The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2000/01/03 - ADMIN - Agenda Packets - City Council - Regular6:45 pm. – Board and Commission Interviews 7:25 p.m. - Economic Development Authority AGENDA - CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA January 3, 2000 7:30 p.m. 1. Call to order 2. Presentation 3. Roll Call a. City Council meeting of December 20, 1999 Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented b. Study Session meeting of October 11, 1999 Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented c. Special meeting of October 25, 1999 Action: Corrections/amendments to minutes - Minutes approved as presented 5. Approval of agenda a. Consent agenda Note: All matters on consent (starred items) are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion approving all. There is no separate discussion of these items. If discussion is desired, the starred item will be moved to the regular agenda. Action: Motion to approve - Motion to delete item(s) b. Agenda Action: Motion to approve - Motion to add item(s) *c. Resolutions and Ordinances Action: By consent, waive reading of resolutions and ordinances 2 6. Public Hearing 6a. Request by Vladimir Velikson to allow restaurants with liquor as permitted with conditions in the C-2, Commercial District Case No. 99-13-ZA Recommended Action: Motion to deny the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment. Staff is recommending an alternative amendment that would be processed separately. 6b. Public Hearing regarding Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments ase No. 99-33-CP Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing to Amend Chapter P, Redevelopment to modify the redevelopment plan for Louisiana Avenue/Highway 7 and Chapter U, Plan By Neighborhood. Both amendments would limit requirements for removing billboards. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution amending Comprehensive Plan text contingent upon Metropolitan Council approval, approve summary resolution, and authorize publication. 7. Petitions, Requests, Communications 8. Resolutions and Ordinances 8a. Election of Mayor Pro-tem State Statute section 412.121 requires that Council choose each year an acting Mayor from the Council members Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolution appointing a Mayor Pro-tem 8b. Resolution Authorizing Criminal History Background Investigations of Applicants for Certain Licenses Issued by the City This action authorizes the City Manager to identify licenses which require a criminal background investigation prior to issuance and authorizes the Police Department to retrieve and review data maintained in the criminal justice information system computers. 3 Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the resolution authorizing criminal history background investigations of applicants for certain licenses issued by the City. 8c. Approval of Encroachment Agreement for Private use of Dart Avenue Authorization to execute Encroachment Agreement between the City and Paul and Mary Anderson for construction of private driveway on undeveloped Dart Avenue. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the attached resolution authorizing execution of Encroachment Agreement. *8d. Designate St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor as Official Newspaper for 2000 Minnesota Statutes and the City Charter require that a legal newspaper of general circulation be designated for publication of the City’s official proceedings and notices. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolution designating the St. Louis Park Sun- Sailor as the City’s Official Newspaper for 2000 9. Reports from Officers, Boards, Committees *a. Cable Television Commission Minutes of October 7, 1999 *b. Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Minutes of October 13, 1999 *c. Vendor Claims Report Action: By consent, accept reports for filing 10. Unfinished Business 11. New Business 11a. Notice to Consider Establishing a Stormwater Utility This report is to initiate the thirty (30) day notification process to consider establishing a Stormwater Utility. Recommended Action: Motion to set a public hearing and first reading for February 7, 2000 of an Ordinance amending Section 9 of the Ordinance Code, establishing a Stormwater Utility. 4 12. Miscellaneous 13. Claims, Appropriations, Contract Payments - none 14. Communications 15. Adjournment 5 Item #4a UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA December 20, 1999 1. Call to Order Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 7:35 p.m. 2. Presentations - None 3. Roll Call The following Councilmembers were present at roll call: Ron Latz, Sue Santa, Robert Young, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Chris Nelson arrived at 7:40 p.m. Also present were the City Manager (Mr. Meyer); City Attorney (Mr. Scott); Economic Development Coordinator (Mr. Kleve); Planning Manager (Ms. Jeremiah); Police Chief (Mr. Luse); Assistant Zoning Administrator (Mr. Moore); Public Works Director (Mr. Rardin); Housing Programs Coordinator (Ms. Larsen); and Recording Secretary (Ms. Olson). 4. Approval of Minutes 4a. City Council Meeting of December 6, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented. 4b. Study Session meeting of September 13, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented with changes. Page 19, Item 3, delete Paragraph 4 starting with “Councilmember Latz . ..” Page 17, last paragraph of Item 1, change last sentence to “Mr. Moore suggested residents living within a block and half on the East side of the noise wall should be invited to an educational meeting and there will be a meeting in January with residents on the West side”. 4c. Study Session meeting of September 27, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented with change. Page 24, Item 8, change address to “4312 Coolidge Avenue South”. 6 4d. Study Session meeting of October 25, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented. 4e. Study Session meeting of November 8, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented with change. Page 27, Item 1, Paragraph 6, change first sentence to read “Councilmember Nelson stated that during comprehensive planning discussions, it was suggested that the designation be commercial/office”. 4f. Study Session meeting of November 22, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented with changes. Page 30, Item 1, Paragraph 3, change “eminent domain” to “slow-take domain”. Page 31, Item 3, add comments “Councilmember Nelson does not want to see repeated sweeps of the City each time looking for different violations” and “There was a discussion that the Inspections Department already has a checklist in place where they look at certain things and they could adopt that for survey type enforcement”. 4g. Study Session meeting of July 26, 1999 The minutes were approved as presented with change. Page 34, Item 6, add comments “Councilmember Nelson was opposed to the trade area restrictions and the continuation of charitable gambling authority”. 5. Approval of Agendas a. Consent Agenda. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve the consent agenda with the removal of Item 8f and Item 8h. The motion passed 5-0. b. Agenda It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by CouncilmemberSanta, to approve the agenda with the removal of Item 11d and addition of Item 8f and Item 8h. Motion passed 5-0. c. Resolutions and Ordinances By consent, Council waived reading of resolutions andordinances. 7 6. Public Hearings 6a. Zarthan Ave/16th Street Tax Increment Financing District Mr. Kleve, Economic Development Coordinator presented a staff report. Mayor Jacobs opened the public hearing. Mr. Kleve asked that a memorandum dated 12/15/99 from Sandra L. Vargas, Hennepin County Administrater be entered into the public record. Mayor Jacobs closed the public hearing subject to the right of the Council to reopen it at a future date. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt the resolution establishing the Zarthan Ave/16th Street Tax Increment Financing District within Redevelopment Project No. 1 and adopting the Tax Increment Financing Plan Therefor. 7. Petitions, Requests, Communication 7a. Variance Appeal, 6200 Minnetonka Boulevard Scott Moore, Assistant Zoning Administrator presented a staff report which identified three alternatives for the City Council. 1. The City Council may uphold the decision by the Board of Zoning Appeals. If the Council chooses this option, they should move to deny the variance request and uphold the Board of Zoning Appeals’ Resolution of Findings denying the variance. 2. The City Council may grant a variance to permit a fence in the front yard with a height of six feet instead of the maximum 3.5 feet. IF the Council chooses this option, they should indicated their findings and direct staff to prepare a Resolution of Approval with the findings to present at the January 3, 2000 City Council meeting. 3. Based on a recommendation of the BOZA, the City Council may direct staff to research the fence section of the Zoning Ordinance again to determine whether the code is still appropriate. This recommendation could be in conjunction with Alternative 1 or 2. Mr. Moore stated that staff recommended that the City Council choose Alternative 1. Councilmember Nelson asked why there was a delay in enforcement from December 15, 1997 to February 25, 1999. Mr. Moore explained that he prepared a letter on January 5, 1998 to be sent to the applicant, however the Director at that time, who is no longer with the City, said he was going to handle the enforcement of this issue. 8 Councilmember Latz asked if this was a new question before the Council. Mr. Moore indicated that this was not a new question. The code permits that the same variance can be applied for six months after it has been denied. Councilmember Latz suggested changing that provision in the code in order to save administrative time. Councilmember Nelson asked if that provision stopped the City from continuing enforcement. Mr. Moore indicated that a written agreement was signed where the applicant agreed with the City to suspend any further enforcement of the code allowing him the right to go through the appeal process one more time and in the event that all of his legal remedies have been exhausted, he has then agreed to bring the fence into compliance. James Lundgren, Attorney representing Mr. Manthey explained his involvement in the process. He indicated that Mr. Manthey does not want to take the fence down because of livability issues. He indicated that this thoroughfare was different than a residential street in a quiet part of St. Louis Park where the zoning requirements were appropriate. He submitted that Minnetonka Boulevard was not appropriate in order to obtain livability on that thoroughfare. He recommended that the City complete a comprehensive planning study of this area or table the motion at this time, at least until Susan Sanger who is Mr. Manthey’s representative would be available. He believed that this was more than just one stubborn guy with a fence, but impacts a lot of neighbors who have shown support and feel they are in a similar situation. Mr. Manthey stated that this issue was not about a six feet fence, but rather the fact that Minnetonka Boulevard and the intersection of Brunswick and Blackstone were going to be impacted greatly by the upcoming changes in the railroad as indicated in the Railroad Study of March, 1999 and Hennepin County’s plan to widen Minnetonka Boulevard. He stated that he brought this up to BOZA and City Council three years ago and believes we are failing to see the sagacity of the issue and trying to be a motivater in the community to address these issues. He indicated that he would like to have his issue tabled until this whole comprehensive planning study can be done to see the true impacts to his neighborhood and Councilmember Sanger would be present. Mr. Meyer, City Manager clarified that there was not an item on the agenda relative to the rail issue and there were no changes under consideration by the Council tonight. He gave a brief update on the current process that the City was in regarding the Railroad Study and stated that it would be at least 18 months before there would even be any recommendations for commuter rail. He stated that he was not aware that Hennepin County has anything in there capital plan that calls for that work to be done. James Lundgren, Attorney representing Mr. Manthey, stated that the wall has been there for 3 years and designed originally that it would not pose a safety hazard to traffic. He asked that given the period of time that is has been there, and given the fact that it doesn’t appear to pose a 9 safety hazard that perhaps allowing the livability to continue until some of these other issues have been resolved. Councilmember Nelson asked if there were other members of the audience that were going to speak to the variance issues. Mayor Jacobs stated that he would like to keep the comments on the issues that are relevant to the variance issues and not the rail issue or Minnetonka Boulevard. He asked if there was anyone present wishing to speak on the variance itself. Heather Ofterdahl, 2936 Blackstone Avenue South, asked why the City didn’t want a fence at this location and how this was decided. Mayor Jacobs explained that all cities were required to look at 7 statutory factors in terms of granting a variance and that the ordinances have to uniformly be applied and enforced throughout the City. Mr. Scott, City Attorney indicated that was a question of whether or not there was something unique about this particular