehaha Creek Watershed District will require a permit, which would be a condition of approval. She said staff thinks it is appropriate to combine the preliminary and final plat processes. Ms. Grove added that the applicant is being required to use at least 60% Class I brick material. Vice-Chair Robertson said it appears the property does not meet the intent of the accessibility code, i.e., the one accessible space behind the building is not adjacent to the building, and the curbcut appears to be misaligned from that one space; and the rear accessibility entry only services those who arrive by vehicle—there is no sidewalk, public way, leading to an accessible entrance without going into a drive aisle, and the rear access entrance is actually not appropriate for the back. Vice Chair Robertson thinks the access should be reworked before approval. Vice-Chair Robertson opened the public hearing. Cass Davids, representing Vail Place, and Margaret Dondilinger of Project for Pride in Living, the developer/ consultant, addressed the Planning Commission. Ms. Dondilinger said this project is intended to be an amenity to the neighborhood. The applicant has dressed up the front of the building and, overall, it meets 55% of the Class I material requirement; she added the 30% difference on the north side will be addressed. Ms. Dondilinger said this is the first time the accessibility issue has been raised. Commissioner Garelick asked if the neighborhood supports Vail Place. Ms. Dondilinger said at a neighborhood meeting two residents outside of the 350-foot perimeter attended and expressed some concern about the tenants but no comments were made about the physical building or property. Ms. Davids said Vail Place serves adults with mental illness but they must pass regular screening requirements such as criminal, rental history, and credit checks, and the residents live independently with support services—it is not a group home. Vice-Chair Robertson suggested connecting the sidewalks to a greater degree to diminish the segregation of the back and front of the building, and he would like to see the porch remain uninterrupted. Commissioner Morris asked if the handicapped stall is large enough, and if the handicapped stall overlaps the trash access aisle. Ms. Grove said the building official reviewed the plans and did not indicate or raise any code issues. Commissioner Morris asked about the concrete pad. Ms. Dondilinger said the applicant would like to maintain it as a garden interest spot, and it is still being discussed. Ms. Dondilinger said there is an occupancy limit of eight and approximately less than 10% of the sampled participants own cars, therefore, the parking lot will not be full. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4c - Planning Commission Minutes 8-7-02 Page 4 of 5 Vice-Chair Robertson closed the public hearing. Commissioner Finkelstein said the Vail project was originally based on a donation by Representative Gloria Segal, and he thinks it is a good memorial in her name. It was moved by Commissioner Finkelstein, seconded by Commissioner Morris, to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat, subject to conditions as recommended by staff. The motion passed 4-0. 4. Unfinished Business: None 5. New Business: None A. Consent Agenda B. Other New Business 6. Communications A. Recent City Council Action – August 5, 2002 B. Other i. City of Richfield Planning Commission Forum: First Ring Futures September 9, 7:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m. Ms. Erickson said she will attend the forum. ii. Discussion - possible Study Session meeting on August 21 Because no planning cases are scheduled for August 21, staff suggests that a Study Session could be held. Ms. Erickson listed possible discussion topics. Commissioner Morris suggested discussing affordable housing. Ms. Erickson said that a joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Housing Authority on City housing issues was being planned for fall 2002. Commissioner Garelick would like to discuss the legal aspects of mandated affordable housing at the study session. 7. Miscellaneous: None 8. Adjournment Commissioner Morris moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:00 p.m. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4c - Planning Commission Minutes 8-7-02 Page 5 of 5 Minutes prepared by: Respectfully submitted by: Linda Samson Nancy Sells Recording Secretary Administrative Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4d - Charter Comm Minutes 05-15-02 Page 1 of 4 MINUTES CHARTER COMMISSION MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA May 15, 2002 City Hall, Community Room I. Call to Order Chair Carver called the meeting to order at 7:01 p.m. Introductions and Attendance It was moved by Commissioner Fiderlein and seconded by Commissioner Jennings to excuse the absences of the following members: Cynthia Ahrens, Cheryl Ernst, and Janice Loftus. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. A. Members Present: Paul Carver, Mike Sixel, Carol Walsh, Nathan Busch, Brian Fiderlein, Marilyn Hoeft, Linda Jennings, Christopher Johnson, David Johnson, David Ornstein, and James Schaefer. B. Members Excused: Cynthia Ahrens, Cheryl Ernst, and Janice Loftus. C. Members Unexcused: Brian Leary. D. Staff and Guests Present: City Clerk, Cindy Reichert; St. Louis Park League of Women Voters Observer, Celia Andersen; and Recording Secretary, Linda Samson. E. Vacancies: None. II. Approval of Minutes It was moved by Commissioner Sixel and seconded by Commissioner Walsh that the minutes of March 13, 2002 be approved as presented. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Commissioner Busch arrived at 7:05 p.m. III. Status of Police Citizens Advisory Committee--verbal City Clerk Cindy Reichert informed the Commission that the Police Citizens Advisory Committee was still in the process of formation and planning and that a group has been called together to draft rules and by-laws. Still to be determined is the mission, membership, meeting dates, and authorities of the group. Their recommendation will St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4d - Charter Comm Minutes 05-15-02 Page 2 of 4 then be forwarded to the City Council for formal adoption and appointments will be made by the City Council. IV. Redistricting/Legislative Update (including Fire Civil Service Legislation)--verbal Ms. Reichert reported that redistricting was complete and gave a brief overview of the process that had been used. She also stated that a public information campaign about voting districts was underway and that members of the public should look for more information in the Sun Sailor and the City’s website. Staff will be working with neighborhood groups and other community groups to inform residents of changes that are taking place. Ms. Reichert said as part of a cost-saving measure, the number of precincts has been reduced to 17, and that several polling locations had been discontinued. There were also three new locations to be added as polling places; Benilde-St. Margaret’s High School, Groves Learning Center, and Aldersgate United Methodist Church. Ms. Reichert added that it is a legal requirement that each ward be comprised of approximately the same number of residents. When ward boundaries were reconfigured, Council had directed that the boundaries remain as much the same as possible to minimize impact to voters and also directed staff to follow neighborhood boundaries wherever possible. Ms. Reichert reported that no action has been taken by the State Legislature in regard to the Fire Civil Service Legislation. V. Commissioner Self-Education Plan: Charter Refresher and Nuances (remember that City Attorney and others can help, if needed; review Charter prior to meeting to best prepare for discussion) Commissioner Hoeft asked why, in Chapter 6, Taxation and Finance, in the Home Rule Charter, some votes call for at least a five-member vote of the Council and, at other times, a vote calls for at least six voting Councilmembers. Ms. Reichert responded that some voting requirements call for a majority and other voting requirements call for a super-majority. Some provisions are a repeat of state statute and others were determined by past Charter Commission action. In regard to Chapter 9, Franchises, Commissioner Hoeft asked: What is a franchise? Commissioner Ornstein said franchise agreements are usually by ordinance, and a city may impose a franchise fee, e.g., cable television. Commissioner Ornstein also stated that federal and state laws impact franchises, but a city may not change a franchise without the franchisee’s consent. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4d - Charter Comm Minutes 05-15-02 Page 3 of 4 Chair Carver raised the question: May a Councilmember sit on the Charter Commission? Apparently, at this time, it is possible. Commissioner Ornstein said judges may not. Commissioners requested that staff check City files to determine if a Councilmember has also been a Charter Commissioner. Commissioner C. Johnson asked about Councilmembers and Commissioners serving on other governing boards, e.g., the Planning Commission. The question was raised: Is it permissible for a Councilmember to simultaneously serve on the Planning Commission or, perhaps, the Charter Commission? Commissioner Walsh asked if there is a limit to the number of boards on which a resident may serve simultaneously? Ms. Reichert responded no, not at this time. Vice Chair Sixel would like to know if Councilmembers have opinions regarding serving on both the City Council and the Charter Commission simultaneously. The Charter Commission favors exploring the following: Is it permissible to serve on the City Council and the Charter Commission simultaneously? Has anyone served on more than one governing board simultaneously? What is the opinion of the City Council on dual service? What does the bill state? What is meant by governing board, and does it include county and/or state? What are the rules of City Councils and Charter Commissions for other cities? VI. 2002-2003 Commission Work Plan (see March 13 minutes) The investigation regarding the issue of dual service will be added to the Work Plan. Chair Carver said the Work Plan will be as stated (see the minutes of March 13, 2002, Item IX, 1-5), with the addition of dual service mentioned above. VII. Scheduling Annual Presentation to City Council (following development of 2002- 2003 Work Plan) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4d - Charter Comm Minutes 05-15-02 Page 4 of 4 Chair Carver proposed that the Charter Commission tentatively schedule its annual presentation to the City Council for Monday, July 15, 2002. VIII. Update on Possibility of Grants to Help Fund 2004 Celebration (Carol Walsh)-- verbal Commissioner Walsh said the Minnesota Humanities Commission may help with funding. Commissioner Walsh reported the head St. Louis Park librarian said she will do all she can to help. There was agreement that it would be helpful to look to other cities to learn about their successes and failures in regard to their Charter celebrations. IX. City Charter Voting Requirements for Housing Revenue Bonds (Attorney’s opinion/clarification attached—FYI only, no action required) There were no comments or questions regarding this item. X. Future Commission Meeting Schedule The next scheduled meeting for the Charter Commission will be August 14, 2002. XI. Other Business Ms. Reichert announced that City Manager Charlie Meyer is the recipient of the Minnesota City/County Management Association 2002 “Manager of the Year” award. A reception will be held for Mr. Meyer at 6:30 p.m. Monday, May 20th. Chair Carver suggested recognizing Commissioner Ahrens with a certificate for her work as the former Chair of the Charter Commission. Commissioner Schafer moved and Commissioner Jennings seconded recognizing Commissioner Ahrens. