Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-10-2021 City Council Meeting Minutes CITY COUNCIL MEETING Mayor Amáda Márquez Simula Councilmembers John Murzyn, Jr. Connie Buesgens Nick Novitsky Kt Jacobs City Manager Kelli Bourgeois City Hall—Council Chambers, 590 40th Ave NE Monday, May 10, 2021 7:00 PM MINUTES CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Mayor Márquez Simula called the meeting to order at 7:07 pm. Present: Mayor Márquez Simula; Councilmember Buesgens; Councilmember Jacobs; Councilmember Murzyn, Jr.; Councilmember Novitsky Also Present: Sarah Arneson; Lenny Austin, Chief of Police; Kelli Bourgeois, City Manager; Randy Boyum; Kyle Brasser; Aaron Chirpich, Community Development Director; Adam Davis; Eric Glidden; Naomi Glidden; John Haluska; Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director; Kelly Harrison; Minerva Hark, City Planner; Michelle Ives; Rachel James; Benjamin Johansen; Kelsey Johansen; Joseph Kloiber, Finance Director; Valerie Larsen; Patrick McVary; Stacy McVary; Andy Newton; Jason Norden; Monika Schachern; Sarah Tholen; Nicole Tingley, City Clerk; Amy Waller PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE MISSION STATEMENT Our mission is to provide the highest quality public services. Services will be provided in a fair, respectful and professional manner that effectively addresses changing citizen and community needs in a fiscally- responsible and customer-friendly manner. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Mayor Márquez Simula announced the addition of “Native American Land Acknowledgement” under “Proclamations, Presentations, Recognition, Announcements, Guests” to the agenda. Motion by Councilmember Buesgens, seconded by Councilmember Jacobs, to approve the Consent Agenda as amended. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. PROCLAMATIONS, PRESENTATIONS, RECOGNITION, ANNOUNCEMENTS, GUESTS A. Native American Land Acknowledgement Mayor Márquez Simula provided background information regarding the Native American Land Acknowledgement statement, the first of its kind in the City which will be an ongoing work in progress. “We collectively acknowledge that we are holding this meeting on the ancestral and contemporary lands of the Dakota, Ho-Chunk and Anishinaabe peoples. When settlers arrived here to expand the territory of the American colonial project, these indigenous nations were the rightful inhabitants and stewards of the land and they remain so to this day. The main treaty between the United States and the Dakota people, the Treaty of the City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 2 Traverse des Sioux, was signed in 1851. More than 40 treaties were signed with the Anishinaabe, culminating with the Mille Lacs Treaty in 1865. While our indigenous neighbors have recognized and respected these treaties as binding international law for over 150 years, most of these treaties were not honored by the United States government or the State of Minnesota. Instead, the land we now occupy was taken from these sovereign nations through federal and state policies and forced removal. As citizens and residents of this land, we affirm the responsibility of the United States and the State of Minnesota to respect and uphold the rights of the Dakota, Anishinaabe and Ho-Chunk nations. This sovereignty includes the right to protect native water and land resources from the encroachment of mining, dumping and pipelines, which all pose a threat to the health and integrity of native land and peoples and by extension to all of us who live in this land. By offering this land acknowledgement, we honor the legacy and the future of indigenous peoples in this place.” She asked residents to share their thoughts regarding the Acknowledgement so that it may be improved upon in the future. The goal is to keep the conversation moving forward and to create an ongoing dialogue between the Native American community and the City. The statement may be read at many City events. Valerie Larsen, Columbia Heights Public Schools American Indian Liaison to the Parent Advisory Committee, accepted the Land Acknowledgement on behalf of the American Indian family and said she was happy and proud to report that 2021 it is the sixth year that the American Indian students in Columbia Heights have had a 100% graduation rate, including six students this year, and invited everyone to attend the pow wow on Saturday, May 22, from noon to 5:00 pm on the football field. B. National Police Week Proclamation Mayor Márquez Simula read the proclamation announcing May 9-15, 2021 as “Police Week” in Columbia Heights to honor the service and sacrifice of all law enforcement officers and, on behalf of the City, thanked the City Police Department. Chief Austin accepted the proclamation certificate. He reported that in 2020 there were 264 federal, state, military, tribal and local law enforcement officer deaths in the line of duty and over the years there have been 258 line-of-duty deaths in Minnesota; the Minnesota Law Enforcement Memorial Association will honor them on a Facebook tribute at 7:00 pm on Saturday, May 15. CONSENT AGENDA Motion by Councilmember Novitsky, seconded by Councilmember Murzyn, Jr., to approve the Consent Agenda as presented. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. 1. Approve April 26, 2021 City Council Meeting Minutes MOTION: Move to approve the minutes of the City Council meeting of April 26, 2021 City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 3 2. Accept October 5, 2020 Traffic Commission Minutes MOTION: Move to accept the minutes of the Traffic Commission meeting of October 5, 2020 3. Accept April 7, 2021 Library Board Minutes MOTION: Move to accept the minutes of the Library Board meeting of April 7, 2021 4. License Agenda MOTION: Move to approve the items as listed on the business license agenda for May 10, 2021 as presented. 