property that would create some undue hardship and therefore the City should not apply our general rules to this particular property. Mr. Meyer, City Manager explained that the Council had to consider and apply many discretionary factors, but the courts have decided that these questions have to be asked and answered. Mr. Mayor indicated that the variance was denied the first time because five out of the seven factors were not met. Councilmember Latz asked what the basis was for claiming that the fence having been there in violation of the ordinance for three years ought to get credit for having been there for three years. Mr. Manthey stated that there visibility triangles that were met when the fence was designed. Mr. Lundgren stated he was not suggested that that fence isn’t out of compliance, but what we are saying is that there is no evidence that this fence has caused any safety problems in three years and we are just stating the fact that the fence has been there for three years due to the lack of action for three years had something to do with the City not moving very rapidly toward enforcement. Councilmember Latz stated that the fact that it hasn’t been enforced for three years is not an issue. The fact is that from the beginning Mr. Manthey was aware that is was in violation of the ordinance, and it was his obligation to be in compliance with the ordinance whether or not the staff takes affirmative steps to enforce the ordinance. He asked how this home was different that and other homes on Minnetonka Boulevard in that area. 10 Mr. Lundgren stated that the problem exists all along that corridor of Minnetonka Boulevard and some of the houses have six feet walls who are fortunate enough to have a side-yard facing Minnetonka Boulevard. He stated that this was not a unique property in that situation. Councilmember Latz believed that the implication was to change the height requirement along Minnetonka Boulevard for all homes. Mr. Lundgren believed that the environment would call for this, but he was asking that it be modified for his property since his circumstances are unique. Mr. Manthey exclaimed that his property was unique because of the presence of a narrow bridge, increased traffic, increased bus traffic, slowing of traffic at his intersection that causes accidents, and future increase in rail traffic. He showed pictures of other six feet fences in the neighborhood and explained other fences in surrounding area. He provided a petition with 116 resident signatures stating they approved of the fence. Mr. Scott indicated that all the fences shown were researched and they are all in the sideyard abutting the street. Councilmember Latz asked if there was anything in the record indicating Councilmember Sanger’s viewpoint. Councilmember Nelson researched the past minutes and found that “Councilmember Sanger emphasized that the high fence was not in accord with the livable community principles and she made the motion to uphold the BOZA decision”. Councilmember Latz believed this was not a questions of safety, but how the residents in St. Louis Park look to people who walk and travel Minnetonka Boulevard. The current fence that exists does not look welcoming at all and it should not be any surprise to any purchaser of that property that they are purchasing one with a front door on Minnetonka Boulevard. There is no doubt that traffic has increased and the railroad is an issue, but they are an issue for a lot more than this particular property and therefore this property is not unique. He had a concern about tabling this issue since the Council wouldn’t have any idea of when these issues that would be addressed. He was opposed to the request for the variance. Mr. Manthey stated that Councilmember Latz suggested that he built the fence knowing the ordinance and went against the ordinance. He indicated that he did not do this. He was cognoscente of his plans, wrote them up and brought the plans to the City and they said good job, go for it. After ten days, City Staff stopped by and suggested the fact that there was a complaint and he was building the fence at an inappropriate height and could discontinue building the fence or continue building the fence and apply for a zoning variance. He stated he did not start the fence with bad intentions. Councilmember Latz stated that he appreciated Mr. Manthey making the comments because he had a conversion with Mr. Manthey today about this fact and since Mr. Manthey had not pointed 11 this fact out in initial presentation after the staff report suggested to Councilmember Latz that Mr. Manthey was dropping the issue. Mr. Moore briefly reviewed the background of the inspection in response to a complaint. He stated that he did not tell Mr. Manthey that one of his options would be to finish the fence and apply for the variance, but rather he told him the fence could not be constructed at the 6 feet height. It is up to the individual resident to research and know the ordinance requirements in regards to the fence height. He agreed that in starting the fence, if Mr. Manthey came to the City two times this showed that he thought he was doing the right thing. Mr. Manthey stated it was unfortunate he did not have the opportunity to speak with Mr. Moore at the time, he would have gotten better information and he would not have started the fence knowingly that it was against the variance. Councilmember Latz stated that the problem was that Mr. Manthey did finish the fence knowing it was against the variance. Councilmember Nelson stated that he knows Mr. Manthey and he likes him, but he voted against the variance request on December 15, 1997. He believed that Mr. Manthey acted in good faith, but that is not really relevant. He was not in favor of tabling this issue. He agrees that there has been increased traffic, but doesn’t see it as an issue of hardship because it is the same all down Minnetonka Boulevard. He believes that is important to try to get Hennepin County to take care of this road. He briefly commented on the other issues raised, but didn’t believe that they made this a particularly sensitive area. He was not in favor of a row of six fences along Minnetonka Boulevard. He was in favor of upholding BOZA’s decision to deny the variance request and recommended discussing increased noise and traffic on the collectors and highways in St. Louis Park at a study session. Councilmember Santa concurred with Councilmember Latz and Nelson and didn’t believe that the issue has changed from three years ago and there were no new factors introduced. It was moved by Councilmember Santa, seconded by Councilmember Latz, to uphold the Board of Zoning Appeals’ decision to deny the variance request. The motion passed 5-0. 8. Resolutions and Ordinances 8a. PPL Louisiana Court Redevelopment Project Kathy Larsen, Housing Programs Coordinator presented a staff report. She indicated that Steve Bubul of Kennedy and Graven was present to answer questions. Councilmember Latz was in support of the project and stated that he had been working with PPL and Perspectives. 12 Councilmember Young was concerned about condemnation since in previous discussions the Council felt that they didn’t want to do that and had such bad luck in the past with legal costs and much higher prices. Mayor Jacobs believed there were initial steps authorizing the process to be started if it was deemed necessary. Mr. Buhul pointed out that the actual condemnation would be handled by the Housing Authority and the resolution that is before the Council is to approve that and request that the Housing Authority move forward at the Housing Authority’s option if PPL has demonstrated that it has exhausted its effort to acquire that property. Then if the Housing Authority chooses it can file condemnation with the understanding that both parties are going to be paying 50% of the condemnation while the action was going forward. If the point where there is a deposit to be made in order to acquire the property under a quick take, that is going to come at the same time that the City is prepared to issue the bonds and then the bond proceeds would be used to actually acquire the property. Councilmember Young asked what would happen if there was a price that wasn’t acceptable. Mr. Bubul indicated that at this point the City has analyzed the prospects and have determined the project was feasible. Councilmember Young questioned if the project was going to include all the buildings. Mayor Jacobs stated that there were four properties, owned by two different owners that have not responded. Councilmember Latz noted that these buildings were located in Louisiana Court in a place where there acquisition would be critical to the success of the overall project and they include two of the worst buildings in Louisiana Court. If those two properties are not acquired, there would be no value in moving forward. Councilmember Young asked what would happen if the City can’t obtain these properties through the condemnation process. Councilmember Latz believed the project would go away since the project would not make sense without those buildings. He noted that the condemnation process involved with the Hutchinson Spur property was a unique property that was very difficult to find comparables for purposes of evaluation, but was not the case in this project. Councilmember Young was opposed to the project. He believed that there was a perception in this neighborhood that this was a real problem area and the solution was that the City take over through a partnership with PPL which would reduce the number of units available to low income people by consolidating some of the one bedrooms into three bedrooms. He believed that there was an element of social engineering being introduced indicating that the new management will be able to help the people to be better individuals and he didn’t know if they asked for that, but 13 that is what they will get if this goes through. He also believed it involves some cosmetic changes to the buildings. He felt that there was going to be a lot of public expenditure and risk to the City and in the end these solutions were not going to change the perception of the neighborhood and would not accomplish what the we think we are going to accomplish. Councilmember Nelson was in support of the project which facilitates an ownership change. He pointed out the similarity of this project to the significant changes at Meadowbrook. He believed that the neighborhood perception would change over time and if the City could start in the right direction then that was a good goal. He also noted that the City was fully secured on this project and that changing the number of units was addressing a different low income need. Mr. Bubul clarified how the building mix was identified and the process of condemnation. Councilmember Nelson asked if the leases were terminated if deemed necessary to facilitate a change. Lisa Krueger, Consultant to PPL, indicated that there were many units that were on month-to- month leases and there was plenty of time to assess the situation on the units with annual leases and there was considerable flexibility in terms of relocation. Councilmember Nelson asked if part of the problem at Louisiana Court was tenant related and if there was a need to relocate people and was that a legal possibility or impossibility. Barb McCormick, PPL stated that one of the reasons that the project was going to be managed by acquisition and then a delay before construction is that in her experience, one of the most important things to do was to establish a new management philosophy and the controls necessary which would make it very clear about what the expectations for acceptable tenant behavior was and then the management would have legal action necessary to assure that the lease terms were respected. She indicated that it was not PPL’s intent to have wide spread dislocation by virtue of this project. She indicated that those who have existing leases would be offered the new lease that assures them a specific rent for a certain time and would be evaluated case by case. Mark Ruff, Ehlers and Associates stated that his understanding has been that the City was not intending to buying out any existing leases. Councilmember Latz believed that the goals of the project were important and could be accomplished by the proposal presented. Mayor Jacobs supported the project and believed that the risk of doing nothing was that the City would continue to deal with a blighted area which has many problems. He was comfortable that the City’s financial investment is secure and protected. Councilmember Young explained that in the end the net was going to be a reduction in the number of people and not just the number of units at Louisiana Court. He stated that he would be all for this if this was a Meadowbrook, but believed that this was not a Meadowbrook and 14 couldn’t be compared since there was not the help of a Cop Shop, Linda Trummer, Hospital Foundation and the City with tough inspections requirements. It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt a resolution authorizing execution of Contract for Redevelopment by and among the City of St. Louis Park, the St. Louis Park Housing Authority and Project for Pride in Living. The motion passed 4-1, Councilmember Young opposed. It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution authorizing execution of Cooperation Agreement between the City of St. Louis Park and Housing Authority of St. Louis Park. The motion passed 4-1, Councilmember Young opposed. It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution requesting condemnation of certain real estate by the Housing Authority. The motion passed 4- 1, Councilmember Young opposed. It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adopt Resolution giving preliminary approval to a proposed issue of multifamily housing revenue bonds. The motion passed 4-1, Councilmember Young opposed. 