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. XII. Adjournment As there was no other business, at 8:04 p.m., Commissioner Schafer moved and Commissioner Sixel seconded adjournment. MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. Respectfully submitted, Linda Samson Recording Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4e - Human Rights Comm Minutes June 2002 Page 1 of 3 City of St. Louis Park Human Rights Commission Meeting Minutes - June 19, 2002 Westwood Room - City Hall Present Commission Members: Shep Harris, Herb Isbin, Julie Kirsch, Patrick Rogers, Kristi Rudelius- Palmer, Kristin Siegesmund (arrived late) and Emily Wallace-Jackson Staff: Martha McDonell, staff liaison, and Lynn Schwartz, recording secretary Call to Order Acting Chair Kristi Rudelius-Palmer called the meeting to order at 8:01 p.m. (The meeting began late so that commissioners could participate in the Parktacular parade.) April Minutes: Moved by Herb Isbin and seconded by Julie Kirsch to approve the April minutes. Motion passed unanimously. (The commission did not meet in May.) June Agenda: Given the shortened meeting time, members agreed to focus on the work plan and postpone most other agenda items to the July meeting. Reports Commissioner Reports: Emily Wallace-Jackson reported that she spoke with ECFE (Early Childhood and Family Education) staff about diversity activities they could provide to children and parents participating in ECFE. Wallace-Jackson also reported that this is her last meeting. She has moved to Hopkins and is now a member of the Hopkins Human Rights Commission. Kristi Rudelius-Palmer reported that she witnessed an incident at the McDonald’s on Lake Street. A customer was yelling at one of the employees, telling that person that he should go back to his own country. Rudelius-Palmer said she intervened during the argument and also spoke with the restaurant manager. She urged the restaurant manager to document the incident. She then suggested that the commission recruit a business owner or manager for commission membership. Discussion followed on whether a business representative who does not live in St. Louis Park would be eligible for membership. Martha McDonell said she thought all commissioners must be St. Louis Park residents. She said she would check the bylaws and, if need be, talk to the City Clerk about what steps would be needed to amend the bylaws or the City Code to make business representation possible. Herb Isbin reminded commissioners to use the Reports section of the agenda to update the group on their progress on subcommittees or special projects (if the project isn’t already on another section of the agenda). St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4e - Human Rights Comm Minutes June 2002 Page 2 of 3 Kristen Siegesmund mentioned that she heard that Home Depot has adopted a corporate policy of not doing business with the federal government so it does not have to comply with laws concerning disability and affirmative action. Since St. Louis Park has a Home Depot, she felt she would like to learn more about the national stance and whether it would have any impact on our community. Siegesmund offered to do some research and, if the commission is interested, a representative from Home Depot could be invited to come to a future meeting. Old Business Essay Contest Presentation: Patrick Rogers reported that the City Council’s presentation to Abigail Burkart, the student who submitted the winning Human Rights essay, went very well. Rogers said he appreciated Herb Isbin’s comments to the student. Isbin commended the student on her writing ability and urged her to continue to take a stand and follow her convictions but to also keep an open mind on controversial issues. On behalf of the commission, Kristi Rudelius- Palmer commended Martha McDonell for her efforts in arranging for the plaque and preparing material for the mayor and council. Kristen Siegesmund asked commissioners to e-mail her with any ideas for topics that can be suggested to the League of Minnesota Human Rights Commissions for their annual fall conference. Commissioner Recruitment: Shep Harris reported that he drafted a memo to the City Council summarizing the commission’s concerns and suggestions for the commissioner appointment process. Members agreed to review the memo at the July meeting. Harris also reported that he did not have time to work on recruiting a new student member; he will work on this when school resumes in the fall. Hate Crimes Response Plan: Shep Harris asked if the Police Department ever reports back to the commission on the outcome of hate crime allegations/investigations. (Was anyone charged? Were they prosecuted? What was the final outcome?) Martha McDonell responded that the department does not provide the commission with this type of information and perhaps this is something the commission should request. Further discussion was postponed to the July meeting. Work Plan: A draft of the 2002 work plan prepared by Kristi Rudelius-Palmer and a 2002 - 2004 version prepared by Shep Harris were discussed. Shep Harris said his proposal was aimed at giving the commission a way to follow through on its mission. Kristi Rudelius-Palmer said she like the larger objectives that are made possible by creating a three year plan. Harris said his plan proposes an audit similar to Moorhead’s so the commission can learn about community needs and issues. He noted that the audit could involve surveys, focus groups, community forums, open meetings or whatever tool might be used to give the commission a sense of what’s going on in the community. The audit would help the commission prioritize its efforts and assess its effectiveness at the end of each year. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4e - Human Rights Comm Minutes June 2002 Page 3 of 3 Emily Wallace-Jackson said she hoped the commission’s final work plan would include an effort by the commission to connect with community organizations or neighborhoods. She urged commissioners to make a personal effort to contact one or more organizations in the coming months. Kristi Rudelius-Palmer said she also liked the idea of creating partnerships with local groups. Shep Harris added that these partnerships would enable the commission to more readily respond to incidents or high profile issues. Herb Isbin urged commissioners to follow through on partnerships, training or other goals. He felt many good ideas proposed last year could have benefited from better follow-through. Members suggested several modifications to the version drafted by Shep Harris including: promoting accessibility, developing relationships with organizations and businesses, and creating a data base. Moved by Shep Harris and seconded by Pat Rogers to adopt the 2002 – 2004 Work Plan with these modifications. Harris and Rudelius-Palmer agreed to incorporate the ideas found in both documents and as well as the initiatives suggested at tonight’s meeting into a final document. Members should come to the July meeting prepared to prioritize objectives and select a few initiatives that could be accomplished in 2002. Members should also be prepared to commit themselves to some specific projects. July Agenda Members agreed to place the following items on the July agenda: § Work plan § 2003 essay contest § Hate crimes response plan § Commissioner recruitment. Adjournment Moved by Kristi Rudelius-Palmer and seconded by Herb Isbin to adjourn. Motion passed unanimously. With no further business, the commission adjourned at 9:13 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lynn Schwartz, Recording Secretary St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4f - Traffic Study Cedar Shore Dr Page 1 of 2 4f Motion to adopt the attached resolution revoking the current resolution and authorizing the removal of parking restrictions on the north side of Cedar Shore Drive from France Avenue, east to the City boundary; and reestablishing “No Parking” restrictions on the south side of Cedar Shore Drive from France Avenue, east to the City boundary Background: The City received a request to consider removing existing signage along Cedar Shore Drive, which limits the hours of parking on the north side of the street. Specifically, the signs restrict parking between the hours of 2:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. Analysis: Cedar Shore Drive enters onto France Avenue. Only two properties, adjacent to Cedar Shore Drive, are located within the boundaries of the City of St. Louis Park. According to the City’s Traffic staff, these signs were installed in conjunction with the play field that was previously located in the open area south of the street. This area has since been developed as a storm water detention basin and wetland. Since the play facility, which attracted a lot of parking and, therefore, the need for restrictions, is no longer in service, staff is amenable to the removal of these signs. Staff mailed a letter to affected residents (3 properties) on August 6, 2002, requesting that they contact the City by August 23rd if they had any objections to the removal of these signs. As of Tuesday, August 27th, no correspondence has been received regarding this proposal. Recommendation: Staff recommends adopting the attached resolution rescinding Resolution Number 1864 and authorizing the removal of “No Parking” restriction signage on the north side of Cedar Shore Drive from France Avenue, east to the City boundary. (Since the previous resolution also addressed No Parking on the south side of the street, this has been carried over into the new resolution). Attachments: Map (Supplement) Resolution Prepared by: Maria A. Hagen, City Engineer Reviewed by: Michael P. Rardin, Director of Public Works Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 4f - Traffic Study Cedar Shore Dr Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 02-097 RESOLUTION RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 1864, AUTHORIZING REMOVAL OF “NO PARKING” RESTRICTIONS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CEDAR SHORE DRIVE FROM FRANCE AVENUE TO THE EAST CITY BOUNDARY, AND REESTABLISHING “NO PARKING” RESTRICTIONS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF CEDAR SHORE DRIVE FROM FRANCE AVENUE TO THE EAST CITY BOUNDARY WHEREAS, the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota has been requested, has studied, and has determined that parking controls are no longer necessary at this location. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Minnesota, that: 1. Resolution No. 1864, dated Sept. 5, 1961, is hereby rescinded in full. 2. The Director of Public Works is hereby authorized to remove “No Parking 2:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.” signs on the north side of Cedar Shore Drive from France Avenue to the east City limits. 3. Signs, prohibiting parking 24 hours per day on the south side of Cedar Shore Drive from France Avenue to the east City limits, shall continue to be in effect. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 3, 2002 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7a - 2003 Levy and Budget Page 1 of 4 7a Approve preliminary 2003 property tax levy, budget for the 2003 fiscal year, revisions to the 2002 adopted budget, and set Public Hearing date for on proposed budget and property tax levy Resolution approving the preliminary property tax levy and budget is required by Truth in Taxation legislation. Information contained in the resolution will be used in the individual tax notices prepared by the County. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the resolution establishing the preliminary tax levy and budget for 2003, approves revisions to the 2002 adopted budget and sets public hearing date for proposed budget and property tax levy. Background: The 2003 proposed budget and the 2002-revised budget were reviewed by the City Council at the August 19, 2002 study session. By law, the City Council must approve a preliminary tax levy and budget for 2003 and submit the tax levy certification to the County by September 15, 2002. The County will mail out parcel specific notices to affected taxpayers on or before November 22, 2002. Final action of the levy and 2003 budget will not occur until the second Council meeting in December. It is proposed that the preliminary levy certification be set at the maximum levy allowed by the State. In addition, the City will levy for the 1999 General Obligation Bond, the PERA increase from 2002 to 2003 and an HRA levy. The HRA levy will be handled separately from the City levy. Property Tax Levy: For fiscal year 2003, a total levy of $14,536,228 is proposed. This represents an increase of approximately 1.9% to the general fund budget. The total levy helps to support the operations of the General Fund, Park and Recreation operations and Park Improvements. A portion of the levy is dedicated to the retirement of General Obligation Debt. The allocation of property taxes is indicated in the chart below. Levy 2001/2002 2002/2003 General Fund 11,051,827$ 11,261,020$ Parks and Recreation Fund 2,712,972 2,763,323 Park Improvement Fund 179,160 182,485 GO Debt 327,500 329,400 Total Levy 14,271,459$ 14,536,228$ Legislative requirements provide that Cities hold a “Truth in Taxation” public hearing related to the budget. Staff is recommending holding the budget, (Truth in Taxation), hearing on St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7a - 2003 Levy and Budget Page 2 of 4 December 2, 2002 to discuss the proposed 2003 budget as well as the legislative changes. This will assist in clarifying the budget status for, and allow input from, the public as well. Recommendation: Approve resolution setting the preliminary 2003 tax levy, 2003 budget, 2002 revised budget and setting public hearing date on proposed budget and property tax levy. Attachments: Levy Summary Resolution Prepared By: Jean D. McGann, Director of Finance Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7a - 2003 Levy and Budget Page 3 of 4 RESOLUTION NO. 02-091 RESOLUTION APPROVING PROPOSED 2002 TAX LEVY, COLLECTIBLE IN 2003, APPROVING PROPOSED BUDGET FOR 2003, REVISED BUDGET FOR 2002 AND SETTING PUBLIC HEARING DATE FOR PROPOSED BUDGET AND PROPERTY TAX LEVY WHEREAS, The City of St. Louis Park is required by Charter and State law to approve a resolution setting forth an annual tax levy to the Hennepin County Auditor; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes currently in force require approval of a proposed property tax levy and a preliminary budget on or before September 15th of each year; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received the proposed budget document; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the preliminary 2003 budget for all Governmental Funds, Enterprise funds and Internal Service funds shall be as follows: Revenues:Appropriations General Property Taxes 14,539,587$ Personal Services 19,545,025$ Licenses and Permits 2,231,550 Supplies Services and other Charges 20,396,615 Intergovernmental 4,219,984 Capital Outlay 2,779,477 Charges for Services 3,500,156 Transfer Out 1,474,520 Fines, Forfeits and penalties 295,000 Enterprise 9,147,660 Special Assessments 146,216 Miscellaneous 3,420,156 Transfer In 5,991,029 Total Revenue 43,491,338$ Total Appropriations 44,195,637$ Fund Balance/Reserves - Jan. 1 72,018,748$ Fund Balance/Reserves - Dec. 31 71,314,449$ Total Available 115,510,086$ Total Available 115,510,086$ AVAILABLE RESOURCES:REQUIREMENTS: And as supported by the proposed budget document; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Public Hearing required by Truth in Taxation legislation will be held on December 2, 2002; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, Minnesota, that the following sums of money be levied in 2002, collectible in 2003 upon the taxable property in said City of St. Louis Park for the following purposes: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7a - 2003 Levy and Budget Page 4 of 4 General Fund 11,261,021$ Park and Recreation Fund 2,763,323 Park Improvement Fund 182,485 GO Debt Service 329,400 Total 14,536,229$ And BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota and to the Local Government Aids/Analysis Division, Department of Revenue, State of Minnesota as required by law. Reviewed for Administration Adopted by the City Council September 3, 2002 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7b - City HRA levy Page 1 of 2 7b Resolution authorizing an HRA levy Council authorization of HRA levy as approved on EDA agenda Recommended Action: Adopt resolution setting HRA levy for 2003 Background: At the August 19, 2002 study session, the HRA levy was discussed. The EDA is required to approve this levy as well as the City Council. As outlined in the resolution, the HRA levy cannot exceed .0144 percent of the taxable market value of the City. The City is allowed to levy $496,522 based on the taxable market value. The levy amount of $496,522 is greater than originally proposed. This is due to taxable market values coming in higher than anticipated. Staff will review market values prior to final certification in December. The levy amount is included as part of the Development Fund budget. Levy proceeds are to be used for infrastructure improvements in redevelopment areas. Recommendation: Adopt resolution setting HRA levy for 2003. Attachments: Resolution Prepared By: Jean D. McGann, Director of Finance Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7b - City HRA levy Page 2 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 02-092 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE HRA LEVY FOR 2003 WHEREAS, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Section 469.090 to 469.108 (the “EDA Act”), the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park created the St. Louis Park Economic Development Authority (the "Authority"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the EDA Act, the City Council granted to the Authority all of the powers and duties of a housing and redevelopment authority under the provisions of the Minnesota Statutes, sections 469.001 to 469.047 (the "HRA Act"); and WHEREAS, Section 469.033, subdivision 6 of the Act authorizes the Authority to levy a tax upon all taxable property within the City to be expended for the purposes authorized by the HRA Act; and WHEREAS, such levy may be in an amount not to exceed 0.0144 percent of taxable market value of the City; and WHEREAS, the Authority has filed its budget for the special benefit levy in accordance with the budget procedures of the City; and WHEREAS, based upon such budgets the Authority will levy all or such portion of the authorized levy as it deems necessary and proper; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the St. Louis Park City Council: 1. That approval is hereby given for the Authority to levy, for taxes payable in 2003, such tax upon the taxable property of the City as the Authority may determine, subject to the limitations contained in the HRA Act. Approved this 3rd day of September, 2002, by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park. Reviewed for Administration City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7c - Police Contract Page 1 of 5 7c Contract for Patrol Officer and Support Services Agents 1/1/02 – 12/31/03 A two year agreement with LELS Local #206, Police Officer and Support Services Agent, for 2002 and 2003. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor Services Inc. (Local #206) for our Police Officers and Support Services Agents, establishing terms and conditions of employment for two years: 1/1/02 – 12/31/03. Background: We are pleased to inform you that we have finally reached final agreement with our Police Officers and Support Services Agent for 2002 and 2003 and request Council approval. The previous contract, which expired 12/31/01, had been in effect for 2 years. Many hours in negotiations ended up centering on flex leave and wages (how we compare to market). Negotiations on this contract started December 2001. Many hours were spent in negotiation discussing a variety of issues including market wage rates and the flex leave program. After a number of negotiation sessions, we could not reach agreement and brought in a mediator. We remained far apart on issues even after mediation and certified an impasse with issues listed for arbitration. Several more months went by and in June we received a call from the Union requesting we go back to the negotiating table to see if we could work through some of the issues regarding the contract. After several lengthy negotiation sessions and open discussions, we were able to work through a long list of issues and came to agreement on a 2-year contract. The union had a vote on the contract on August 21, and we are now ready to recommend approval by Council. The union and the city negotiation teams agreed with a 3.5% wage increase for 2002 consistent with our other employee groups. For 2003 a 3% wage increase was accepted (3% is consistent with the 2003 budget recommendation). An additional 34 cents per hour was added to all steps of the Police Officer base wage for 2003, allowing for a market adjustment to bring the group up to average base salary in comparable cities. The insurance contribution will increase to $510/mo. ($70/mo. increase), consistent with other non-supervisory employees for 2002. For 2003, the insurance contribution by the employer will be the same as other non-exempt (non-supervisory employees). The other change to the contract, which effects many areas, is the implementation of the flex leave program (changing from the sick/vacation plan to flex leave). The flex leave program is the same program in place for other city employees on the plan. Listed below are the changes to the proposed contract. The proposed contract is on file with the City Clerk. More detail is available upon request. Summary of Contract Changes 1. Duration: 2 years 1/1/02 – 12/31/03. 