5. Review of Bills MOTION: Move that in accordance with Minnesota Statute 412.271, subd. 8 the City Council has reviewed the enclosed list of clams paid by check and by electronic funds transfer in the amount of $717,064.32. PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. Adopt Resolution No. 2021-42, being a Resolution Levying and Adopting the Assessment of One Alley Light, Area No. 677-50 The resolution is for one Xcel Energy HPS protective light (Nightwatch) to be located on the existing pole behind 4226 and 4228 Madison Street. The annual cost would be $12.00 per parcel, though the cost may increase with increases in the electric utility rate. This special assessment would be added to the utility bill prepared and mailed by the City to property owners or occupants on record with the Finance Department. Mayor Márquez Simula opened the public hearing. No one wished to speak. Motion by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Buesgens, to close the public hearing and waive the reading of Resolution No. 2021-42, there being ample copies available to the public. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. Motion by Council Buesgens, seconded by Councilmember Novitsky, to adopt Resolution No. 2021-42, being a Resolution levying and adopting the assessment for an alley light, area no. 677-50. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. 7. Resolution No. 2021-43, a Resolution to Approve a Variance to Construct a Detached Accessory Structure in a Residential Front Yard Located at 3919 Reservoir Boulevard NE Planner Hark explained that Jason Norden has applied for a Variance to allow an accessory structure (detached garage) to be constructed and located within a residential front yard of the property located at 3919 Reservoir Boulevard NE. The existing single-family home on the lot was built five feet from the rear property line, and aerial imagery supports that the structure has been there since at least the year 1938. The development of this lot occurred prior to today’s zoning regulations and does not provide reasonable space for the construction of a standard detached garage behind the principal structure’s front building line. There is an existing substandard garage constructed in the rear of the property that is City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 4 currently being used as storage. Even if this existing structure were to be removed, there would not be adequate space to construct a standard garage in its place. This is an existing condition not caused by the current owner. The proposed garage would conform to all current setback requirements and will be served by the existing driveway accessed from Reservoir Boulevard. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on May 4, 2021 as required by City Ordinance. At the meeting, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the City Council approve the Variance, subject to certain conditions of approval. Staff recommends that the City Council approve Resolution No. 2021-43 as presented. Mayor Márquez Simula opened the public hearing. Jason Nordon, owner of 3919 Reservoir Boulevard NE, said Planner Hark provided a detailed report regarding his request, adding that his home was built in 1920, a year before Columbia Heights was formed. Motion by Councilmember Novitsky, seconded by Councilmember Murzyn, Jr., to close the public hearing and waive the reading of Resolution No. 2021-43, there being ample copies available to the public. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. Motion by Council Novitsky, seconded by Councilmember Murzyn, Jr., to approve Resolution No. 2021-43, approving the Variance for the proposed detached garage to be located at 3919 Reservoir Boulevard NE, subject to the conditions outlined therein. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. 8. First Reading of Ordinance No. 166, an Ordinance Pertaining to the Rezoning of Certain Property Located at 825 41st Avenue NE, from Multiple-Family Residential District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District No. 2021-01 Planner Hark explained that Reuter Walton Development has applied for a Preliminary Plat; Planned Unit Development; and Easement Vacations for a portion of the property located at 825 41st Avenue NE. The property was previously the original home of Columbia Heights High School, constructed in 1926. It later became the Columbia Heights Junior High School in 1961, and then sold to the Northwestern Electronics Institute (NEI) in 1981. It operated as a technical college until 2002. After NEI merged with Dunwoody, the City of Columbia Heights purchased the vacant building and parcel. The building was demolished in 2004, making way for the Public Safety Center, which was constructed in 2009. The portion of the existing lot in which development is proposed served as both the school’s recreational field and parking lot, with approximately 500 parking stalls. Historical aerial imagery even suggests that one or two single-family homes were once present on the site. The current use of the portion of the lot in question is snow storage by the City’s Public Works Department, as well as minimal parking for the neighboring Crest View development. The site is zoned R-4, Multiple Family Residential District. The site is adjacent to the One- and Two-Family Residential District (R-2A) to the north and west, as well as the Multiple Family Residential District to the east (R-4) and the south (R-3). City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 5 The applicant is proposing to subdivide the existing lot into three separate parcels. One parcel will include the existing Public Safety Center. One of the newly created parcels will include a four-story, 62-unit affordable housing building