8b. Towing Contract for Years 2000 through 2004 John Luse, Police Chief presented a staff report. The Council discussed the appropriate and legal action to be taken. Mr. Scott, City Attorney indicated that the Council had to award the lowest responsible bidder the contract. John Mulligan, Attorney representing Schmit Towing was present. Mr. Schmit, Schmit Towing was present. Mr. Mulligan briefly explained the content of the letter that he had sent to the City. He stated that knowing that the contract was revenue neutral the City ought to choose a company with integrity and who had not disregarded any other prior contracts. Markus Hughes, 3635 Hampshire Avenue South, All Hours Towing was present and briefly responded to the violations. He also presented a letter from the City of Golden Valley related to the impound lot identifed as a possible loction by Schmit Towing. It was moved by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to recommend that the City Council authorize the Mayor and City Manger to execute the attached five-year contract with All Hours Towing for towing services. The motion passed 5-0. 8c. This report discusses a resolution for adopting a Standard Operating Policy for Code Administration 15 By consent, Council adopted the attached resolution supporting the Inspection Department Standard Operating Policy for Code administration. 8d. Second Reading of Ordinance Amendment revising Permit Fees for Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical Permits. By consent, Council adopted the ordinance revising plumbing, mechanical and electrical permit fees, approved the summary and authorized summary publication. 8e. Police Uniform Contract By consent, Council authorized the Mayor and City Manger to execute a contract with Uniforms Unlimited for police uniforms for a two-year period from January 1, 2000 through December 31, 2001. 8f. Resolution to Adopt the 2000 Budget It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to approve resolution adopting the 2000 budget. The motion passed 5-0. 8g. Second Reading of the Ordinance Amending Water & Sewer Utility Rates for 2000 By consent, Council adopted the ordinance and approved summary ordinance for publication. 8h. Resolution Approving the Property Tax Levy for 2000 It was moved by Councilmember Latz, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to approve the resolution. The motion passed 5-0. 8i. Advancement of Funds from the MSA Account By consent, Council adopted the attached resolution requesting the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) to advance funds in the amount of $720,000 to repay MSA approved construction costs.. 8j. Amendment to Ordinance 1325 By consent, Council approved the ordinance to vacate a portion of Meadowbrook Road, and authorized publication of summary ordinance. 9. Reports from Officers, Boards, Committees a. Housing Authority Minutes of November 10, 1999 b. Planning Commission Minutes of December 1, 1999 16 c. Vendor Claim Report By consent, Council accepted reports for filing 10. Unfinished Business a. Board and Commission Appointment(s) It was moved by Councilmember Young, seconded by Councilmember Nelson, to reappoint James Gainsly and Susan Bloyer to the Board of Zoning Appeals; Bruce Browning, Robert Jacobson and Mary Jean Overend to the Telecommunications Advisory Commission; Herbert Isbin to the Human Rights Commission; James Nordgaard to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission and Paul Carver and Sally Velick to the Planning Commission. Motion passed 5-0. 11. New Business 11a. Approval of lease agreement for a free standing communications antenna with Sprint Spectrum L.P. (SSLP). By consent, Council moved to approve the attached resolution authorizing execution of lease agreement. 11b. Traffic Study No. 548: Three way stop signs at Alabama Avenue So. and W. 32nd Stet By consent, Council accepted this report for filing and adopted the attached resolution authorizing the installation of three way stop signs at the intersection of Alabama Avenue SO. and W. 32nd Street. 11c. Traffic Study No. 549: HealthSystem Minnesota request for Parking restrictions on the north side of Louisiana Circle. By consent, Council adopted the attached resolution authorizing the change in parking restriction s on the north side of Louisiana Circle to “One-Hour” parking from Louisiana Avenue west to the westerly driveway for 3900 Louisiana Circle. 11d. Authorize Publication of notice of availability of Park Commons East EAW for public comment. It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Santa to authorize the publication of the notice of availability of the Park Commons East EAW. Motion passed 5-0. 12. Miscellaneous - None 13. Claims, Appropriation, Contract Payments- None 17 14. Communications 15. Adjournment It was moved by Councilmember Nelson, seconded by Councilmember Santa, to adjourn the meeting at 9:40 p.m. The motion passed 5-0. City Clerk Mayor 18 Item # 4b UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION October 11, 1999 The meeting convened at 7:00 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers Jim Brimeyer, Ron Latz, Chris Nelson, Susan Sanger, Sue Santa, Robert Young and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. Staff present: City Manager (Mr. Meyer), Director of Community Development (Mr. Harmening), Planning Manager (Ms. Jeremiah), Human Resources Manager (Ms. Gohman), Director of Public Works (Mr. Rardin), and City Clerk (Ms. Larsen). 1. Park Commons Update Mr. Ruff of Ehler’s and Associates, Mr. Bubul of Kennedy and Graven, and Greg Esterman of Avalon Bay were present at the meeting. Mr. Ruff gave an overview of the financial plan analysis. He discussed the necessary steps to move forward with the project, the influence of the tax increment financing on the City, finance parameters, and fiscal disparities. He also mentioned the difference between the building cost of the project compared to the assessor’s value. Mayor Jacobs felt that corners should not be cut to cover the five- percent gap in funding. Mr. Ruff stated the City is responsible for repaying the bonds, but it will fall to Avalon Bay to close the funding gap. Councilmember Sanger asked when at what point would the value of the project become equal with the funds put into the project. Councilmember Nelson was concerned with the fiscal disparities and suggested that a consistent policy with certain criteria be set to guide future development projects. Mr. Harmening stated that a policy had been written several years ago with the general rule that funds can be taken out of the district and the project can be re-evaluated if the needs change. Mr. Harmening warned against decertifying the existing TIF districts due to the potential impact on the investment (20 million in bonds). Mr. Esterman stated that he felt comfortable with the fact that Avalon Bay would be responsible for closing the funding gap. Councilmember Sanger inquired if the financing plan would improve if more owner-occupied properties were developed rather than rental property. Mr. Meyer responded that the Livable Communities principle does not produce the highest property value, and the focus was on improving the value of the community. Mayor Jacobs asked if funding was achieved, would the mix of property still be viable. 19 Councilmember Sanger stated the she foresees the cost of the City contribution increasing and is concerned. Ms. Jeremiah replied that City financing will be thirty-three percent of the project and that is with all costs included. Councilmember Sanger then asked how the future phases of the plan would be affected by tapping out the TIF districts. Mr. Meyer replied the lower value of the property would assist in obtaining a new increment out of the district. Councilmember Sanger was concerned with funding and asked if the City was willing to end with just Phase I. Ms. Jeremiah responded that the staff was expecting the South side of the project to be self- funded. Councilmember Nelson asked what the funding source would be for the north/south road. Ms. Jeremiah responded that it was dependent on additional development to the west. She added that the expansion of the Park Nicollet facility could be the funding source. Councilmember Young inquired if the City and developers could participate as partners with the developers in setting lease rates and other such decisions. Councilmember Brimeyer would like to see a chart on what must happen for this project to be completed. He also added that he did not like the lack of ability to fund other projects in the future. Ms. Jeremiah stated that they were still working under a predevelopment agreement. Mr. Esterman reported on the current activities of the site plan. He stated that the refined pro forma would be ready in six weeks, and that Avalon Bay is working with Federal Realty on the lease agreements. Ms. Jeremiah reported on the Park Commons West open house. She stated that it was well attended and the majority of the comments were positive. She also reported that there were concerns with the north/south roadway and a lack of understanding involving the TIF recommendation. She then gave an update on acquisition and demolition for the project. 2. MSP Real Estate – Updated Preliminary Request for Tax Increment Financing Assistance; Mill City Plywood Site/7301 Walker St; 200 Unit Apartment Project. Mr. Kleve reported that the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning ordinance and the project would remove a blighting influence in the City. He discussed the sources and uses involved in the project, the environmental challenges, the use of TIF in the project, staff availability and support, and grant funding. Staff support of the project was contingent upon the developer obtaining grant funding. Councilmember Sanger inquired on the chances of grant approval. It was replied that grant money could reduce the payback period on TIF.Mr. Harmening stated that grant funds would cover the local contribution. He then asked Council if they supported the application for funding. Mr. Latz asked if Met Council would factor in housing goals. 3. Prosecuting Attorney Fees Council was in agreement with the staff recommendation to raise the hourly fee for Mr. Colich’s services from $67.50 to $75.00 per hour. 4. 2000 Benefit Contribution 20 Ms. Gohman reported that in negotiations with union groups, benefits dollars for each employee are the same regardless of their enrollment in single or family health insurance. She added that more cities in the surrounding area have equalized their benefits than was anticipated. She then discussed benefits relating to the recruitment of qualified employees. Ms. Gohman described the new tier system for health insurance where employees can choose options that are more suited to their individual need. Employees now have two more options to choose from that are more affordable than the family health insurance plan. Staff recommended that the same dollar amount be given for single or family insurance and the difference between supervisory and non- supervisory employees should continue. Councilmember Young suggested that instead of increasing single contribution dollars, the family contribution amount should be lowered. Councilmember Sanger felt that salaries were too low. Council then discussed the job market. 5. Sidewalk and Trail Maintenance Mr. Rardin stated that the issue is not one of Council authorization but maintenance of the sidewalks and trails in question. He discussed how the City was keeping up with the current maintenance systems. He stated that if the staff tried to meet the timeframe set by the City ordinance code, it would be more costly. He added that the current ordinance only addresses sidewalks and not trails. Mayor Jacobs stated that he did not see a need to remove snow from the neighborhood sidewalks. Councilmember Sanger felt that the City should not plow some areas and not others. She added that if plowing is cut back, enforcement of the ordinance will become an issue. Mayor Jacobs suggested that perhaps neighborhood associations could participate in snow removal . He stated that the City should be responsible only for City property and trails. The question was raised on how enforcement would be handled. Council agreed that staff should return with a maintenance and enforcement plan. 6. Sidewalk issue at Quentin and 40th St. Councilmember Nelson suggested that this issue be incorporated into the sidewalk and trail plan. He also suggested that a policy be developed to address issues such as this. 7. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 21 Item # 4c UNOFFICIAL MINUTES CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING ST. LOUIS PARK, MINNESOTA October 25, 1999 Mayor Jacobs called the meeting to order at 5:30 p.m. Present at the meeting were Councilmembers: Chris Nelson, Ron Latz, Sue Santa, Robert Young, and Mayor Jeff Jacobs. 1. Trails and Sidewalk Tour The Council and City staff toured St. Louis Park reviewing some of the most controversial corridors for the sidewalk and trails project. The Council discussed the process of public involvement and a series of neighborhood meetings with staff. Council felt that the options must be narrowed before it is discussed with the neighborhoods. The present options available are: to consider and rule against, consider and rule as a possibility or to receive citizen feedback. Mr. Young felt the standards should be set to minimize the loss of mature vegetation, the impact on residential homes, and other existing structures. Council agreed to obtain feedback from staff and the attorney and bring the item back to a future study session. 