2. Wages: 3.5% increase effective 1/1/02 (consistent with other employee groups). 3% increase effective 1/1/03. Market adjustment for Patrol Officer position adding 34 cents per hour on all steps, added to the base wage after the 3% increase for 2003. Eliminate position of Investigator in wage schedule – position not in use. 3. Increase supplemental pay for assignments of Community Outreach, DARE, Drug Task Force, School Liaison and Support Services Officer from $135 to $140 per month, $155 to $160 per month, and $175 to $180 per month effective January 1, 2002. Maintain the performance pay program for assignments. 4. Maintain performance pay program for Support Services Agent. 5. 2002 - Insurance increase $70/mo from $440 to $510, effective 1/1/02 (consistent with other employee groups). 2003 – Insurance: The Employer contribution will be set at the same dollar amount contributed by the Employer to non-exempt employees of St. Louis Park. 7. Add Flex Leave Package – starting January 1, 2003: The flex leave program is the same program offered to other non-exempt (non-supervisory) employees. Bringing in flex leave requires a significant number of other changes to the contract on January 1, 2003 including the following. • Delete 9.6, which states “One continuous vacation period shall be selected on the basis of seniority until May 15 of each calendar year. • Article XX – Injury on Duty 20.1: Change use of "vacation" and/or "sick" leave to flex leave. • Delete Article XXII Vacation. • Change Article XXIII Holidays from 96 hours to 80 hours. • Delete Article XXIV Sick Leave. • Delete Article XXV Severance Pay. 7. Short term disability program The City offers Short Term Disability as part of the flex leave program. Effective January 1, 2003, the Employer provides a short-term disability (STD) program for non- exempt (non-supervisory) Employees who have successfully completed probation, as a supplement to the flex leave program. The STD program is administered by the Employer in the same manner as other Employee groups in the non-supervisory (non- exempt) Flex Leave Program. The City Manager makes final decisions regarding the Short Term Disability Program and the decisions regarding the program may be grieved and not subject to arbitration. 8. Article XXVI Funeral Leave Existing contract language expires on 12/31/02 and replaced with: Effective January 1, 2003 funeral leave will be eliminated. Employees in the positions of Police Officer and Support Services Agent who worked for the Employer on January 1, 2003 will be issued a one time credit of 3 work days (24 hours) of funeral leave to be placed in a funeral leave bank. This funeral leave bank may be granted on account of a death in the immediate family of the employee. For purposes of administering this section only, immediate family includes mother, father, siblings, spouse, children and grandparents and spouse’s mother, father, siblings and grandparents. Once the funeral leave bank is used it will not be replaced. If not used, it will not be converted to pay or any other type of leave. Other items – cleaning up contract language: 9. 2.1 Recognition: remove job classification Police Investigator/Detective 10. 3.8 delete, we do not use the position Investigator, renumber remaining subsections. 11. 6.4 change the word issues to issued (correct error) 12. 7.4 – step 4, change the last line from Public Employment Relations Board to Bureau of Mediation Service (BMS). 13. 7.6 Remove reference to Civil Service. 14. 12.1 change the word “such” to “each” in the first line. 15. 13.1 Remove the word “an” from the last sentence. 16. 32.3 Remove paragraph relating to Investigative Trainer assignment. We no longer use this assignment. 17. 32.8 delete section, program expired after 2000 and is no longer used. Recommendation: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached resolution approving a Labor Agreement between the City and Law Enforcement Labor Services Inc. (Local #206), establishing terms and conditions of employment for the duration of 1/1/02 – 1/31/03. cc: Charlie Meyer, City Manager Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Nancy Gohman, Human Resources Director Approved by: Clint Pires, Deputy City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 02-093 RESOLUTION APPROVING THE LABOR AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK AND LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR SERVICES INC LOCAL #206 JANUARY 1, 2002–DECEMBER 31, 2003 WHEREAS, the City and the Union have reached a negotiated settlement covering the terms and conditions of a Labor Agreement as permitted by the State of Minnesota Public Employees Labor Relations Act, and WHEREAS, the City Council may enter into such agreements as authorized by its Charter; now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park that the Mayor and City Manager are authorized to execute a Collective Bargaining Agreement, City Contract # between the City of St. Louis Park and Law Enforcement Labor Services Inc. (Local #206) for our Police Officers and Support Services Agents, effective January 1, 2002 – December 31, 2003. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council , 2002 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 1 of 16 7d Request for a Conditional Use Permit and variance for a mixed use/residential-office building at 1155 Ford Road Case Nos. 02-41-VAR and 02-40-CUP 1155 Ford Road Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the Conditional Use Permit and a resolution approving the variance subject to the conditions included in the resolutions Zoning: C-2, General Commercial Comprehensive Plan Designation: Commercial Background: Shelard Homes, LLC is proposing a mixed use residential and commercial development on the northeast corner of Ford Road and Wayzata Boulevard. An athletic club currently exists on site. The proposal is for a 5 story building, with approximately 5,800 square feet of office, 2,100 square feet of residential support area, and 33 parking stalls on the first floor, and four floors of market-rate apartments above. The commercial/office area would be located in the northern third of the first floor. Sixty five (65) residential units are proposed on the 1.3 acre site for a density of 50 units per acre. The breakdown of proposed apartment units includes 2 penthouses, 20 three bedroom, 37 two bedroom, and 4 one bedroom units. An exterior parking lot is proposed to be located on the east side of the building, accessed by a garage entry off of Wayzata Boulevard that goes through the building. The underground residential parking would be accessed on the west side of the building, via a driveway from Ford Road. The project requires a Conditional Use Permit for multifamily housing in the C-2, General Commercial District. In addition, the developer is requesting a variance from the requirement that buildings be setback 15 feet from the back of the curbline for parking lots and interior driveways. On August 7, 2002, the Planning Commission held a public hearing, heard testimony from some residents, and unanimously voted to recommend approval of the Conditional Use Permit and variance. Issues: • Does the proposal meet the Conditional Use Permit requirements for multi-family housing in a C-2 district? • Are other Zoning Ordinance standards being met including C-2 standards? • Are the findings met for the requested variances? • Are there other issues? St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 2 of 16 Issues Analysis: • Does the proposal meet the Conditional Use Permit requirements for multi-family housing in a C-2 district? The current zoning on the subject property is “General Commercial”. The residential portion of the proposed development is permitted by CUP in this district. Conditions established by the Zoning Code include: 1. It is part of a larger commercial development permitted within the district. This condition is met. The proposed development is a vertical mixed-use development with an office use on the first floor. The surrounding developments consist of single story office buildings, a multi-story office building and parking ramp, and restaurants. 2. The building design and placement provide a desirable residential environment. This condition is met. The office and residential components of the building are oriented to provide maximum privacy, each having separate entrances and parking. The proposed building provides ground floor and underground parking, a party room, exercise room and guest accommodations. The general size of the building is compatible with the surrounding office/commercial development. The neighborhood consists of office in multi-story buildings, ramped parking, a hotel, restaurants, apartments, condominiums, townhouses, and a seven-acre park. This proposal would complement this high density, mixed-use neighborhood. 3. Access to open space, plazas and pedestrianways is provided. This condition is met. Shelard Park is located about 120 feet northwest of the property across Ford Road, which contains passive and active recreation opportunities. The developer is proposing to provide a pedestrian way from the building to the northwest corner of the site that link to adjacent sidewalks and crosswalks across Ford Road. Sidewalks have also been proposed along the portions of the lot abutting Ford Road and Wayzata Boulevard. 4. The housing represents a maximum of 30 percent of the ground floor area of the total development. One hundred percent of floor area above the ground floor may be developed as housing. This condition has been met. The proposed uses on the first floor consist of approximately 26% office, 10% residential and parking on the remainder. The residential use on the first floor is comprised of an office, lobby and party room. There are no residential dwelling units on the first floor. One hundred (100) percent of floors two, three, four and five are proposed to be housing. This condition was intended to prevent a majority of residential development on the ground floor. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 3 of 16 5. The site contains a minimum of 400 square feet of usable open space per dwelling unit and no more than half of the open space is located in the front yard. This may be reduced to 200 square feet for each dwelling unit that is located within 500 feet of a park, public plaza or other public usable open space. With required site design changes, it appears this condition can been met. As stated previously, a park is located approximately 120 feet northwest of this property. Thus the square footage requirement is 200 square feet per unit. This proposal is for 65 units, and would require a minimum of 13,000 square feet of open space. The applicant calculated 14,600 square feet of open space, the majority in the side and rear yards. However, ordinance requires a minimum 30’ dimension. With required floor to rooftop building wall deviations, some of the open space along Ford Road does not meet the requirement. With the proposed surface parking lot setback of only 25 feet from the north lot line, some of the rear yard space cannot be counted either. If the applicant redesigns the parking lot to a minimum 8 ½ foot stall width, the setback requirement can be increased and the open space requirement appears to be met with approximately 14,100 square feet of usable open space. 6. The minimum spacing between buildings is at least equal to the average heights of the buildings except where dwellings share common walls. This condition is not applicable as only one building is being proposed. 7. All dwelling units are at or above the grade of all land within a distance of 25 feet from all faces of the buildings. This condition has been met. All residential dwelling units are proposed to be located on or above the second floor of the building. 8. Buildings are located a minimum of 15 feet from the back of the curbline of internal private roadways or parking lots. This condition has not been met. A variance has been requested from this condition and will be discussed later in the report. 9. Housing density does not exceed 50 units per acre. This condition has been met. The proposed density is 50 units per acre. 10. The use is in conformance with the comprehensive plan including any provisions of the redevelopment chapter and the plan by neighborhood policies for the neighborhood in which it is located and conditions of approval may be added as a means of satisfying this requirement. This development is located in the Shelard Park neighborhood. This is a high density area consisting of apartments, condominiums, townhouses, office, hotels, restaurants and ramped St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 4 of 16 parking. The plan by neighborhood development guidelines state that “Any new development should follow the existing development patterns. …Sidewalks should be developed throughout the neighborhood.” This proposal is a mixed-use, high density development that meets these policies as well as the Livable Communities principles as outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. • Are other Zoning Ordinance standards being met including C-2 standards? Compliance Table C2 Ordinance Proposed Height 6 stories or 75 feet 49 feet Setbacks Front: 5 feet, Street Side: 15 feet Side: none Rear: 25 feet Front: 47 feet Street side: 24 feet* Side: 9 feet Rear: 31 feet 8 inches Parking Max required: 131 with 10% transit & 5% bike parking reduction 131 spaces Useable Open Space 200 sq ft per dwelling unit (13,000 sq. ft total) Approximately 14,100 sq. ft. Landscape Buffers Bufferyard A required to the west Bufferyard A Density 50 units per acre 50 units per acre Floor Area Ratio 2.0 max 1.86 * Majority of the building is setback at 30 feet, projections on building are setback 24 feet. C-2 District general standards: Dimensional standards and density requirements for the C-2 District must be met including Floor Area Ratio (FAR), setbacks, and height. All of these standards have been met. Landscaping: A landscape and tree replacement plan has been submitted. The project meets bufferyard requirements along the west and south property lines, and the parking lot landscape requirements. A few corrections need to be made on the final landscape plan. These include revising the size of some plant materials in the planting schedule, and revising the tree replacement calculations to 36 inches of significant trees lost, and 58 inches of total significant trees on the land. The proposed calculations mistakenly counted a dead tree and the trees on the public right-of-way. Replacement requirements have been met. The landscape plan may be required to be modified in order to meet Table 36-364F for minimum landscaping based on project costs. In addition, the ordinance requires that all landscaped areas must provide an underground permanent irrigation system unless drought-tolerant plants are used. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend these both be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to issuance of a building permit. Parking: The developer is proposing a total of 131 parking stalls, approximately 23-25 stalls on the exterior surface lot will be allocated to the commercial/office uses. The remaining residential St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 5 of 16 stalls are dispersed between the interior lot on the first level and the underground garage. The amount of required parking was reduced because it met the allowable parking reduction criteria for having access to a major transit route and by providing on-site bicycle parking. The proposed parking meets ordinance requirements, however to meet accessibility code requirements, the two handicap parking stalls must be moved to the northwest side of the exterior lot so that they are closest to the exterior doors of the office space. Staff and the Planning Commission recommend this change be made prior to issuance of a building permit. Architectural Standards: The proposed building elevations comply with the City’s exterior materials ordinance. The indicated building materials include stucco, glass windows, rock faced CMU, hardi plank siding, and metal fascia and trim. Each elevation consists of at least 65% class I materials. To meet the building wall deviation requirements, both the east and west elevations must provide wall deviation that extend from the grade at ground level to the roof. The proposed deviations do not extend to the ground, and in some cases do not extend to the roof. If the depth of the deviations provided are three (3) feet, then two would be required on the west elevation and one would be required on the east. To accommodate this on the east elevation it may be necessary to shift the landscape island to make room for a sidewalk around the building projection. Staff is willing to work with the applicant and recommends these changes be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to issuance of a building permit. Usable Open Space: As noted, some modifications are required for this plan to meet the City’s usable open space requirement. The ordinance requires usable open space to have a minimum dimension of 30 feet. Certain areas proposed by the applicant as open space do not meet the 30 foot dimensional requirement. Staff believes this situation is correctable and the requirement can be met by altering the parking lot. Staff recommends that the plans be revised to show the parking lot alterations and corrected usable open space calculations prior to any site work. Grading & Drainage: The Public Works Director has reviewed and approved the grading and drainage plans as meeting City requirements. Lighting/Signage: A lighting schedule was submitted that described the types of fixtures to be installed and there proposed locations. A photometrics plan must be submitted which shows the proposed lighting levels in footcandles at all locations on the site. Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that final lighting plans be submitted prior to issuance of building permits. The applicant has not submitted a signage plan, but has indicated that a freestanding sign is proposed along the front property line. Such signs must meet setback requirements, in this case 5 feet, and size limitations. Prior to the installation of any signs, the applicant must obtain sign permits. Sidewalks: The ordinance requires 5-foot sidewalks along all sides of the lot that abut a public street. Such sidewalks were provided on the submitted plans. A portion of the sidewalk is on St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 6 of 16 public right-of-way and a portion is on the applicant’s property. Staff does recommend an easement be dedicated for the installations of the sidewalk on private property. Access: Access to this site is gained via a underground garage entry off of Ford Road and via a drive off of Wayzata Boulevard. The access drive off of Wayzata Boulevard is proposed to be a one-way entrance onto the site into the garage entrance with a one way exit just to the west. Both the Fire Marshal and Chief Building Official have approved the access as meeting code. • Are the findings met for the requested variances? The applicant is requesting variances from the following Code requirements: Buildings are located a minimum of 15 feet from the back of the curbline of the internal private roadways or parking lots. Following are the seven findings for a variance and staff’s analysis of whether the findings are met for each variance. 1. Where by reason of narrowness, shallowness, or shape of a lot, or where by reason of exceptional topographic or water conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional conditions of such lot, the strict application of the terms of this Ordinance would result in a peculiar and practical difficulties or exceptional or undue hardship upon the owner of such lot in developing or using such lot in a manner customary and legally permissible within the zoning district in which said lot is located. The applicant states that due to the narrowness of the lot, it is impossible to achieve a 15’ setback between the parking lot and the building and still have room for green space in front of the building. They are requesting a 4 foot setback. Staff agrees with the applicant that exterior parking probably cannot be accommodated in addition to open space requirements. The applicant has worked with staff to bring the proposed building into conformance with setbacks and provided a wide enough drive aisle for safety reasons. Considering the constraints of the lot width, the required usable open space cannot be accommodated on the site and still redevelop the parcel at densities permitted by the Zoning Ordinance. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been satisfied. 2. 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 said land is located. The applicant states that this variance request is for a parking lot setback on the backside of the building, not visible from adjacent public rights-of-way. The parking lot is located at ground level and does not impact the residential units, which are all located on the upper floors. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 7 of 16 Staff does believe there is uniqueness to the lot in question, particularly concerning the parking lot access and location. The exterior lot is located on the interior of the lot behind the building and is accessed through an at grade garage entrance that requires one to drive through the building. It is intended to be used primarily for the commercial uses on the ground level. As all residential units are located on the upper floors the proximity of the parking lot curb to the building will not impact the residents. 