with amenities and subterranean and at-surface parking. The remainder Lot 3 is intended for the potential future relocation and development of SACA Food Shelf. Staff recommends that the City Council set the second reading of Ordinance No. 1666 to Monday, May 24, 2021. Kyle Brasser, Reuter Walton Development representative, provided a brief overview of the development plan’s history and future plans, which will include 108 free parking stalls and possible future site for SACA. Councilmember Jacobs asked for clarification about the number of stalls, which have been identified as 108 stalls with a number of them being compact size. Planner Hark said she believed the number of compact stalls to be 22 but the PUD was updated to include no more than 30 compact stalls. Mayor Márquez Simula opened the public hearing. John Haluska said he was attending also on behalf of his sister, who lives at 4220 Jackson Street. He said his issues had been previously discussed with staff but include storm water runoff and flooding at the site, who would be completely responsible for improving the sewer system, the height variance because a 47-foot building will cause problems for neighboring properties, access to Central Avenue and stoplight installations, lack of green space, no playground areas for residing children, and the development’s transparency to residents. He thinks the best solution is that the City Council delay action on the development and instruct the Planning Development to bring neighborhood residents their input into the plans. Benjamin Johansen said City staff has specified that the traffic study used for the development is from 2000 but the traffic impact is today’s conditions versus the impact of increased traffic with over 100 vehicles within a one-block radius if the development goes through. He wants the City Council to put in place the safety of residents that “City staff has ignored” for better controlled traffic access for this building. He said, with the number of variance exceptions requested for the building, “what kind of image does this put on Columbia Heights when exceptions would be made for a developer who is not from the City and give low-income families less square-footage space than allotted by City Ordinance 9.109. According to lot area per dwelling unit, the project should have 73,600 square feet but the City is requesting a variance to reduce to 56,628 square feet, a difference of 15,972 feet. Article I, Section 2, of the Bill of Rights for the State of Minnesota specifically says that no member of the State shall be disenfranchised or deprived of any of the rights or privileges of at least getting the bare minimum of what our ordinances state for square footage, and yet that is what the City staff is trying to do. He City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 6 would like the City Council to take 60 days to readdress the cited concerns and place the citizens first, not the developer. Stacy McVary said she lives across from the proposed development and has been aware of the project for four weeks, though it has been planned for 18 months. Neighbors have been in turmoil during this time with their concerns and have delayed improvement projects or made decisions to move. She attended the initial neighborhood meeting, the Planning Commission meeting and now this City Council meeting; and she and neighbors have had their own meetings, distributed flyers so all neighbors were aware of the meetings, emailed pertinent personnel, and done their own research on 2040 Comprehensive Plan, transit corridors, crime rates and other effects of high-density apartment projects on residential neighborhoods. Ms. McVary said she wants to trust that the City Council, as elected officials, will make the decision that is best for Columbia Heights and hopes that the Council has learned that City residents care about what happens and hope they have been heard, but hopefully sooner in the future. She said her opinion of the project has softened over the past four weeks, though she is still not completely in favor of it. Rachel James said she is in favor of affordable housing being developed in the City. There is a nationwide affordable housing crisis and is Anoka County Community Action Program’s number one assessment need, which is a bedrock for homelessness, crime and other problems. The Metropolitan Council’s number one priority is to get people into safe, affordable housing. Anoka County has over 40,000 households who pay more than 30% of their income toward housing and about 6,000 who pay more than 50%, which is extremely cost burdened. In the past three years, only 1,300 units of affordable housing have been added in all of Anoka County; with projection growth, it is only about a tenth of what is needed. Ms. James said Columbia Heights is nearly 100% developed and so options for affordable housing development is extremely limited, adding that she realizes neighbors of this planned project have great questions and points that need to be addressed. She said the project has been transparent all along as part of the 2040 Comprehensive Plan, which was a one-year process, and likes the sidewalk aspects of it and that it is close to Central Avenue. As a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission, she said the City would get a part of developer funding for parks. Lastly, Ms. James said an Anoka County resident making minimum wage would have to work 69 hours a week in order to live in a single-bedroom apartment and urged support of the development. Councilmember Jacobs noted, as a point of order, that any other speakers who are members of a City board or commission, which could benefit from tax money, should state their association for transparency. Manager Bourgeois agreed. Patrick McVary said he lives directly across the street from the