2. Adjournment The meeting was adjouned at 7:00 p.m. City Clerk Mayor 22 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item # 6a Meeting of January 3, 2000 6a. Request by Vladimir Velikson to allow restaurants with liquor as permitted with conditions in the C-2, Commercial District Case No. 99-13-ZA Recommended Action: Motion to deny the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendment. Staff is recommending an alternative amendment that would be processed separately. Vladimir Velikson is requesting a text amendment to allow restaurants with liquor as permitted with conditions, rather than requiring a Conditional Use Permit, in the C-2 Zoning District. His desire is to open an Eastern European restaurant in the Texa Tonka shopping center which would serve liquor and include a small area for live music and dancing. The Zoning Ordinance requires that any property obtaining a Conditional Use Permit must eliminate all nonconformities on the property as a condition of CUP approval. Due to the large number of nonconformities on the shopping center property (there are nine), which would be cost prohibitive and practically impossible to completely eliminate, Mr. Velikson is requesting the text amendment. Another option would be to request variances for all of the existing nonconformities. The request came before the Planning Commission on July 21, 1999. At that time, staff recommended that restaurants with liquor be permitted with conditions, but that accessory bars should still be required to obtain a Conditional Use Permit. After some discussion, the Planning Commission continued the request to the August 18 meeting, and directed staff to determine the number of nonconformities existing on the shopping center site that would need to be removed if a CUP were required, and to identify properties that would become nonconforming if the text amendment were approved. At the August 18 Planning Commission meeting, Mr. Velikson stated for the first time that live music and dancing were part of his restaurant concept. This land use would require a setback variance even if the proposed text amendment were approved. The Planning Commission sent the request on to the City Council with no recommendation, on a vote of 2-2. On September 7, on the applicant’s request and staff’s recommendation, the City Council voted to postpone consideration of the amendment indefinitely, in order for Mr. Velikson to pursue a variance for the music/dancing component, and directed staff to send the request to the Planning Commission for further consideration before coming back to the City Council. In applying for the setback variance for live music/dancing, it was determined that the building setback from the north property line was only 10.7 feet, requiring setback variances for both the music/dancing and any type of restaurant. The Board of Zoning Appeals considered the two variance requests on October 21, 1999 and, against staff’s recommendation, approved both variances. Approval of the variances enable Mr. Velikson to proceed with the text amendment request. After receiving input from the Planning Commission, the applicant, the Board of Zoning Appeals and further discussions among staff, staff has found that there are several difficulties in interpreting and enforcing the proposed amendment. Therefore, staff is now recommending 23 denial of the proposed text amendment. An alternative text amendment is being initiated by staff that would potentially address Mr. Velikson’s needs. Because staff’s proposal addresses a different section of the Zoning Ordinance, the amendment is being initiated as a separate case. It is discussed briefly below, and is scheduled to be considered by the City Council on January 18, 2000. On December 15, 1999 the Planning Commission held another hearing and considered Velikson’s text amendment request. At that meeting, Mr. Velikson presented a petition of approximately 150 people supporting the restaurant concept. The signatures are primarily from the metro area, with about 10-15% from St. Louis Park. A copy of the petition is attached. The Planning Commission voted 4-0 to recommend denial of the request. Commissioners expressed support for the restaurant concept, but concurred with staff that they were not comfortable with the proposed text amendment. The Planning Commission was receptive to finding an alternative method of potentially allowing the restaurant in the shopping center. Issues: • Is it possible to distinguish between a restaurant with liquor and an accessory bar? • Is it appropriate to allow restaurants with liquor as permitted with conditions? • What alternatives exist to potentially meeting the applicant’s needs? Issues Analysis: Is it possible to distinguish between a restaurant with liquor and an accessory bar? Staff’s initial recommendation was to allow restaurants with liquor as permitted with conditions, but to still require accessory bars to obtain a Conditional Use Permit. In the Zoning Ordinance, bars are defined as places where the primary purpose is the serving of alcohol, although they may serve food, and restaurants are defined as primarily serving meals, although alcohol may also be served. Bars are permitted only as an accessory use to restaurants, hotels, private indoor entertainment, and clubs and lodges. Most restaurants in the City which serve alcohol have a separate bar area which primarily serve alcohol, but where food can also be ordered. Where there is no accessory bar, staff believes it would be difficult to enforce any requirement that liquor be served with meals only. A portion of a restaurant could easily become a de facto bar area, particularly if entertainment were offered on the premises which encouraged patrons to stay after a meal. Furthermore, while the Inspections Department conducts periodic inspections of restaurants and bars, their licensing requirements do not distinguish between restaurants serving liquor with a meal only and bars; therefore, an entirely new method of inspections would need to be devised to ensure that an accessory bar were not added to a restaurant with liquor. Therefore, staff believes it is not possible or practical to distinguish between restaurants serving liquor with or without an accessory bar. Is it appropriate to allow restaurants with liquor as permitted with conditions? For both uses that are permitted with conditions and uses that require a Conditional Use Permit, the requirement of the applicant is that the proposal must meet the stated conditions and other applicable Zoning Ordinance provisions. In addition, for a Conditional Use Permit, a public 24 hearing is required, in which neighbors have an opportunity to learn about the proposal and comment or raise concerns. With a CUP, the City Council may also impose additional conditions that it feels are necessary for the proposed use to meet the intent of the Code and to preserve health, safety, welfare and neighborhood character. Staff believes that restaurants with liquor merit the additional review that a Conditional Use Permit provides. There are several potential negative impacts from restaurants with liquor, including late hours, noise, lights, and traffic. While the stated conditions are generally sufficient to protect surrounding properties, the opportunity to modify the site plan in response to public comments or to add conditions may be necessary in some cases to allow the use to fit well into the neighborhood. With Mr. Velikson’s restaurant proposal, the live music and dancing and liquor component could easily lead to later hours of operation than for a typical restaurant that does not include a bar. Therefore, staff believes these uses should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis, and it is not appropriate to allow restaurants with liquor as permitted with conditions. Is staff proposing an alternative? As an alternative to the proposed text amendment, staff is initiating an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance which addresses the nonconformities section. Staff is proposing that the requirement that all nonconformities be removed as a condition of any Conditional Use Permit be made more flexible in some cases. For multi-tenant buildings only, when a new tenant is proposed which would require a CUP and there are some nonconformities on the property, staff is proposing that nonconformities would be required to be reduced or eliminated to the extent reasonable and possible, and that the new use would not increase nonconformities on the property. This is the same standard that is currently applied for Special Permit amendments. The effect of the proposed amendment would be to allow for the continued use and viability of multi-tenant properties which contain some nonconformities, provided the owner is willing to invest in reasonable property improvements. If the proposed text amendment were approved, Mr. Velikson would need to obtain a CUP for the restaurant proposal. Staff is also initiating a text amendment addressing private indoor entertainment with liquor in the C-2 District. Private indoor entertainment with liquor is currently permitted with conditions, and staff believes this use should be treated as other uses which serve liquor and require a Conditional Use Permit. These alternative text amendments will be analyzed further in the January 5, 2000 staff report. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the proposed amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to allow restaurants with liquor as permitted with conditions in the C-2 District. Attachments: Petition in support of Eastern European restaurant Prepared by: Sacha Peterson, Planner Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 25 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item # 6b Meeting of January 3, 2000 6b. Public Hearing regarding Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments Case No. 99-33-CP Comprehensive Plan Public Hearing to Amend Chapter P, Redevelopment to modify the redevelopment plan for Louisiana Avenue/Highway 7 and Chapter U, Plan By Neighborhood. Both amendments would limit requirements for removing billboards. Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution amending Comprehensive Plan text contingent upon Metropolitan Council approval, approve summary resolution, and authorize publication. Background: When the City Council adopted the Comprehensive Plan on May 17, 1999, it included a redevelopment plan for the Highway 7/Louisiana Avenue area. This plan incorporated the recommendations of a citizen’s task force who participated in a planning study of the area. One recommendation included the removal of billboards when the area redeveloped. Currently, a residential development is being proposed for the area between Highway 7 and Walker Street west of Louisiana (Mill City Plywood site). The redevelopment plan for this site includes text requiring the removal of a billboard when this site redevelops. The billboard is located on a separate property that is owned by a billboard company, and is not included in the current proposal being made by MSP Real Estate, Inc. The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment will clarify the conditions that would require the removal of the billboard, requiring removal only when the actual billboard parcel is involved in the redevelopment project. The Planning Commission, although in favor of a policy for removing billboards, recommended approval of the subject amendments on December 15, 1999. Reference Comprehensive Plan Text: Page P-14 “Mill City Site” Proposed Change: Mill City Site Area Between Highway 7 and Walker Street West of Louisiana Avenue *Remove Billboard with Redevelopment of billboard property. Reference Comprehensive Plan Text: Page U-64 Specific Development Guidelines: 26 Proposed Change: Redevelopment shall occur according to Chapter P and Chapter R. Elimination of billboards is a requirement of any redevelopment. Redevelopment of any parcel containing a billboard will require its removal. Site Map: H i g h w a y 7 Louisiana AvenueWalker St. # Subject Billboard Mill City Plywood site 27 Analysis: The Comprehensive Plan is an adopted statement of City policy concerning development and redevelopment. The Plan recognizes that changing dynamics may provide a basis for reconsideration of some elements of the Plan. What has changed since its adoption that would warrant this particular amendment to it? One purpose of the redevelopment chapter of the Comprehensive Plan is to incorporate a redevelopment plan for each established redevelopment area of the City. In the case of the Highway 7/Louisiana area, the redevelopment plan was the result of the work of a citizen task force working with a planning consultant. The redevelopment goals included both land use and development guidelines for that whole area. The task force recommendations have resulted in the redesignation of land uses on many individual properties in that area. These changes have already resulted in several zoning map amendments as well. The development guidelines recommended by the task force have also been incorporated directly into the Comprehensive Plan. The task force made its recommendations without benefit of information related to actual redevelopment costs associated with any project in the area or the actual costs of eliminating billboards. The Mill City Plywood site already has serious development obstacles including pollution, organic soils, drainage and floodplain issues. These require significant City participation to finance the project. Adding additional costs for the purchase of the billboard site would have serious implications for financing the project. The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment would eliminate the requirement to remove the billboard unless the actual billboard site was included as part of the redevelopment parcel. What long term impact will this amendment have on the eventual elimination of the billboard? The subject billboard is located on a 0.52 acre parcel between Highway 7, the north frontage road of Highway 7, and the Mill City Plywood property (see map on page 1 of this report). If the billboard property is not included as part of the current redevelopment project, future redevelopment of the billboard site as a stand along project is unlikely. The likelihood of removing the billboard at some future date would probably hinge on some future widening of Highway 7. Is This Policy Consistent with other Comprehensive Plan policies? An implementation strategy set forth in Chapter R, Livable Communities requires an aggressive program to eliminate billboards as a means to achieving the goal of providing an attractive public realm and community image. The proposed amendments will not eliminate this goal, but will not require the purchase of a parcel containing a billboard if that property is not proposed as part of a redevelopment project. 