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. The applicant states that without the granting of the variance, there would not be room for both green space and enough parking stalls to meet the City’s requirements. Both items are important rights of the tenants. Staff concurs that the applicant will not have enough room to situate both the building and as much of the required off-street parking for the building as possible. In addition, the development will be consistent with the projected densities reflected in the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The granting of 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, or endanger the public safety. The applicant feels that this variance will not impair light or air to any adjacent properties. The building is not encroaching into any yards. Also this variance will allow the required drive aisle width in the parking lot. Staff agrees with the applicant’s analysis. 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 established property values in the surrounding area or in any other way impair the health, safety, comfort, or morals of the area. The applicant has taken care to design a building that will reinforce the existing character of the neighborhood. The parking lot requiring the variance is in the back of the property which is hidden from view from major streets. The front two sides of the building meet all zoning setback requirements. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been met. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 8 of 16 6. The granting of the proposed variance will not be contrary to the intent of this ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. The intent of this code requirement is to provide space between the parking area and the building, specifically for buildings where residential windows face the parking lot. The exterior parking lot is located on the ground level in back of the building. All residential units are located above the ground level, thus are not impacted by the parking stalls. This lot is intended to be used by the commercial tenants located on the ground level and will provide convenient access to that space. As previously discussed, other code requirements and Comprehensive Plan elements have been met. Staff and the Planning Commission believe this criterion has been satisfied. 7. The granting of a variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable undue hardship or difficulty. The applicant feels that granting this variance will alleviate the hardship of the narrow lot size. The applicant has made numerous revisions to the plans, based on staff recommendations. If the building were narrowed to accommodate the curbline setback, it would impact the interior parking drive aisles as well as decrease the size of the residential units. Drive aisles that are too narrow can be a safety concern. The applicant has made every attempt to meet all ordinance requirements. Staff and the Planning Commission agree that the variance will not be serving as a convenience to the applicant. Are there any other issues? Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending that evidence of any needed Watershed District approval must be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any building permits. Minnesota State building code is under a revision process and may be amended as early as this fall. The applicant is proposing a 5-story building, which would require that the amendment be approved. If it is not, a change in structural materials or reduction in the amount of floors would be required to meet building code. Therefore, staff has added a condition that allows the building to be reduced to four stories in height with a commensurate reduction in units without requiring an amendment to the conditional use permit. Staff has discovered that a portion of a billboard is overhanging onto the subject property. As shown on the applicant’s survey, the base of a billboard is located on the adjacent property to the east (Santorini’s Restaurant is located on this parcel), and the catwalk overhangs approximately 2.8 feet onto the applicant’s property. Billboards are nonconforming uses, and the ordinance states that conditional use permits may not be issued for properties which contain a nonconformity. Staff is recommending as a condition of approval that the portion of the St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 9 of 16 billboard overhanging onto the applicant’s property be removed. The City Attorney has concurred that this is in keeping with ordinance requirements. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 10 of 16 Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending approval of the Conditional Use Permit and Variance subject to the conditions in the resolution. Attachments: • Proposed Resolution • Location/zoning map • Application materials (Supplement) • Development plans (Supplement) Prepared By: Julie Grove, Associate Planner Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 11 of 16 RESOLUTION NO. 02-095 A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT UNDER SECTION 36-194d(7) OF THE ST. LOUIS PARK ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT MULTIPLE-FAMILY DWELLING FOR PROPERTY ZONED C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT LOCATED AT 1155 FORD ROAD BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Shelard Homes, LLC has made application to the City Council for a Conditional Use Permit under Section 36-194d(7) of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code for the purpose of permitting a multiple-family dwelling within a C-2 General Commercial District located at 1155 Ford Road for the legal description as follows, to-wit: That part of the South 2 acres of the East 10 rods of the East ½ of the West ½ of the Northeast ¼, Section 1, Township 117, Range 22, which lies Northerly of the Northerly right-of-way line of U.S. Highway No. 12, and South of a line 67.0 feet North of and parallel to the following described line: Beginning at a point on the West line of said South 2 acres of the East 10 rods distant of 103 feet South from the Northwest corner thereof; thence run East to a point on the East line of said South 2 acres of the East 10 rods distant 113.05 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof and then terminating. 2. The City Council has considered the advice and recommendation of the Planning Commission (Case No. 02-40-CUP) and the effect of the proposed multiple-family dwelling on the health, safety and welfare of the occupants of the surrounding lands, existing and anticipated traffic conditions, the effect on values of properties in the surrounding area, the effect of the use on the Comprehensive Plan, and compliance with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. The Council has determined that the multiple-family dwelling will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community nor will it cause serious traffic congestion nor hazards, nor will it seriously depreciate surrounding property values, and the proposed multiple-family dwelling is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The contents of Planning Case File 02-40-CUP are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision for this case. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 12 of 16 Conclusion The Conditional Use Permit to permit a multiple-family dwelling at the location described is granted based on the findings set forth above and subject to the following conditions: 1. The site shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits, which shall be revised to meet the following conditions: a. Correct tree replacement calculations and size of plant materials in the plant schedule on the landscape plan. b. Move the handicap parking stalls to the northwest side of the exterior lot. c. Revise the east and west building elevations to provide building wall deviations, a minimum of 3 feet in depth that extend from the grade at ground level to the roof. d. Revise parking lot dimension to meet the required amount of usable open space requirements as approved by the Zoning Administrator. e. Remove that portion of the billboard, approximately 49’ x 2.8’, that projects over the southeast property line. 2. Prior to any site work, the developer shall meet the following requirements: a. A copy of the Watershed District permit shall be forwarded to the City. b. Any other necessary permits from other agencies shall be obtained. c. Sign assent from and revised official exhibits. d. Required erosion control permits, utility permits and other required permits shall be obtained from the City. e. Final sidewalk construction documents are approved by the Public Works Director and any easements required for installation of sidewalks on private property shall be dedicated to the City. 3. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements, the developer shall comply with the following: a. Building material samples must be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator. b. The landscape plan must comply with Table 36-364F. c. All building elevations must meet building wall deviation requirements. d. A lighting plan and photometrics and irrigation plan meeting the ordinance regulations shall be submitted to and approved by the community development department. e. Meet all Accessibility Code requirements during construction. 4. The developer shall comply with the following conditions. a. Meet any Fire Department emergency access requirements for during construction. b. 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. c. The site shall be kept free of dust and debris that could blow onto neighboring properties. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 13 of 16 d. Public streets shall be maintained free of dirt and shall be cleaned as necessary. e. The Zoning Administrator may impose additional conditions if it becomes necessary in order to mitigate the impact of construction on surrounding properties. 5. Prior to issuance of an occupancy permit the billboard shall be removed from the subject property. 6. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. 7. Prior to installation of any signs the applicant shall obtain sign permits. 8. The building height may be decreased to four stories with a commensurate reduction in the number of residential units without amending the conditional use permit. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 3, 2002 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 14 of 16 VARIANCE RESOLUTION NO. ____ A RESOLUTION GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM SECTION 36-194d(7) OF THE ORDINANCE CODE RELATING TO ZONING TO PERMIT A SETBACK OF 4 FEET INSTEAD OF THE REQUIRED 15 FEET FROM THE BACK OF THE CURBLINE OF THE INTERNAL PARKING LOT FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE C-2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AT 1155 FORD ROAD BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park, Minnesota: FINDINGS 1. Shelard Homes, LLC has applied for a variance from Section 36-194d(7) of the Ordinance Code relating to zoning to permit a setback of 4 feet instead of the required 15 feet from the back of the curbline of the internal parking lot for property located in the C- 2 General Commercial District at the following location, to-wit: That part of the South 2 acres of the East 10 rods of the East ½ of the West ½ of the Northeast ¼, Section 1, Township 117, Range 22, which lies Northerly of the Northerly right-of-way line of U.S. Highway No. 12, and South of a line 67.0 feet North of and parallel to the following described line: Beginning at a point on the West line of said South 2 acres of the East 10 rods distant of 103 feet South from the Northwest corner thereof; thence run East to a point on the East line of said South 2 acres of the East 10 rods distant 113.05 feet South of the Northeast corner thereof and then terminating. 2. On August 7, 2002, 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 St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 15 of 16 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. 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 contents of Planning Case File 02-41-VAR are hereby entered into and made part of the public hearing record and the record of decision of this case. 8. 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. CONCLUSION The application for the variance to permit a setback of 4 feet instead of the required 15 feet from the back of the curbline of a parking lot 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 September 3, 2002 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7d - Lurie CUP and Variance Page 16 of 16 Location Map F O R D R O A D FORD LANE SHELARD PARK Subject Parcel 1155 Ford Road St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 1 of 10 7e Preliminary and Final Plat for Vail in the Park at 3647 Sumter Ave. S. and 7850 37th Street W. Case No. 02-39-s Recommended Action: Motion to adopt a resolution approving the preliminary and final plat, subject to conditions in the resolution, and waiving the requirement for a development agreement. Zoning: RC, Multiple Family Residential Comprehensive Plan Designation: Residential up to 50 units per acre Background: Vail Place is requesting preliminary and final plat approval to construct a two-story seven-unit apartment building on two parcels located at 3647 Sumter Ave. S and 7805 37th Street West. The parcels are generally located north of Highway 7 between Sumter Avenue and Rhode Island Ave. S. The parcels are surrounded by commercial property to the west, and two-family and multiple family districts to the north and east. The lots in question are actually four lots platted underneath the existing two tax parcels. The lot referred to as 3647 Sumter Ave, S., has been vacant for two and one-half years. A tri-plex, owned by Vail Place, was destroyed by fire in August 1999, and was razed that December. The seven-bedroom tri-plex accommodated up to seven residents, and was wholly located on the 70 x 100 eastern portion of the lot (currently 7850 W. 37th St. The applicant has owned the property for 10 years and is proposing to redevelop the two tax parcels in the same general use and intensity that was previously on one parcel. The new proposal is to construct a two-story seven-unit apartment building. Each apartment unit includes one bedroom, which will ordinarily house a single resident who will receive certain support services from Vail Place (see attachment). Vail Place’s target population is for adults. The units are between 550-600 square feet in size. An accessory office will be included for daytime use by Vail Place staff. Nine on-site parking spaces are proposed in the rear yard, adjacent to the alley. Access is provided off of 37th Street W. only. An open porch is proposed off the front of the building and a covered stoop, providing ramp access is proposed off the rear of the building. The proposed multi-family dwelling is a use permitted with conditions in the RC District. On January 24, 2002, the Board of Zoning Appeals approved 7 variances for the proposed apartment building to allow a lot size of 13,000 square feet instead of the required 15,000 square feet, allow 3.5 feet setback from the back of the curb line of internal private roadways or parking lots instead of the required 15 feet, allow 9 off-street parking spaces instead of 14, allow more than half of usable open space in the front yard, allow parking lot setback of 8.5 feet in a side yard abutting a street instead of the required 15 feet and parking lot turnaround setback in an interior side yard of 5 feet instead of the required 15 feet. One of the conditions of approval limited occupancy of the apartment complex to a maximum of 8 adult residents via lease restrictions unless additional off-street parking can be accommodated per code. A second condition required the property to be re-platted into one lot prior to issuance of a building permit. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 2 of 10 On August 7, 2002 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item and voted unanimously to recommend approval of the preliminary and final plat. One commissioner questioned if the plan met ADA requirements and suggested that the accessibility access to the building be reworked. Staff has since reviewed the plans and have determined that it meets ADA requirements. Staff also believes that given the low impact of the use and the buffer between the parking and residential units, the proposed plan meets the intent of the ordinance. Issues: • Is it appropriate in this instance to combine the preliminary and final plat? • Are Zoning Ordinance requirements met? • Does the final plat document comply with the requirements outlined in the Subdivision Ordinance for final plats? • What other submittals are required for final plat approval and are the submittals adequate? • Are there any other issues regarding approval of the final plat? Is it appropriate in this instance to combine the preliminary and final plat? Staff believes that it is appropriate in this case to combine the preliminary and final plat process. The Subdivision Ordinance states that the City may agree to review the preliminary and final plats simultaneously. This request is a replatting which combines four previously platted lots into one lot. The process is simpler than most subdivisions because the creation of only one lot is involved and variances have already been obtained for the apartment complex. Therefore the review process is fairly straightforward and can be done as a single review process. Are Zoning Ordinance requirements met? Following are the basic dimensional and density information for the apartment proposal and how it compares to the requirements for the R-C District: Compliance Table RC Ordinance Proposed Site Area* 15,000 sq. ft 13,000 sq. ft* # of units 15 max 7 units Density 50 units per acre 23 units per acre Building Height 75’ or 6 stories ~26 or 2 stories FAR 1.2 .5 GFAR .25 .25 Building Setbacks Front: 30’ min Side: 15’ min (interior) Front: 35’ Side: 18.5’8 (interior) St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 3 of 10 Side: 15’ min (37th Street) Rear: 25’ min Side: 15’ (37th Street) Rear: +44’ Parking Setbacks Front: 30’ min Side: 15’ min (interior) Side: 15’ min (37th Street) Rear: none Front: 35’ Side: 5’8* (interior) Side: 8.5’* (37th Street) Rear: 0’ Parking 14 stalls 9 stalls* Open Space 400 sq. ft per unit (2,800 sq. ft total) no more than 50% in front yard 2,800 sq. ft. More than 50% in front yard* *Variances were obtained from the requirements in January 2002 subject to conditions. With the variances noted, the proposal complies with the above requirements. Conditions for multiple family dwellings: a. Access shall be to a roadway identified in the Comprehensive Plan as a collector or arterial or shall be otherwise located so that access can be provided without generating significant traffic on local residential streets. Access is provided by 37th Street W., which is a local street. 37th Street West runs parallel to Highway 7, a major arterial road, and connects to Louisiana Avenue, a major collector. The parking lot has been designed so traffic enters off 37th Street and does not impact adjacent properties. There is no access to the lot from either Sumter Ave. or the alley. Thus the proposed seven-unit apartment complex will not generate significant traffic on surrounding local streets. b. Building lots shall contain a minimum of 400 square feet of usable open space per dwelling unit and no more than ½ can be located in the front yard. New developments which are required or elect to dedicate land or cash in lieu of land for parks, trails and open space in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance may reduce this requirement on a one for one basis to a minimum of 200 square feet per dwelling unit. In an effort to conform to existing setback requirements, parking and traffic configurations, the proposal meets the open space requirements for square footage but the space must be located in the front yard. A variance was obtained to permit this. The applicant included a large front yard area, an open porch and landscaping to enhance the property. The parking lot is located in the rear. c. The minimum spacing between buildings shall be the average heights of the buildings. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 4 of 10 This condition is not applicable as only one building is being proposed. d. All buildings shall be located a minimum of 15 feet from the back of the curb line of internal private roadways or parking lots. A variance was obtained to allow a building setback of 3.5 feet from the back of the curb line of parking lots instead of the required 15 feet. Parking is proposed to be adjacent to the alley and not the buildings. The required drive aisle width in the parking lot is provided thus avoiding traffic hazards. e. If parking is accommodated on the required public or private road system, it must meet minimum public street width requirements of the subdivision ordinance to allow on-street parking. This proposal provides 9 on-site parking stalls. A variance was obtained to allow less than two stalls per unit. Guest parking is available on Sumter Ave and 37th Street W. Both streets meet the minimum width requirement. f. Sidewalks with a minimum width of five feet shall be provided along all sides of the lot that abut a public street. Sidewalks shall also be provided between the public street and parking areas to all building entrances. Five foot sidewalks have been proposed along Sumter Ave. S and 37th Street West. This condition has been met. g. Conditions a through f and certain performance standards may be waived or amended if so specified in a Redevelopment Plan for the area that has been adopted as part of the City Comprehensive Plan. Other than the variances obtained, no other performance standards have been requested to be amended. Landscaping: A landscape plan and tree replacement plan have been submitted. Bufferyard requirements have been met. Crabapple trees and plantings are proposed in the alley right-of-way, however they cannot be planted in this location due to snow storage requirements. Staff recommends these be removed. Tree replacement calculations need to be corrected. The proposed plan removes 2 to 3 trees in the right-of-way. By ordinance these must be replaced on a caliper inch for caliper inch basis. The tree replacement calculations provided do not meet this requirement. In addition, the plan did not provide the diameter of some of the trees to be removed. To document the caliper inches to be lost, staff recommends these numbers be provided on the plan. The landscape architect has worked with City staff to ensure that the plant species are appropriate for site conditions and complement City plantings on boulevards and adjacent sites. To preserve some of the significant trees in the right-of-way along 37th St. W., staff recommends shifting the sidewalk to the north (over the applicant’s property) with an easement, and to reduce the driveway width to 20 feet and possibly shift it west if necessary. Staff is willing to continue working with the applicant to revise the landscape tree replacement plan. Staff recommends these both be submitted and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to beginning site work. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 5 of 10 Architectural Standards: The developer has proposed a building design that will reinforce the existing character of the established neighborhood and appears “appropriately-sized” for the lot. The overall design and choice of materials build on the character of the community. The massing is visually broken down into parts through a two-foot jog at the front and rear, providing a change in materials. The exterior walls meet building deviation requirements. The proposed building materials include face brick, Hardi-Plank shingleside, and Hardi-Plank siding. The face brick and windows (both Class I materials) comprise more than 60% of the exterior materials, thus meeting ordinance requirements. Hardi-plank has been accepted previously as a Class II on multi-family buildings Does the final plat document comply with the requirements outlined in the Subdivision Ordinance for final plats? The Subdivision Ordinance outlines the specific data requirements for final plats, including name of the subdivision; location of all monuments; location, width, and type of all easements to be dedicated; statement dedicating easements; owner’s policy of title insurance; and the type of certification required. Vail Place final plat complies with all of these requirements. The requirements also specify that the final grading, development and erosion control plans must be prepared in accordance with current City specifications. This is discussed below. What other submittals are required for final plat approval and are the submittals adequate? For final plat consideration, the developer is required to submit final grading plans, erosion and sediment control plans, utility plans, and tree preservation plans. Grading, Erosion and Sediment Control, Utility plans: Final grading erosion and sediment control plans have been reviewed and approved by the Public Works Director. The utility plan was also reviewed and approved as meeting City requirements. Park and trail dedication: As the proposed replatting does not involve creation of additional lots, park and trail dedication fees do not apply. Developers agreement: The subdivision ordinance allows the City to require a development agreement for those subdivisions where public infrastructure is a requirement of approval or development may impact existing infrastructure. Staff spoke with the City Attorney regarding this issue. It was determined that sidewalks are the only proposed improvements on this property. This can be accommodated through a condition in the resolution; thus a developers agreement is not required. Are there any other issues regarding approval of the final plat? If the development trips Minnehaha Creek Watershed District thresholds, a watershed district permit will also be required. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 6 of 10 Recommendation: Staff and the Planning Commission are recommending approval of the preliminary and final plat subject to the conditions in the resolution: Attachments: • Proposed Resolution • Site Location map • Variance Resolution (Supplement) • Application Materials (Supplement) • Plans (Supplement) Prepared By: Julie Grove Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 7 of 10 RESOLUTION NO. 02-096 RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT OF VAIL IN THE PARK BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of St. Louis Park: Findings 1. Vail Place, owners and subdividers of the land proposed to be platted as Vail in the Park, have submitted an application for approval of preliminary and final plat of said subdivision in the manner required for platting of land under the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, and all proceedings have been duly had thereunder. 2. The proposed preliminary and final plat have been found to be in all respects consistent with the City Plan and the regulations and requirements of the laws of the State of Minnesota and the ordinances of the City of St. Louis Park. 3. The proposed plat is situated upon the following described lands in Hennepin County, Minnesota, to-wit: Lots 25, 26, 27 and 28, Block 313, Rearrangement of St. Louis Park, Hennepin County, MN Conclusion 1. The proposed preliminary and final plat of Vail in the Park is hereby approved and accepted by the City as being in accord and conformity with all ordinances, City plans and regulations of the City of St. Louis Park and the laws of the State of Minnesota, subject to the following conditions: A. The site shall be developed, used, and maintained in accordance with the official exhibits, which shall be revised to meet the following conditions: i. Landscape and tree replacement plans must be revised as approved by the Zoning Administrator. ii. Site plan must be revised to show final sidewalk and curb cut locations as approved by the Zoning Administrator and Public Works Director. B. Easements must be dedicated as shown on the final plat. C. Before a final plat is signed by the City, the developer shall comply with the following requirements: St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 8 of 10 i. Submit financial security in the form of cash escrow or letter of credit in the amount of 125% of the costs of tree replacement, sidewalk installation, and repair/cleaning of public street and utilities. ii. Submit financial security in the amount of $2000 to be released when item D below is satisfied. iii. Submit an owners policy of title insurance, which insures the City’s interest in the plat as approved by the City Attorney. D. Within 60 days of final plat approval by the City Council, the subdivider shall record the final plat with the County Recorder. The subdivider shall, immediately upon recording, furnish the City Clerk with a print and reproducible tracing of the final plat showing evidence of the recording. The subdivider shall also provide a copy of the final plat on disc in an electronic data format. E. Prior to any site work, the developer shall meet the following requirements: i. A copy of the Watershed District permit shall be forwarded to the City. ii. Any other necessary permits from other agencies shall be obtained. iii. A final tree preservation plan shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator and any cash-in lieu of tree replacement be submitted. iv. Sign assent form and revised official exhibits. v. Required erosion control permits, utility permits and other required permits shall be obtained from the City. vi. Final sidewalk construction documents are approved by the Public Works Director and any easements required for installation of sidewalks on private property shall be dedicated to the City. F. Prior to issuance of any building permits, which may impose additional requirements, the developer shall comply with the following: i. Meet any Fire Department emergency access requirements during construction. ii. The subdivider shall furnish the City with evidence of recording of the final plat. iii. A lighting plan and photometrics and irrigation plan meeting the ordinance regulations shall be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator. iv. Building material samples must be submitted to and approved by the Zoning Administrator. v. Meet conditions for beginning site work. G. 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. 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. H. Prior to construction of the fence and trash enclosure, submit detailed plans and a fence permit application for approval by the Zoning Administrator. I. Prior to issuance of any occupancy permits, lease restrictions as required by the variance approval shall be submitted and approved by the City Attorney. St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 9 of 10 J. The developer or owner shall pay an administrative fee of $750 per violation of any condition of this approval. provided, however, that this approval is made subject to the opinion of the City Attorney and Certification by the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby directed to supply two certified copies of this Resolution to the above-named owner and subdivider, who is the applicant herein. 3. The Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to execute all contracts required herein, and the City Clerk is hereby directed to execute the certificate of approval on behalf of the City Council upon the said plat when all of the conditions set forth in Paragraph No. 1 above and the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code have been fulfilled. 4. Such execution of the certificate upon said plat by the City Clerk, as required under Section 26-123(1)j of the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code, shall be conclusive showing of proper compliance therewith by the subdivider and City officials charged with duties above described and shall entitle such plat to be placed on record forthwith without further formality. The City Clerk is instructed to record certified copies of this resolution in the Office of the Hennepin County Register of Deeds or Registrar of Titles as the case may be. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council September 3, 2002 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item: 090302 - 7e - Vail Place Prelim and Final Plat Page 10 of 10 Site Map W. 37th StreetSumter Avenue SS t a t e H w y N o . 7 Rhode Island Avenue SC2 R4 R3 R3 RC Subject Property Slparzoning.shp Slparzoning5-02.shpC1 C2IGIPMXOR1R2 R3R4RC Mndot.shp N EW S