proposed development. He said he appreciates the comments the previous speaker noted about affordable housing and wanted to make it clear that he is not rejecting people, but the problem he has is the City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 7 project’s design. He said it is not in line with the R-4 zoning status, and the transit oriented development along Central Avenue stops at 41st. He said he did not debate that the property is underutilized but the project exceeds the maximum for density and space use, which should be 25-50 units per net acre, and takes too much advantage of a PUD variability. Mr. McVary said the project is too tall, does not fit into the scale and character of the neighborhood, is rather industrial-looking design versus a pleasant residential design, setbacks are pushed right up against the sidewalks, does not take advantage of any natural building cushioning or seem to meet the reasonable minimum standards. He suggested that the City Council hold the developer accountable to create an improved plan, after which he cited the definition of “redevelopment.” Adam Davis said, for transparency, that he works for the City and is a member of the Traffic Commission but would be addressing the Council as a City resident. He attended the recent Planning Commission meeting which discussed the project and said he listed all the issues that citizens raised and thinks his plan will address those concerns as well as maintain items that the developer is seeking. He said historical parking does not consider increased traffic levels since that time, and the current plan will inevitably route most of it to 42nd Avenue, in particular all of the underground to Jackson; his proposal is to flip the building on its “y” axis so that the four-story apartment building would hug the east side toward VanBuren and the potential SACA site would be on the west side. He said SACA will likely be a one-story building, have a low-impact use, daytime hours and open one Saturday per month. The parking lot and underground parking would be to the east, removes access towards Jackson, and all vehicles would then have access to 41st Avenue, which has a traffic light. It removes the privacy issue because the four-story building is farther away from neighbors and the one-story building would have little impact. It removes the need for cars to travel onto Quincy or Jackson or west on 42nd Avenue. In addition, his updated plan does not create a remnant lot. He implores that the Council bring his idea to the developer as a change that will address resident concerns and table action until they are addressed, believes a traffic study and sewer and water solution are needed and thinks there can be no assumption that MnDOT will fix the traffic issues. He noted that there was a person killed on 42nd Avenue last year. Randy Boyum said his concerns have been cited already concerning the four-story building height, traffic and parking. He said, in the plans presented, the developer has indicated 108 parking spaces, of which there would be 62 exterior stalls, two for handicapped use; the underground parking sketch has not been shared, though three handicapped spaces have been listed. Eric Glidden said he has lived there for 13 years and his children and those of the neighborhood, which total 12 and are under ten years of age and under, love playing on the hill that faces the proposed four-story high-density units. He said he agrees with pretty much everything that has been stated previously, including the fact that the City needs affordable housing. He commended the many people who have worked on the project but thinks citizens should have been contacted before the project moved along as much as it has. In addition, Mr. Glidden said it is concerning that an outdated traffic study was used in City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 8 the planning, the scale and design do not fit, and making improvements during a delay would help a great deal. He said he is not against the development but will be disappointed if the plan is approved as presented and may consider moving from the City if that happens. Sarah Arneson said she has been a resident over eight years and shares the concerns cited by her neighbors. She is aware there are other redevelopment plans within the City and said the City has demonstrated in the past that it can do development correctly. The parcel in question comes with a high price tag for easements and mitigations that have to take place before construction can begin, which limits other types of development that may be in better alignment. The City is being asked to consider a plan that is not fully formulated, the neighborhood is being asked to “stomach” even more disruption, the building will cause unnecessary stress for existing residents who are being asked to make a sacrifice to the current standard of living. There are currently 45% rental properties within the City and this multi-unit construction will likely tip the scale, making Columbia Heights an impermanent, transient housing community. Ms. Arneson asked that Council to review the proposal wholistically and from “your neighbors’ point of view” and asked what the rush is to develop Jackson and has the City done its due diligence in estimating the full impact of all the cited key issues, including a majority of rental units. She urged the Council to adopt a wait-and-see approach and vote “no” on the parcel. Sarah Tholen said the proposal has been impactful to her family, citing loss of sleep and delayed major home improvements. With small children at home and in the neighborhood and an adult disabled sister who lives with her, she worries about the traffic and safety concerns for pedestrians. She urged the Council to take a break and take more time to review the proposal’s effect on the