28 What are the procedural requirements for Comprehensive Plan text amendments? The Zoning Ordinance provides instructions for how the Comprehensive Plan can be legally amended. Initiation of any amendment must be initiated by: 1. A petition of the owner or owners of the actual property, the guiding of which is proposed to be changed. 2. A recommendation of the Planning Commission. 3. Action by the City Council 4. A recommendation of the Community Development Director. This particular request is a recommendation of the Community Development Director. The Comprehensive Plan amendment also requires a public hearing at the Planning Commission and at the City Council. The amendment also requires approval by the Metropolitan Council. Attachments: Resolution Summary Resolution Prepared By: Judie Erickson, Planning Coordinator Approved By: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 29 RESOLUTION NO. 00-001 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364 MILL CITY PLYWOOD SITE AND BILLBOARD SITE 7301 WALKER STREET WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 was adopted by the City Council on May 17, 1999 (effective September 1, 1999) and provides the following: 1. An official statement serving as the basic guide in making land use, transportation and community facilities and service decisions affecting the City. 2. A framework for policies and actions leading to the improvement of the physical, financial, and social environment of the City, thereby providing a good place to live and work and a setting conducive for new development. 3. A promotion of the public interest in establishing a more functional, healthful, interesting, and efficient community by serving the interests of the community at large rather than the interests of individual or special groups within the community if their interests are at variance with the public interest. 4. An effective framework for direction and coordination of activities affecting the development and preservation of the community. 5. Treatment of the entire community as one ecosystem and to inject long range considerations into determinations affecting short-range action, and WHEREAS, the use of such Comprehensive Plan will insure a safer, more pleasant, and more economical environment for residential, commercial, industrial, and public activities and will promote the public health, safety, and general welfare, and WHEREAS, said Plan will prepare the community for anticipated desirable change, thereby bringing about significant savings in both private and public expenditures, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan has taken due cognizance of the planning activities of adjacent units of government, and WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan is to be periodically reviewed by the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park and amendments made, if justified according to procedures, rules, and laws, and provided such amendments would provide a positive result and are consistent with other provisions in the Comprehensive Plan, and 30 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of St. Louis Park recommended adoption of an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan 2000-2020 on December 15, 1999, based on statutes, the Metropolitan Regional Blueprint, extensive research and analyses involving the interests of citizens and public agencies; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of St. Louis Park that the Comprehensive Plan, as previously adopted by the Planning Commission and City Council, is hereby amended as follows: Chapter P: (Page P-14 “Mill City Site”) Area Between Highway 7 and Walker Street West of Louisiana Avenue * Remove Billboard with Redevelopment of billboard property Chapter U (Page U-64 Specific Development Guidelines) Redevelopment shall occur according to Chapter P and Chapter R. Redevelopment of any parcel containing a billboard will require its removal. Adopted by the City Council January 3, 2000 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council Reviewed for Administration: City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 99-33-CP/N/res/ord 31 SUMMARY RESOLUTION NO. 00-001 A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2000 TO THE YEAR 2020 FOR THE CITY OF ST. LOUIS PARK UNDER MINNESOTA STATUTES 462.351 TO 462.364 MILL CITY PLYWOOD SITE AND BILLBOARD SITE 7301 WALKER STREET This resolution amends Chapters P and U as follows: Chapter P: (Page P-14 “Mill City Site”) Area Between Highway 7 and Walker Street West of Louisiana Avenue * Remove Billboard with Redevelopment of billboard property Chapter U (Page U-64 Specific Development Guidelines) Redevelopment shall occur according to Chapter P and Chapter R. Redevelopment of any parcel containing a billboard will require its removal. This resolution shall take effect upon its publication. Adopted by the City Council January 3, 2000 Contingent upon approval of the Metropolitan Council Jeffrey W. Jacobs /s/ Mayor A copy of the full text of this resolution is available for inspection with the City Clerk. Published in St. Louis Park Sailor: January 12, 2000 32 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item # 8a Meeting of January 3, 2000 8a. Election of Mayor Pro-tem State Statute section 412.121 requires that Council choose each year an acting Mayor from the Council members Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolution appointing a Mayor Pro-tem Background: Minnesota State Statute section 412.121 states that at the first meeting of each year the Council shall choose an acting Mayor from the Council members. The acting Mayor shall perform the duties of Mayor during the disability or absence of the Mayor from the City or, in case of vacancy in the office of Mayor, until a successor has been appointed and qualifies. Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Cynthia D. Larsen, City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 33 RESOLUTION NO. 00-002 A RESOLUTION APPOINTING RON LATZ TO THE OFFICE OF MAYOR PRO-TEM WHEREAS, Minnesota State Statute Section 412.121 requires cities to choose each year an acting Mayor from the Council members; and WHEREAS, the acting Mayor shall perform the duties of Mayor during the disability or absence of the Mayor from the City or, in case of vacancy in the office of Mayor until a successor has been appointed and qualifies; and WHEREAS, the Council has carefully reviewed the qualifications of all Council members and has considered the desires of the residents and the welfare of the City as a whole, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the St. Louis Park City Council that Ron Latz is hereby appointed Mayor Pro-tem of the City of St. Louis Park and shall serve in that capacity until a duly elected successor assumes the office at the first regular City Council meeting of the year 2002. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 3, 2000 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 34 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item # 8b Meeting of January 3, 2000 8b. Resolution Authorizing Criminal History Background Investigations of Applicants for Certain Licenses Issued by the City This action authorizes the City Manager to identify licenses which require a criminal background investigation prior to issuance and authorizes the Police Department to retrieve and review data maintained in the criminal justice information system computers. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt the resolution authorizing criminal history background investigations of applicants for certain licenses issued by the City. Background: City staff has recently been informed that the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA) requires authorization by the City Council for use of the Criminal Justice Information Computer System. The Police Department has indicated that the methods currently used for investigation of applicants for premises permits, liquor licenses, pawn shop licenses, etc. are not adequate. They feel that use of the BCA system will provide greater security for issuance of licenses in those areas where potential for illegal activity exists. BCA Requirements: In addition to Council authorization, the BCA requires that: • The City Manager identify the types of licenses where criminal history investigations are warranted; • The Police Department be the authorized body to conduct those investigations; • The license application include an informed consent clause executed by the applicant. • Investigations are conducted consistently on all persons applying for identified license types. Per current city ordinance, many license types (taxi driver, massage, etc.) require background investigations. These investigations will continue to be done using current methods. At this time, the City Manager is recommending that more extensive background checks using the BCA system be done for premises permit and liquor license applications only. Lt. Mark Ortner will be working with representatives of the BCA and other regulatory agencies in the near future to develop a recommendation that may include other license types. 35 Impact on Recodification Project: Staff is working on revisions to licensing requirements contained in the St. Louis Park Ordinance Code which are expected to be brought to council for discussion in the near future. It will be proposed that a section authorizing BCA checks as outlined in this resolution be included in the “licensing in general” provisions of the code. Until such time as the new code is adopted (1st draft expected in January of 2000) this resolution will suffice to provide that authorization. Attachments: Resolution Prepared by: Cynthia D. Larsen, City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 36 RESOLUTION NO. 00-003 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CRIMINAL HISTORY BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS OF APPLICANTS FOR CERTAIN LICENSES ISSUED BY THE CITY WHEREAS, it is the purpose and intent of the St. Louis Park City Council to provide for the public health, safety, and welfare of City residents by providing a system at the local level for criminal history background investigations of all applicants for certain licenses as identified by the City Manager. WHEREAS, the City may obtain information needed to conduct said investigation on a city-approved license application which shall also include an Informed Consent/Waiver Form executed by the prospective licensee; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park hereby authorizes the St. Louis Park Police Department to perform criminal history background investigations on applicants for those licenses identified by the City Manager by retrieving and reviewing data maintained in the criminal justice information system computers. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 3, 2000 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 37 City Of St. Louis Park Council Agenda Item # 8c Meeting of January 3, 2000 8c. Approval of Encroachment Agreement for Private use of Dart Avenue Authorization to execute Encroachment Agreement between the City and Paul and Mary Anderson for construction of private driveway on undeveloped Dart Avenue. Recommended Action: Motion to approve the attached resolution authorizing execution of Encroachment Agreement. Background: Paul and Mary Anderson have purchased vacant property, which abuts Dart Avenue right of way south of Morningside Road. Dart Avenue is platted as street right of way and lies south of Morningside Road and west of Wooddale Avenue. The Andersons plan on constructing a single family home on their property and requested the City give them permission to construct a private driveway on the Dart Avenue right of way. Since Dart Avenue would serve no other properties it would not be economical for either the Andersons or the City to construct a public road. In response to the Anderson’s request to construct a private driveway on Dart Avenue right of way, staff and the City Attorney have developed an Encroachment Agreement. The Agreement permits the Anderson’s to construct a private driveway and their utility services on Dart Avenue right of way. In return, they agree to indemnify and hold the City harmless from all claims arising from their encroachment and they are solely responsible for its maintenance and upkeep. The City may terminate the Agreement only upon construction of an improved public road, which will provide physical access to their property. Staff recommends that the Council authorize execution of this Agreement with Paul and Mary Anderson. Attachments: Map Resolution Prepared by: Carlton Moore/Mike Rardin, Public Works Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 38 RESOLUTION NO. 00-004 RESOLUTION APPROVING ENCROACHMENT AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PRIVATE DRIVEWAY WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of St. Louis Park, wishes to enter into a non- exclusive encroachment agreement with Paul and Mary Anderson for the use of constructing a private driveway on the Dart Avenue right of way; and WHEREAS, Public Works has negotiated an encroachment agreement with terms acceptable to the City Council; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Mayor and City Manager are hereby authorized to enter into an encroachment agreement with Paul and Mary Anderson for the construction of private driveway and utilities on undeveloped Dart Avenue. Attest: Adopted by the City Council January 3, 2000 City Clerk Mayor Reviewed for Administration: City Manager 39 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item # 8d* Meeting of January 3, 2000 *8d. Designate St. Louis Park Sun-Sailor as Official Newspaper for 2000 Minnesota Statutes and the City Charter require that a legal newspaper of general circulation be designated for publication of the City’s official proceedings and notices. Recommended Action: Motion to adopt resolution designating the St. Louis Park Sun- Sailor as the City’s Official Newspaper for 2000 Background: MS 331A.02 and Charter Section 3.07 require that a legal newspaper of general circulation be designated for publication of the City’s official proceedings and notices and such other matters and measures as are required by law and City Charter. Basis of Recommendation: 1. The paper is delivered to nearly all residences in the City, thereby providing city-wide coverage of legal notices and other city government issues to residents. 2. The paper has served well as the official newspaper for many years. 3. The paper has expressed a desire to continue to provide this service. 4. The cost for legal publications is reasonable. Attachment: Resolution Letter from Frank Chilinski, Publisher Prepared by: Cynthia D. Larsen, City Clerk Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager 40 RESOLUTION NO. 00-005 A RESOLUTION DESIGNATING AN OFFICIAL ST. LOUIS PARK NEWSPAPER FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2000 WHEREAS, MS 331A.02 and Charter Section 3.07 require that a legal newspaper of general circulation be designated for publication of the City’s official proceedings and notices and such other matters and measures as are required by law and City Charter; and WHEREAS, the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor is a duly qualified medium of legal publication; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the St. Louis Park City Council hereby designates the St. Louis Park Sun Sailor as the City’s Official Newspaper for Calendar Year 2000. Reviewed for Administration: Adopted by the City Council January 3, 2000 City Manager Mayor Attest: City Clerk 41 Item # 9a* OFFICIAL MINUTES ST. LOUIS PARK CABLE TV ADVISORY COMMISSION OCTOBER 7, 1999 --7:00 P.M. ST. LOUIS PARK CITY HALL FIRST FLOOR COMMUNITY ROOM MEMBERS PRESENT: Bruce Browning, Rick Dworsky, Dale Hartman, John Herbert, Ken Huiras, and Robert Jacobson MEMBERS ABSENT: Mary Jean Overend STAFF PRESENT: Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator; John McHugh, Community TV Coordinator; and Shirley Olson, Recording Secretary 1. Call to Order - Roll Call Chair Huiras called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. 2. Roll Call: All current members of the Commission except Mary Jean Overend were present. New Commissioner (School District appointee) John Herbert was in attendance and welcomed. 3. Approval of Minutes: Bruce Browning asked that the reference to home entertainment systems in section 4 be struck, since it was handled informally on the Paragon tour. Ken Huiras asked that the last sentence of paragraph 6, section 7. A. be moved up to the first sentence to more clearly answer the question asked in the previous paragraph by Dale Hartman. It was moved by Bruce Browning, seconded by Robert Jacobson, to approve the minutes of August 12, 1999 meeting of the Cable TV Advisory Commission with these amendments. Motion carried unanimously. 4. Adoption of Agenda: Chair Huiras recommended that agenda be adopted. The Commission concurred. 5. Old Business A. Review of School District Report and School District funding for 2000 The Commission reviewed a letter and purchasing schedule plan from Charles E. Fiss, the School District’s Video Technician. 42 Bruce Browning asked if the School District was expecting to replace all of the designated equipment with franchise funds. He believed it was an aggressive equipment list for the funds currently available. Reg Dunlap said it probably was the School District’s intention to use franchise funds to purchase all the equipment, based on their presentation earlier this year. Robert Jacobson questioned what type of equipment was necessary for the purpose of teaching. He questioned if VHS camcorders were obsolete and if additional tripods for camcorders were necessary. He believed the School District’s intentions needed to be clarified. Bruce Browning questioned if the referendum was passed, what amount could go for this equipment list. He recommended that the Commission defer making a decision until the referendum had been passed and specifics of desired equipment and usage were known. Reg Dunlap suggested that the Commission make a recommendation at this time since the Commission had not made a decision about increasing the School District’s $25,000 grant. Ken Huiras recalled already approving a grant of $25,000 for 1999. Reg Dunlap stated he would research if this was approved. It was moved by John Herbert, seconded by Rick Dworsky, to approve a $25,000 operating grant for 1999 to the School District, unless after staff research this amount has already been approved. The motion passed unanimously. Rick Dworsky requested that the School District provide a report with a list of equipment that was purchased with the $7,500 franchise fees. Staff will request the list from the District. Bob Jacobson recommended that a complete inventory list which included an estimated life and replacement schedule be included in report so that the Commission could consider increasing the grant next year. It was the consensus of the Commission that the current equipment list had missing information, including the status of current equipment and how any replaced equipment could be shared in some way with non public schools. The Commission directed Staff to request a report from the Charlie Fiss, Video Technician. 6. New Business B. Consider MACTA lobbying contribution regarding Senator Kelley bill Reg Dunlap presented an update on the proposed legislation that would eliminate local control over cable franchises and fees, and a letter requesting $5,000 for a lobbyist to protect the interests of cities from Cor Wilson, Chair of the Minnesota Association of Community 43 Telecommunications Association (MACTA) Legislative Committee. Reg Dunlap said that Senator Kelley was considered an expert on telecommunications in the Minnesota Legislature, but had a more limited knowledge of cable TV, and explained how this legislation would threaten St. Louis Park’s local authority and control of franchise fees. The Commission discussed the impact of this proposed legislation on the residents of St. Louis Park and the need of the City to adopt a position to protect the community. Bruce Browning said that the City could not afford to risk the franchise fees as currently collected. It was moved by Bruce Browning, seconded by Robert Jacobson, to recommend that the City Council approve a resolution approving an amount of $5,000 to be used by Spano & Janecek to provide legislative services as addressed by MACTA to respond to proposed legislation by Senator Kelley. The motion passed unanimously. C. Discuss Annual Commission Report to Council and 2000 Work Plan Reg Dunlap indicated that a 1999 annual Commission report has not yet been completed, but would be at the request of the Commission. The Commission discussed and recommended that the following topics be added to the 2000 Work Plan: • Paragon Cable franchise agreement & updates on Council action • Roadrunner (Paragon high speed Internet Access) • Cable program listing enhancements - Day/week at a glance (after upgrade to 750 MHz) • High Definition TV & Must Carry rules • Needs Assessment Update 7. Reports - None 8. Communications from the Chair - None 9. Communications from City Staff Reg Dunlap, Civic TV Coordinator indicated that he did not attend the recent NATOA conference because of the need to work on the Council Chambers remodeling. Reg Dunlap indicated that there had been a procedural problem with the name change to the Commission and presented options for the Commission. It was the consensus of the Commission to wait until about March, 2000 to complete the procedure for the name change when the City Clerk’s office recommends City Ordinance Recodification. Reg Dunlap asked if the Commission had any changes to updated roster. The Commission made no changes. 44 Reg Dunlap presented a brief update of City Council Study Session of September 27, 1999 with the Paragon representatives presenting a cable upgrade overview and future services. He indicated that many concerns and questions were raised by the Council, and staff was directed to have the City Attorney review the franchise language pertaining to the continual upgrade of the system. Reg Dunlap indicated that the Commission was not being asked to take any action at this time. Reg Dunlap briefly reviewed a Cable Television Rate Survey conducted by the City of Apple Valley and noted that St. Louis Park compared favorably on the cost per channel and number of channels. Bruce Browning recommended that the Commission invite a Telecommunication futurist to a Commission meeting to discuss both the regulatory aspects of cable and technical application for the future. Reg Dunlap stated he would research this possibility. Reg Dunlap invited Commissioners on a tour of the newly renovated Council Chambers. 10. Adjournment With no other business to come before the Commission, it was moved by Bruce Browning, seconded by Rick Dworsky to adjourn at 8:55 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Shirley Olson Recording Secretary ATTEST: Reg Dunlap Civic TV Coordinator City of St. Louis Park 45 Item # 9b* PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY COMMISSION Minutes of Wednesday, October 13, 1999 Wolfe Park Pavilion MEMBERS PRESENT: Felt, Wright, Stephansen, Chubb, Davidman, Tomoson, Otteson, Norgaard MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Walsh, Voelker, Vaughan 1. CALL TO ORDER - Meeting was called to order by Ms. Felt at 7:07 p.m. 2. ADJUSTMENTS TO THE AGENDA – Addition to New Business - welcome new Commission member, James Norgaard. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 15, 1999 - Motion to approve by Ms. Wright, seconded by Mr. Chubb. Motion passed 8-0. 4. NEW BUSINESS A) Welcome New Commission Member, James Norgaard: Ms. Felt, along with the Commission, welcomed Mr. James Norgaard to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission as a City appointee. B) Webster Park Fence Request: Ms. Walsh informed the Commission of a resident request for the installation of a guardrail by the play structure at Webster Park for children’s safety. This park property is leased, free of charge, from MnDOT but they will not install a guardrail due to snowplowing issues on the ramp. MnDOT wants the City to install a fence between the park and the off-ramp. An estimated cost is yet to be determined. The Commission inquired about the play structure at Grove’s Academy. Ms. Walsh indicated the public is welcome to use that play structure but it is not a City park. The City will replace the structure in Webster Park when needed, as there are no other parks in that area. The Commission suggested meeting, informally, with the neighborhood the beginning of 2000 and continue to inform the Council of progress. C) Amphitheater Proposed Uses: Ms. Walsh advised the funding for the Wolfe Park Amphitheater is $315,000 from the Legislature in 1998 and $90,000 which is part of the park construction. This gives the total project a budget of $405,000. Initially the design stage was delayed as they were waiting for the roadway to be designed but they can no longer wait. The Commission reviewed two potential sketches of the amphitheater along with pictures of amphitheaters in other Cities. The sketches included lighting throughout the park and amphitheater, and a grass seating area. The Commission indicated they were 46 against concrete floors (use rubber) but were informed concrete may be better for sound. Ms. Walsh asked the Commission what types of programs they would like to see. The Commission suggested the following: summer concerts (or split with Oak Hill Park), summer theater, and art group ideas. Ms. Walsh suggested the Commission come back in November with ideas and limitations. D) Future Topics: Ms. Walsh asked the Commission for future agenda items. The Commission responded with the following: Williston Center field trip, golf fundraiser, ice/hockey rink usage in coordination with neighborhood, and park master plan. Staff will update the master plan and distribute to the Commission for their 2000 Work Plan. Ms. Walsh advised staff will be working on a Parks and Recreation brochure which can include a note advising the public that if rinks are not used, they may be removed. 5. OLD BUSINESS A) Off-Leash Pet Area: Ms. Voelker distributed Hennepin Parks brochure and advised no other cities in the area have Off-Leash areas. The Commission will be informed as new information arises. 6. COMMUNICATIONS A) Chair - None B) Commissioners: The Commission commended Ms. Tomoson on her article in the Sun-Sailor on Children First – Responsibility Important Asset. Mr. Davidman shared his experience of a police ride-along with a Minneapolis Police Officer and suggested it to anyone who has the opportunity. The Commission briefly discussed the moving of the ‘beehive’ grills from along Hwy 100. Suggested locations included the Depot, Wolfe Park, and a Historical Society chosen site. Ms. Walsh will set up a neighborhood meeting and advise Commission. C) Program Report by Jim Vaughan: Mr. Vaughan informed the Commission of the following updates from the Forestry department: Thirty trees were transplanted in Wolfe Park. They saved as many as they could and have a nice variety. Dutch Elm disease is up this year due to storms and mild winters. Mr. Vaughan briefly explained the disease and the program the City offers. In this program, the City helps pay the cost (40% residential/60%boulevard trees) of injection. The average cost to residents is $120. Oak wilt also up this year but this is not as much of a concern as dutch elm disease. The department will be moving into stump removal this fall and spring. Then, when the snow falls, they will begin pruning the trees in the City. Also, the department is getting a new bucket truck which will help in rotational trimming. Resident’s can do the trimming themselves if they use a licensed trimming company (the City has a list). They put beetles in some parks to eliminate purple loose strife. It takes approximately 2-3 years to eliminate it depending on the size of the problem. Benches were installed at Parkview, Aquila, and 28th and Virginia. Mr. Vaughan explained the Twin City Tree Trust 47 program and advised they’ve worked with the City for 15 years (wood chipping and working on retaining walls). Also, they had a ‘criminal crew’ employed in the summer who did wonderful work. Mr. Vaughan also worked with neighborhood associations such as Fern Hill, Ainsworth, Lake Forest, Browndale, Bronx, and Parkview on various projects. Some of these projects were funded through neighborhood revitalization grants which Ms. Walsh briefly explained. The Commission inquired on the review committee and if a commission member should be involved. Staff will obtain more information and inform the Commission. Mr. Vaughan briefly explained other aspects the Forestry Division does including trail overlays, installation of hockey boards, aerating fields, installing sun shelters, gardens and landscaping along with the regular maintenance of ballfields, mowing, etc. D) Director’s Report: Ms. Walsh advised of the plans for improvements and dedication in 2000 for Blackstone Park. 7. ADJOURNMENT - Motion to adjourn the meeting was made by Mr. Davidman and seconded by Mr. Otteson. Motion passed 8-0. Meeting was adjourned at 8:39 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, Stacy M. Voelker Department Secretary 48 Item #9c* December 23, 1999 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT A & T UPHOLSTERY EQUIPMENT MTCE 95.00 ADVANTAGE PAPER GENERAL SUPPLIES 802.48 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 68.08 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR TELEPHONE 1,038.29 ALL FIRE TEST INC BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 101.74 ALLIANCE MECHANICAL BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 476.06 ALLIANCE MECHANICAL BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 995.00 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHI PS 37.00 AMERICAN WATER WORKS GENERAL SUPPLIES 466.00 APPLE PRINTING AND SECRETARIAL PRINTING AND PLUBLISHING 407.90 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 43.36 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 65.79 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 65.78 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 105.61 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 24.10 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 46.68 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 46.68 ASI SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHI PS 170.00 ASI SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHI PS 170.00 ASI SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHI PS 170.00 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 505.92 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 87.00 AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 350.64 BARNES, ROBERT GENERAL SUPPLIES 256.01 BERTELSON OFFICE PROD BLDG/STRUCTURE 39.70 BETH EL SYNAGOGUE AIR POLUTION 60.00 BITUMINOUS ROADWAYS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SERV 3,138.07 BIZCOM EQUIP PARTS 67.03 BOBS PERSONAL COFFICE SERV GENERAL SUPPLIES 376.37 BRO TEX GENERAL SUPPLIES 547.84 BROADWAY RENTAL EQUIP RENTAL (1.66) CAMPBELL KNUTSON PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 9,427.03 CARTEGAPH EQUIPMENT MTCE 495.00 CARTRIDGE CARE EQUIPMENT MTCE 2,654.67 CENTER FOR ENERGY & ENV OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 3,670.48 CHENEY SIGNS OFFICE SUPPLIES 25.73 CLARKLIFT OF MINNESOTA EQUIPM ENT PARTS 148.90 COLLINS COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE 252.00 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS CEDIT (938.10) CRILEY,KATHI MEETING EXPENSE 171.91 CRYSTEEL TRUCK EQUIP EQUIP PARTS 408.52 49 DELEGARD TOOL CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 133.07 DRENNEN, DONALD GENERAL SUPPLIES 20.01 E & S ELECTRONICS EQUIPMENT MTCE 89.49 EGAN MCKAY ELETRICAL CONT PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 213.75 EHLERS & ASSOCIATES PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 3,240.00 ELVIN SAFETY GENERAL SUPPLIES 55.53 EMERY'S TREE SERV CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL 3,368.68 ENGINEERING REPRO SYS GENERAL SUPPLIES 92.15 ENSR CONSULTING & ENGINEERING PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 1,100.00 EVERGREEN LAND SERV PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 696.93 EXPERIAN OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 672.97 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS SUPPLIES (15.67) FLEXIBLE PIPE TOOL EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,287.98 FLIKEID, TERRY GENERAL SUPPLIES 229.37 FLOYD TOTAL SECURITY GENERAL SUPPLIES 9.47 G & K SERVI CES CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL 175.82 GALLAGHER & CO REVERSE CREDIT MEMO 2,520.00 GALLAGHER & CO OVERPAID (2,520.00) GENERAL SAFETY SUPPLIES 16.37 GENERAL SAFETY SUPPLIES (30.44) GENUINE PARTS CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 842.87 GOODYEAR BRAD RAGAN TIRE & SERV TIRES 3,453.48 GOPHER STATE ONE-CALL RADIO COMM 371.00 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC BLDG/STRUCTURE 1,517.62 GREAT LAKES WEATHER SERV GENERAL SUPPLIES 590.00 GREAT WEST LIFE & ANNUITY DENTAL INSURANCE 1,311.65 GREENMAN TECHNOLOGIES OF MN CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL 11.20 GUERNSEY, KATHRYN INSPECTION SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00 HALVERSON, LYNDON INSPECTION SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00 HENN CO INFORMATION TECH COMPUTER SERVICE 115.18 HENN CO DEPT OF COMM VARIOUS 13,000.00 HEWLETT -PACKARD CO OFFICE FURNITURE & EQUIP 959.03 HOISINGTON KOEGLER GROUP OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 1,166.56 HOLZ, ANNE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 599.83 HOME DEPOT BLDG/STRUCTURE 21.24 HOME DEPOT GENERAL SUPPLIES 44.64 HOME DEPOT BLDG/STRUCTURE 50.86 HOME HARDWARE GENERAL SUPPLIES 32.32 HUMAN RESOURCE EXECUTIVE SUBCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIP S 89.95 HYDRO SUPPLY CO OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 3,019.95 IIMC SUBCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIP S 170.00 IKON OFFICE SUPPLIES EQUIPMENT MTCE 1,161.68 INACOM EQUIPMENT MTCE 300.00 50 INACOM EQUIPMENT MTCE 2,345.30 INGRAHAM &ASSOC INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 134.85 IOS CAPITAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT 252.41 J H LARSON CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 67.97 JONES, TIM GENERAL SUPPLIES 150.01 KENNEDY & GRAVEN PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 2,861.40 KONICA BUSINESS TECH RENTAL EQUIPMENT 39.41 KOVATCH MOBILE EQUIP EQUIPMENT PARTS 179.73 LAKELAND ENGINEERING EQUIP EQUIPMENT PARTS 100.67 LANDSCRAPE ARCHITECTURE SUBCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIP S 49.00 LATHROP PAINT SUPPLY CO BLDG/STRUCTURE 5.41 LINDSAY-KNOLLWOOD LLC DEPOSIT PAYABLE 13,200.00 LUSE, JOHN SUBCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIP S 180.00 M A C T A PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 5,000.00 M C F O A GENERAL SUPPLIES 25.00 MAIL BOXES ETC GENERAL SUPPLIES 5.86 MAMA-LMC LABOR RELATIONS MEETING EXPENSES 16.00 MANUFACTURING AND TEST CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 25.00 MATERSON PERSONNEL INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 1,953.00 MCDONALD, KRISTEN INSPECTION SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00 MCFOA GENERAL SUPPLIES 25.00 MENARDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 38.28 MERRILL/ALTERNATIVES INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 55.86 METRO COUNCIL ENV CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL 250,008.00 METROCALL TELEPHONE 140.06 MID-AMERICA BUSINESS SYS GENERAL SUPPLIES 179.91 MILLERBERND, DENNIS TRAING/CONFERENCES/SCH OOLS 148.32 MINN DEPT OF FINANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 1,000.00 MINN DEPT OF FINANCE OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 50,000.00 MINNEGASCO HEATING GAS 12,573.79 MINNESOTA GFOA SUBCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIP S 90.00 MN DEPT OF ADMINISTRATION STATE SURCHARGE PAYABLE 1,398.33 MN DRIVER & VEHICLE SERVICES REFUND VEHICLE RENEWALS (46.00) MUNICILITE EQUIPMENT PARTS 23.86 MYERS TIRE SUPPLY CO EQUIPMENT PARTS 103.70 NATL NOTARY ASSOC SUBCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIP S 34.00 NEXTEL RADIO COMM 87.00 NORTHLAND CHEMICAL CORP GENERAL SUPPLIES 63.34 NORTHLAND ELECTRIC SUKPPLY EQUIPMENT PARTS 363.54 NORWEST COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 10,218.30 51 OFFICE DEPOT OFFICE SUPPLIES 186.80 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 965.25 PARTS PLUS EQUIPMENT PARTS 573.16 POMPS TIRE SERVICES EQUIPMENT MTCE 1,167.56 PORTNOY, EUGENE INSPECTION SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00 PRO STAFF OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 816.00 PROGRESSIVE CONSULTING ENG PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 4,233.60 PUBLICORP INC TRAINING/CONFERENCE/SCH OOLS 300.00 QUEST ENG EQUIPMENT PARTS 18.26 QUICKSILVER EXPRESS COURIER EQUIPMENT MTCE 861.18 QUILL CORP OFFICE SUPPLIES 99.45 REID & ASSOCIATES, JOHN E PRINTING & PUBLISHING 49.95 RELIABLE OFFICE SUPPLIES 326.21 RIGID HITCH INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 170.22 SA-AG INC OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 1,533.39 SAFETY KLEEN BUILDING MTCE SERVICES 231.37 SCHWAAB INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 62.03 SEVEN CORNERS ACE HDWE SMALL TOOLS 1,002.88 SHOOP, PAT PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 300.00 SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO BUILDING MTCE SERVICES 372.22 SPS COMPANIES OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 197.27 SRF CONSULTING GROUP PROFESSIONAL SERVICE 780.00 STAT MEDICAL GENERAL SUPPLIES 188.44 STREICHER'S GENERAL SUPPLIES 3,443.27 STRUCK, DONALD CLOTHING ALLOW/REIMBURSEMENT 83.28 SUBURBAN CHEVROLET SUPPLIES 38.25 SUN NEWSPAPER LEGAL NOTICES 938.85 SWEENEY BROS TRACTOR CREDIT MEMO (1,006.45) TARGET/DAYTONS SMALL TOOLS 89.41 THE MOBILE PHONE CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 95.74 THE TAPE CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 454.84 TRACY/TRIPP MOTOR FUELS 8,325.32 TRANSMISSION SHOP INC EQUIPMENT MTCE 27.55 TRANSPORTATION COMPONETS EQUIPMENT PARTS 101.62 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 44.94 US WEST COMMUNICATIONS TELEPHONE 422.22 UNITED RENTALS EQUIPMENTS PARTS 221.31 VAN WATERS & ROGERS GENERAL SUPPLIES 829.26 VANN, DAVE GENERAL SUPPLIES 300.00 VERMEER OF MINNESOTA EQUIPMENT PARTS 1,167.13 VIKING AUTOMATIC SPRINKLER EQUIPMENT PARTS 192.00 W & W GENERATOR REBUILDERS EQUIPMENT MTCE 69.23 52 WALSER FORD EQUIPMENT PARTS 916.85 WHEELER HARDWARE BLDG/STRUCTURE 89.47 WOLFE, STEPHEN MILEAGE/PERSONAL CAR 179.49 ZD JOURNALS SUBCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIP S 99.00 ZIEGLER INC EQUIPMENT PARTS 250.63 ZIP PRINTING OFFICE SUPPLIES 52.19 ZIP SORT OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERV 185.00 - 452,565.10 December 30, 1999 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ADAMS, MARY B GENERAL SUPPLIES 61.79 ALBINSONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 2.00 ALMSTEAD'S SUPERVALU CONCESSION SUPPLIES 2.79 ANDRESEN,MARY INSPECTION-SINGLE/DOUBLE 25.00 