neighborhood. Kelly Harrison said ten days ago she received a first-notification flyer from a neighbor regarding the proposed project. She lives at the corner of 43rd and Jackson Street, and six weeks after she moved into her home there was a rain event that emptied 2,000 gallons of sewage into her basement. With all of the surrounding developments, she said water goes downhill and she is “at the bottom” and is concerned about the sewer development. Ms. Harrison said she does not enjoy living with all the traffic of skateboarders, young kids and vandalism that goes on in the parking lot but does not think the new construction at 42nd and Jackson will help that, just add to a very crowded space. She and her husband are both blind and they walk around the neighborhood a lot, and travel along the sidewalks and crossing streets will only get more difficult with the additional traffic. She does not know if they wish to live in a city-like environment and would prefer Columbia Heights’ small-town feel. Andy Newton said he supports the project, as Columbia Heights is a working class town, and it would be an opportunity for families to obtain affordable housing, join the community as invested citizens whose children will attend schools and events here and eventually will be ready to settle into home ownership and become involved with City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 9 businesses and government. The City needs to adapt and accommodate new people, all types of people; and there is a small segment of the community that believes affordable housing would only invite more “people of color,” which is inaccurate and a gross generalization. “It is shameful and we as a community are above this, and we have work to do, so let’s get to it.” Monika Schachern said she is concerned about traffic because of all of the children in the neighborhood and where the police begin and start their shifts there. She questioned why the proposed site is being considered, when two others have not even been decided upon. Ms. Schachern brought up the issue of property values, noting that the Planning Commission felt that would not be a factor with the new development, but she said she thinks the Council should think about the City’s property values. Lastly, she added that there is currently no parking on the streets from November through April and inquired as to where the extra cars would park when the current homeowners do not have places for their visitors to park. Michelle Ives asked how the development will affect the residents of the assisted living home, such as parking, getting emergency medical and police assistance, safety of the residents in wheelchairs and safety of the deaf residents. She believes it is not in the best interest of the community but is in the best interest of the developer. Every single day cars drive down the wrong way on a one-way and more traffic for sure will cause an increase in this. Ms. Ives asked how much these units are going to rent per month and would it really be affordable housing. She agrees with all of the concerns of the community and asks the Council to put more thought into this before approving it. Lastly, she added that she started in low-income units behind McDonalds and is now a homeowner and not against low-income housing at all; she chose her home due to the single-family home surrounding it. Kelsey Johansen agreed that many had stated her concerns. She and a lot of the neighbors are not against affordable housing. However, the area is currently a tight-knit walkable community and would love to incorporate more into that, such as townhomes or multiplexes; but to put a four-story building into a single-family neighborhood does not fit, and increased traffic is concerning because of the area children. If the development is truly catering to people who are working in affordable-income-style careers, there will be far more than 100 people in the units because affordability lends itself to shared living spaces. With the 266 units at the new City Hall building, the proposed 400-600 units on the 44th block and Central, and the 62 units being marketed at affordable housing, there should be ways to further incorporate such housing into the community at other sites. Amy Waller has been a homeowner for three years and her home was chosen because of it is quiet and has a small-town feel. Because of her small children, she is especially concerned about traffic that would be associated with the proposed project. She believes the cited “minimal effect” of traffic is inaccurate and unacceptable, especially in light of an outdated traffic survey being utilized in planning. She hopes that the Council considers rezoning the area, as the proposed variances could have negative impacts on the City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 10 neighborhood. Ms. Waller also asked, if the project is approved, that the Council consider keeping SACA as the part of this parcel and perhaps make the building longer or shorter so that it is not such a towering presence and make the green space for the community to gather and incorporate the new residents. She is not against affordable housing but believes the variances are a bad idea. Mayor Márquez Simula closed the public hearing, and Council adjourned for a short break. Planner Hark said she appreciated the resident comments and explained that their concerns would be addressed between her and Director Chirpich. Parking: The project’s proposed parking stalls are 108, of which 25 are compact and felt to be sufficient. There is flexibility to increase the compact stalls to 30 if needed. Green space: City code is silent on how much green space is required for the development but is consistent with the urban design of the site, the City’s urban forester has approved the plans and the developer is incorporating green space in as much as possible. Density: The allowable lot-per-area dwelling units are 1,000 square feet for a one bedroom, 1,200 square feet for a two bedroom and 1,500 square feet for a three bedroom. If distributed equally, the applicant is only asking for a reduction of 313 square feet of required lot area per unit type; as an example, instead of requiring 1,000 square feet of lot area for a one-bedroom unit, the developer is asking for 687 square feet. Transient oriented development does allow for a slight increase in density, and the applicant is taking the mid-range for the site. Design: The materials chosen for the proposal are high quality, durable and provide a unique and beautiful aesthetic for the building’s exterior, including cast stone base with brick on the first floor; combination of brick, fiber cement lap siding; and fiber cement panels. It is a modern design but incorporates old ideas and materials of brick but is consistent in the State for multi-family developments incorporated into residential zones. SACA inclusion: City staff would hope that SACA could be included in the current plan; however, SACA has had some funding issues but is working hard to resolve them in order to move forward. If the organization is unable to do so, the proposed PUD ordinance would outline what uses may be allowed, in this case commercial, retail, office as well as residential dwelling. The community would be involved if an amendment is needed. Director Chirpich also appreciated the thoughtful issues and responses residents brought forward in a respectful and constructive manner. Stormwater and sanitary considerations: This site and the potential future development of the Hy-Vee site do experience deficiencies related to sanitary sewer capacity that have a corollary to stormwater capacity; and the proposed plan is to determine what the current conditions are outside of these developments and analyze how these developments layer onto that issue to understand the responsibility matrix for all of what is going on. That City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 11 study has been ordered by the City, and the City Engineer is working with a consulting engineering firm to do a full and thorough analysis of all of these capacities. Once all of the data is compiled, recommendations will be brought to the Council. As a goal post, developers typically pay their fair share of what they add to an existing problem; but the City is responsible for the base problem, and a variety of funding sources are available. With regard to storm sewer upgrades for this proposal, the developer definitely pays for the necessary stormwater improvements that will go to fix the issue of overland flooding on the site. Cost sharing may be necessary, however, for sanitary considerations. Height: As noted earlier, the building’s height is consistent with similar development patterns. Zoning for the parcel follows the Comprehensive Plan as it relates to density. Traffic: Regarding a resident-cited traffic study, City staff did not rely on such a study, but rather used by the Engineering staff as a perspective. Central Avenue is the primary ingress and egress for the site and the primary corridor. It is expected that it will be used most often by the affordable housing residents, though there will always be exceptions. Suggested building reorientation: City staff does not have sufficient time to fully analyze in a meaningful way the reorientation suggestion and some of the underlying principles contradict with the Comprehensive Plan, which guide that buildings be placed at the street front to shield the view of the street level or at-grade parking to create a more pedestrian friendly environment. Parking: The ADA compliance spots and exiting striped zones that relate to those do not diminish the parking stall count and have been taken into consideration. Rental ratios: There are no caps on rentals within the City, and the Fire Department’s recent determination has an overall residential ratio of 35% for rentals and single-family rental units at 32%. Demand for affordable housing in the City outstrips the supply. Transit corridor studies for Central Avenue: MnDOT is not swift in fully vetting, and the window of opportunity for development in the City would be limited if untimely. Property values: City staff are unable to say whether property values for surrounding homes would increase or decrease with the development, though a shift in either direction is not expected. It is believed that concentrated single-family units are more detrimental than mixed use neighborhoods. Assisted living access for Crestview: This project does not diminish access, though their parking may need an amendment depending on the dynamics of a SACA proposal. No City notices sent to nearby multi-tenant townhomes: It is City ordinance policy that property owners within 350 feet are noticed by direct mail, and it is noted in the notice that it is responsibility of owners of multi-tenant facilities to disperse it to all tenants. Councilmember comments: City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 12 Mayor Márquez Simula asked for clarification about the difference between a problem for the sewer of residents flushing toilets and sinks all at once compared to there being a rain event problem for the sewer. Director Chirpich explained that it is a condition where the sanitary sewer capacity is functioning well for this site, where sanitary sewage would run north on Jackson and the capacity sizing of that pipe is not an issue; however, where it meets up with 43rd, some bottlenecks may occur. On a daily basis there is no sewer issue and is only an issue when there is a rain event, but there can be an issue if a homeowner has a sump pump inappropriately discharged into the sanitary sewer