ANIMAL HUMANE SOCIETY OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 2,855.00 APACHE GROUP OF MINNESOTA GENERAL SUPPLIES 618.02 ARAMARK UNIFORM CORPORATE ACCT GENERAL SUPPLIES 199.52 ASI SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 170.00 AUTOMATIC SYSTEMS INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 140.00 BATTERIES PLUS GENERAL SUPPLIES 186.33 BRENTS SIGNS GENERAL SUPPLIES 365.30 BROADWAY RENTAL RENTAL EQUIPMENT (1.66) BURNETT, BETH & MORLEY GENERAL SUPPLIES 427.25 CARLSON EQUIPMENT COMPANY GENERAL SUPPLIES 242.82 CENTRAL LOCK & SAFE CO EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 15.00 CIMARRON PRINTING PRINTING & PUBLISHING 13,225.15 CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS GENERAL SUPPLIES (938.10) COPYMED INC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 434.94 CRYSTAL WELDING INC EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 3,927.82 CUSTOM GRAPHIX PRINTING & PUBLISHING 270.33 DALCO CLEANING/WASTE REMOVAL SUPPLY 6,909.59 ELAN FINANCIAL SERVICES GENERAL SUPPLIES 2,469.51 FACTORY MOTOR PARTS COMPANY EQUIPMENT PARTS (15.67) FILTRATION SYSTEMS INC BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 770.21 GALLAGHER & CO OF MN INC, A J WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 0.00 GENERAL SAFETY EQUIPMENT CORP EQUIPMENT PARTS (14.07) GRAINGER INC, W W GENERAL SUPPLIES 353.26 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 2,162.26 GUNNAR ELECTRIC ELECTRICAL 21.50 53 HASLERUD, CARRIE GENERAL SUPPLIES 125.80 HOME DEPOT/GECF GENERAL SUPPLIES 591.30 ICI DULUX PAINT CENTERS BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 73.06 IKON OFFICE SOLUTIONS EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 187.99 IND SCHOOL DIST #283 OFFICE SUPPLIES 1,001.12 INDEPENDENT BLACK DIRT CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 793.08 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 200.00 JONES, MARK UNREALIZED REVENUE 269.72 JOSEPH CATERING MEETING EXPENSE 327.58 JUSTUS LUMBER COMPANY OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 652.47 KAPAK CORPORATION GENERAL SUPPLIES 932.80 KNOX, ELIZABETH M MILEAGE-PERSONAL CAR 95.00 LATHROP PAINT SUPPLY COMPANY BLDG/STRUCTURE SUPPLIES 16.02 LEAGUE OF MN CITIES TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOO LS 490.00 LOFFLER BUSINESS SYSTEMS INC RADIO COMMUNICATIONS 4,747.54 MAKI,DENNIS GENERAL SUPPLIES 100.00 MASTERSON PERSONNEL INC PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 1,425.75 MENARDS GENERAL SUPPLIES 116.57 MERKLEY, SCOTT SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 22.32 METRO AREA MGMT ASSN TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOO LS 32.00 METRO ATHLETIC SUPPLY GENERAL SUPPLIES 633.68 METRO WATER CONDITIONING INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,019.84 METROCALL TELEPHONE 202.86 MIDWEST BADGE & NOVELTY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 217.45 MILLER, CAROL CONCESSION SUPPLIES 182.38 MINN CHIEFS POLICE ASSOCIATION SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 180.00 MINN CO ATTORNEYS ASSOCIATION OFFICE SUPPLIES 34.70 MINNETONKA ATHLETIC ASSOC OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 449.50 MINUTEMAN PRESS PRINTING & PUBLISHING 977.00 MN DRIVER & VEHICLE SVCS EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT CHARGE (46.00) MN RUBBER ADULT ATHLETIC/LEAGUES - EXEMPT 330.00 NATIONAL CAMERA EXCHANGE & VID GENERAL SUPPLIES 127.75 NEWMECH CO INC BUILDING MTCE SERVICE 793.50 NORTH MEMORIAL MEDICAL CENTER TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOO LS 100.00 NORTHLAND ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO GENERAL SUPPLIES 43.69 NSP CO ELECTRIC SERVICE 328.37 NYSTROM PUBLISHING PRINTING & PUBLISHING 4,354.88 OESTREICH, MARK CONCESSION SUPPLIES 186.48 PAGE ELECTRICAL CONTRACTING IN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 292.50 PARK NICOLLET MEDICAL CENTER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES 961.50 PARKER, JON TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOO LS 624.84 54 PECCHIA, TOM GENERAL SUPPLIES 140.00 PENNEY CO INC, WH GENERAL SUPPLIES 129.84 PEPSI-COLA COMPANY CONCESSION SUPPLIES 283.82 PIRES, CLINTON E GENERAL SUPPLIES 1,087.74 PLEAA SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 50.00 PRIMO DELI & PIZZERIA MEETING EXPENSE 44.30 PRO STAFF OTHER CONTRACTUAL SERVICES 714.00 RANDY'S SANITATION INC GARBAGE/REFUSE SERVICE 3,260.45 SAM'S CLUB CONCESSION SUPPLIES 21.91 SCHWAAB INC GENERAL SUPPLIES 85.25 SIMPLEX TIME RECORDER CO LANDSCAPING SERVICE 192.75 ST CLOUD STATE UNIVERSITY TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOO LS 1,025.00 STAR TRIBUNE SUBSCRIPTIONS/MEMBERSHIPS 111.80 SUBURBAN PROPANE MOTOR FUELS 183.80 SWEENEY BROS TRACTOR EQUIPMENT PARTS (1,006.45) TARGET/DAYTONS GENERAL SUPPLIES 29.88 TRUCK UTILITIES MFG CO MACHINERY & AUTO EQUIPMENT 58,170.30 U S WEST INTERPRISE TELEPHONE 722.09 UNITED PAYPHONE NETWORK EQUIPMENT MTCE SERVICE 137.50 UNITED ROTARY BRUSH CORP EQUIPMENT PARTS 5,644.98 VIEAU, DURELL GENERAL SUPPLIES 114.39 VIKING COUNCIL JUVENILE DIV PR DEPOSITS PAYABLE 4,671.65 VIKING INDUSTRIAL CENTER SMALL TOOLS 12.30 WARDS NATURAL SCIENCE ESTAB GENERAL SUPPLIES 33.76 WATSON CO INC CONCESSION SUPPLIES 4,887.61 WESTWOOD HILLS NATURE CTR EQUIPMENT PARTS 116.94 WILLIAMS, TIM TRAINING/CONFERENCES/SCHOO LS 177.50 WM H MC COY PETROLEUM FUELS OTHER IMPROVEMENT SUPPLIES 14.38 ZIP PRINTING GENERAL SUPPLIES 179.55 140,317.97 December 30, 1999 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT GREAT WEST LIFE & ANNUITY INS DENTAL INSURANCE 2,911.90 2,911.90 December 30, 1999 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT AETNA LIFE INSURANCE & ANNUITY DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 642.57 CEDAR TRAILS WEST HOMEOWNERS A DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 243.52 COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 203.00 I.U.O.E. LOCAL NO 49 DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,445.65 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-401 DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 245.98 ICMA RETIREMENT TRUST-457 DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 11,525.65 LAW ENFORCEMENT LABOR DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,749.00 55 SERVICES MINN COMM OF REVENUE SEASON SKATING TICKETS 12,514.00 MINN DEPT OF REVENUE MOTOR FUELS 135.93 MN CHILD SUPPORT PAYMENT CENTE DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 3,268.95 ORCHARD TRUST COMPANY DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 4,974.00 PARK NATIONAL BANK DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 99,031.86 PERA DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 44,066.20 PERA FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT ASSO DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 2,726.15 PERA POLICE RETIREMENT ASSOC DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 5,882.62 SLP ASSOC OF FIREFIGHTERS- LOCA DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 1,005.04 SLP CREDIT UNION DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 27,509.96 USCM / MIDWEST DEDUCTIONS PAYABLE 6,529.46 223,699.54 December 30, 1999 VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT SEDGEWICK MANAGED CARE WORKERS COMPENSATION INSURANCE 35.00 35.00 56 City of St. Louis Park City Council Agenda Item 11a Meeting of January 3, 2000 11a. Notice to Consider Establishing a Stormwater Utility This report is to initiate the thirty (30) day notification process to consider establishing a Stormwater Utility. Recommended Action: Motion to set a public hearing and first reading for February 7, 2000 of an Ordinance amending Section 9 of the Ordinance Code, establishing a Stormwater Utility. Background: Staff has met with the City Council on three occasions over the past six months to discuss the creation and implementation of a Stormwater Utility. Issues discussed included need; use by other cities; the current and proposed stormwater management program; rate charges; potential revenue; impact to selected businesses and organizations; draft ordinance; grant program; and a public information process. Public Information Overview: The public information process has included articles in the Park Perspective, utility bill stuffers, presentations to the Business Council, and meetings with a business group. The November 4, 1999 Business Council meeting included an overview of the proposed Stormwater Utility and a question/answer session. The overview included the following: • Stormwater utility background information • Resulting sanitary sewer utility impacts • Financial impacts to selected businesses / organizations • Proposed implementation schedule A follow-up meeting with the Business Council is scheduled for February 3, 2000. At the November 4, 1999 Business Council meeting there was some meaningful discussion and an awareness that some of their concerns could not be addressed at the time and that subsequent meetings were needed. This resulted in the creation of a four-business member group to meet with staff to continue to address their concerns. Staff met with the business group four times in November and December. The following is a list of items addressed: 57 1. Which Twin West cities have a stormwater utility? City Yes / No Crystal Yes Edina Yes Golden Valley Yes Hopkins Yes Minnetonka No New Hope Yes Plymouth No 2. Should stormwater ponding areas be included in the acreage charge? The original proposal did include ponds as chargeable acreage, as is the case in most other cities that were reviewed. From a fairness point of view, staff agreed that ponds designed and used exclusively for stormwater retention or treatment purposes. The area below the 100-year flood elevation should be exempt of charges and the chargeable parcel acreage reduced accordingly. It will be the responsibility of the property owner to supply the City with any necessary information required to determine if a parcel or portion of a parcel qualifies as an exception and is eligible for such an acreage adjustment. The adjustment must be approved by the Public Works Director and will become effective at the beginning of the next billing cycle. 3. Where are the existing and proposed stormwater ponding areas and what planning has occurred to date? A map was presented showing the existing and proposed ponding areas. Staff then provided a brief overview of the draft Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan and distributed a Water Resource Management Plan executive summary. 4. Where is Stormwater Utility in the approval process and what information has been presented to the City Council? The Stormwater Utility implementation schedule that was previously presented to the City Council and the Business Council was distributed and discussed. The proposed Stormwater Utility process forthcoming is as follows: • Public input period continues through January 2000 • Public Hearings are to be held in February of 2000 • Utility billing to begin April 2000 (beginning of the 2nd quarter) Copies of past City Council study session reports were distributed and discussed. 5. Should the Stormwater Utility be used to fund Capital Improvement Projects (CIP)? The question raised the fairness issue of having new infrastructure funded by the Stormwater Utility when the existing infrastructure was previously funded through special assessment. 58 Staff research indicates that City funds and special assessments paid the cost of the existing infrastructure. This is not proposed to be changed for new infrastructure in the future. The Stormwater Utility will not be used to pay for infrastructure improvements for new development, it will fund maintenance activities to modify, refurbish, rebuild, and maintain existing infrastructure. The utility will also be used for environmentally mandated water quality projects and education. 6. Is the Residential Equivalency Factor (REF) used to compute the Stormwater Utility cost for commercial property fair and reasonable? This question was raised when comparing the quarterly commercial cost proposed for St. Louis Park with other cities. The general premise of the Stormwater Utility is that the most fair and equitable payment structure is to charge a utility fee that is directly proportional to the volume of the runoff that is generated by each land use. The City of St. Louis Park is using actual annual average runoff to determine the REF for each land use. To determine the runoff, actual daily rainfall data recorded at the Minneapolis/St. Paul Airport from 1980-1989 was used to calculate the annual average runoff for each type of land use within the City. Some cities base their utility fees on runoff volumes generated buy a specific individual storm event such as a 1-year or 10-year storm event. This approach does not provide as accurate a reflection of how much runoff each land use produces throughout each year. Summary: As a result of these meetings, staff has revised the draft ordinance to exempt stormwater ponds from utility charges, which will recognize some of their efforts and associated costs. Upon completion of the meetings, the business group members were satisfied with the fairness of the proposed utility. However, some concern still existed over the charges to commercial properties. Are the charges so high as to possibly put St. Louis Park businesses at a competitive disadvantage with those located in other cities? Staff could not answer that question and it may or may not be an issue during the adoption process. Prepared by: Scott Merkley - Public Works Coordinator Reviewed by: Mike Rardin - Public Works Director Approved by: Charles W. Meyer, City Manager