rather than the storm sewer. The direct fix is to make the pipes bigger, especially at 43rd and Central Avenue. Mayor Márquez Simula asked about the number of underground spaces. Planner Hark confirmed parking would be included with rents and quoted 46 underground parking stalls (43 standard, one compact and two ADA spaces) and 62 exterior surface-level stalls (35 standard, 24 compact and three ADA spaces), adding that the developer did express an intention to provide some underground electric vehicle charging stations. Mayor Márquez Simula noted that citizens had expressed concerns about the project being rushed. Director Chirpich said the proposal’s evolution began 18 months ago when Reuter Walton Development contacted the City about a possible development. Various aspects were discussed openly about the parcel, and the City Council wished to work with SACA regarding their expansion plans. Plans were refined with the developer before resident input was requested, and he acknowledged some hindsight in engaging sooner with the residents. Mayor Márquez Simula inquired about rental rates. Developer Brasser said there would be 16 one-bedroom units, 30 two-bedroom units and 16 three-bedroom units. Units will be affordable at 50% of the AMI (Area Medium Income) for 13 units or 60% of the AMI for 49 units. Units will start at about $900.00 and rise to $1,600.00 for three-bedroom units. Mayor Márquez Simula thanked everyone who shared concerns about the project and said she takes all input very seriously for those who wish to utilize the affordable housing. Councilmember Novitsky said the project has been ongoing for 18 months and information was available to all who wished to learn more about it during that time at the City’s open meetings. Multiple proposals were turned down for the parcel and he appreciates that Reuter Walton Development addressed the parking issue, where underground parking will be included for an affordable housing unit at no additional cost. He said the density was planned at a good compromise and sewers are an existing problem with the INI, which will need to be taken care of. Overall, he said the project was not rushed. Councilmember Murzyn, Jr. said he wished there had been more input from residents and does not like the idea of a four-story building on the site. He would prefer to delay the project to allow more time for a compromise with nearby homeowners. Councilmember Jacobs asked what the timeline is for the study on the City sewer problem. Director Hansen said the study consists of two parts, the first related to this particular City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 13 development and is in draft format; the second part is larger and includes the entire collection district, about 60% of the City. There should be a draft at the end of May for the City to consider. Councilmember Jacobs appreciates the steps taken during the process and Reuter Walton Development’s tenacity to work with the Community. Referring to the Grand Central Flats on Central Avenue that development was built after high-density housing was already in place behind them. She said the City has the ability to slow the development process down, which would allow the developer to strategize with the neighborhood on how to make it more palatable, and SACA needs to stay in the City, which is currently not a hard commitment. She believes the proposal cited by Mr. Davis has value; there should be a current traffic study provided by the City, as traffic will increase significantly especially on Jackson, and she anticipates a problem with drainage issues; thinks nobody questions the building’s high-quality components, but they do not equal compatibility to the neighborhood; has issues that if something is consistent with the State guidelines does not mean that it will work locally. She prefers to delay the project for 60 days, which would allow the traffic study to be completed, and would like the developer to sit down with the neighborhood group and/or spokesperson from that group along with the Community Development staff, and proposed that the City set up a process for the future that a neighborhood liaison for developments be included in the planning process. Councilmember Buesgens said she also looks wholistically regarding the project and said the Metro Council is suggesting affordable housing because they wish to prevent the homelessness and tent cities which occurred on the West Coast because officials were not proactive. She cited the State of Minnesota’s affordable housing need to be 55,000 units and said it is a huge issue and Columbia Heights is not alone in presenting such projects. Councilmember Buesgens said she lives 1-1/2 blocks from Central Avenue by 44th and has been waiting for five nearby 1960’s apartment complexes to be demolished in order to build affordable housing because of the high demand. According to the North Metro section in the May 2, 2021 Sunday paper on page H2, the vacancy rates in the North Metro is 2% for a one-bedroom unit and 2.3% for a two-bedroom, which is a tight market for apartments. For the residents of the Grand Central Flats concerned about potential for increased traffic, she takes the shortcut from 47th to 49th often times and it is a quiet area and encouraged them to look at it during rush hour. She also noted that Grand Central Flats was the first affordable housing project for regular working residents in the City, and this project would be the second. Columbia Heights has done well over the years to provide various housing options and is well balanced. Lastly, she said the City needs to look at its tax base, which has only 9% that can be taxed commercially and the City is built out. Homeownership is difficult now because of excessive demand and prices are soaring with multiple offers, so this affordable housing will be an opportunity to provide a safe, friendly environment for new residents. She would like to see the project move forward and said she appreciated the citizen input. City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 14 Motion by Councilmember Buesgens, seconded by Councilmember Novitsky, to waive the reading of Ordinance No. 1666, there being ample copies available to the public. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. Motion by Council Buesgens, seconded by Councilmember Novitsky, to set the second reading of Ordinance 1666, being an Ordinance pertaining to the rezoning of certain property located at 825 41st Avenue NE from Multiple-Family Residential District to PUD, Planned Unit Development District No. 2021-01, to May 24, 2021 at approximately 7:00 pm in the City Council Chambers. A roll call vote was taken. 3 Ayes (Buesgens, Márquez Simula, Novitsky) and 2 Nays (Jacobs, Murzyn, Jr.). Motion Carried 3-2. 9. Annual Declaration that the City of Columbia Heights does NOT Waive the Monetary Limits on the Municipal Tort Liability under Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04 Director Kloiber explained that the City purchases its liability insurance from the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust (LMCIT). Staff is currently preparing the renewal application for the policy period June 1, 2021 through May 31, 2022. The LMCIT requires that member cities document annually whether or not they waive the tort liability limits established for municipalities by Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04. With certain exceptions, the City’s general liability insurance provides up to $2 million per claim and up to $3 million in aggregate claims per year. In addition, the City carries coverage termed “excess liability” or “umbrella” coverage for up to an additional $1 million. Minnesota Statutes Section 466.04, however, limits a city’s liability for certain types of claims to less than this policy coverage. If the City does not waive these lower limits provided by statute, LMCIT will only pay out the (lower) statutory limit for any applicable claims. Kloiber stated that he believed that the limit amounts are $500,000 per claimant and $1.5 million per occurrence, but he would follow-up with the City Council. Consequently, the LMCIT prices its liability premiums lower for Cities that do not waive the statutory limits. The City’s insurance agent is aware of no Minnesota cities that chose to waive these statutory limits for the most recent policy period. Staff estimates that the annual savings in premium costs for the City of Columbia Heights are $15,000.00 by not waiving the statutory limits and recommends that the City Council declare that the City does not waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability. Motion by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Murzyn, Jr., to declare that the City of Columbia Heights does NOT waive the monetary limits on municipal tort liability under Minnesota Statutes, Section 466.04. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. CITY COUNCIL AND ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS Report of the City Council Mayor Márquez Simula attended a Senior Center art class; along with Councilmembers Buesgens and Jacobs, attended the Sister City tree planting Arbor Day celebration, which was also attended by Representative Sandra Feist, and planted a linden tree in Lomiaki Park; attended North Park Elementary School’s Equity Team meeting; and attended the Traffic Commission and EDA meetings. City of Columbia Heights MINUTES May 10, 2021 City Council Meeting Page 15 Councilmember Novitsky has been busy planning the Jamboree, which to date includes a parade and some marching bands and drumline, and he has been attending the high school softball games. Councilmember Jacobs volunteered at SACA; attended the Lion SACA food and hygiene product drive; finished her “Action to the Hill,” a three-day remote access; attended the Sister City tree ceremony; attended a “Chats from Home” series on affordable housing and American Jobs Plan by the Alliance; and would like to recognize May as the “Asian American and Pacific Islander Month” and said she is proud to say that she has a son who is Asian American. She said, without regard to tonight’s vote, she wanted to thank everyone in diligence for coming forward as a neighborhood and hopes that the developer considers more options for them. Councilmember Buesgens attended the School Board meeting via Zoom; attended the Arbor Day celebration and said the City has an awesome forester, who is so knowledgeable about the types of trees; and volunteered at Blooming Sunshine Garden. She encouraged residents to get their COVID-19 vaccinations so that the 70% level can be reached and masks can then be removed indoors. Report of the City Manager Manager Bourgeois reported that the new City banners have been installed, which helps to fund the Centennial celebration, and thanked the donors. The second vaccine clinic will be held at the Fire Department on Thursday, May 13, from 1:00 pm and 7:00 pm and Friday, May 14 from 10:00 am to 4:00 pm.; if the CDC approves vaccinations for younger people, they will be able to attend the clinic and be vaccinated. Information will be posted on social media and the City website. COMMUNITY FORUM Clerk Tingley noted that Director Kloiber, regarding his report, confirmed that the amounts stated for monetary limits on municipal tort liability of $500,000 per claimant and $1.5 million per occurrence are correct. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Jacobs, seconded by Councilmember Novitsky, to adjourn. All Ayes, Motion Carried 5-0. Meeting adjourned at 10:26 pm. Respectfully Submitted, ______________________________________ Nicole Tingley, City Clerk/Council Secretary