Minutes

New Brighton Planning Commission

Regular Meeting - September 17, 1996

7:30 p.m.

Call to Order

Vice Chair Livingston called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m.

Roll Call

Present:	Roger Blomquist, Joann Knuth, Jim O'Brien, Mike Livingston, Norm Schiferl, Paul Zisla (8:10 p.m.)

Absent:	Larry Baker

Also Present:	Erny Mattila, City Planner

Steve Larson, City Council Liaison

Approval of Minutes

Motion by Blomquist, seconded by Knuth, to approve the August 10, 1996, Planning Commission minutes. 5 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

Report on Council Action

Larson said it was his pleasure to announce that the City Council appointed Norm Schiferl to the Planning Commission to replace Steve Jensen. Larson welcomed Schiferl to the Commission.

Larson reported that Stockyard Days was a huge success. The weather was wonderful and the Antique Car Run was a success. Of the ninety-five cars that started in New London, eighty cars finished in New Brighton. The fireworks were beautiful.

Larson said the City was still looking for space for a soccer field and is considering converting Driftwood Park's softball field to soccer. The Council will look to the Soccer Association for help with the funding. The total cost should be about $3,000. Knuth said she supported space for soccer. Larson said the Council also would be considering a proposal for participation in a four-sheet ice facility at the National Sports Center. Ramsey County has temporarily agreed to put $500,000 toward the purchase of one sheet of ice. The youth hockey associations would also be involved.

Agenda Review

The agenda was adopted as written.

Public Hearings

Livingston welcomed the audience and said the purpose of a public hearing is to consider proposals and give the public an opportunity to speak on the proposal. The City Planner will review his report on the proposal and then Planning Commission will ask questions of the Planner. Then, the public hearing is opened for audience participation. The public hearing is closed and the Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council.

SP-196	7:40–9:05 p.m.	City of Minneapolis Water Works

Mattila outlined the staff report concerning an application for a special use permit to construct an underground water reservoir on property owned by the City of Minneapolis. Mattila showed slides of the site.

Livingston asked if the applicant was present. Adam Kramer, Director of the Minneapolis Water Works, Galina Izraelev, Project Engineer, and Jay Whitaker, Superintendent of Engineering, were present representing the Minneapolis Water Works.

Kramer stated that Minneapolis originally purchased the New Brighton site for additional reservoir capacity. Minneapolis purchased the site because it is a high point in the Metropolitan area. The proposed reservoir could supply Minneapolis and the seven suburbs in the system by gravity as opposed to pumping. The proposed reservoir would be the major backup for the Minneapolis water system in case of a power outage at any pumping station.

Blomquist asked if the elevation of the current site was the same as the elevation of the proposed site. Kramer responded they were the same, 1,080 feet. Kramer stated that, to supply water by gravity from two reservoirs, the reservoirs must have the same elevation at the bottom and the top to equalize the pressure.

O'Brien asked the City of Minneapolis would object to increasing the planting along the base of the existing reservoir. Kramer responded the City of Minneapolis could increase that planting.

Schiferl asked if the City of Minneapolis and the City Forester looked at making the plantings along Stinson Boulevard more informal. The trees and shrubs are planted in a rigid pattern. Mattila responded that he and the City Forester walked the area around the periphery of the site to visualize the proposed landscaping plan. The City Forester recommended the Caragana and Amur Maples be staggered along the bank of reservoir so the root systems would not impact the reservoir. The maples are a good choice because they grow to make a dense screen, 12 feet high. Additionally, deciduous trees would be planted along the Stinson Boulevard boulevard .

Blomquist asked what percent of the City of Minneapolis' water flows through this reservoir. Kramer answered Minneapolis has reservoirs in Fridley and in Columbia Heights, therefore, a third of the water goes through the New Brighton reservoir. The proposed expansion would increase it to about half. Kramer said Minneapolis would be increasing its storage capacity. The flow would stay the same.

Councilmember Larson pointed out the existing storage capacity is 40 million gallons. The proposal would double the capacity. The new reservoir would be 750 feet by 400 feet.

Whitaker presented a schematic of the Minneapolis water system, which supplies water for a half million people. The New Brighton site has the highest elevation in the system and can feed the system by gravity. Whitaker introduced Galina Izraelev, the project engineer.

Blomquist asked about the anticipated construction length. Izraelev answered construction would take between nine months and two and one-half years. Larson asked when the work would begin. Izraelev said construction would begin in the fall of 1997. Kramer said they would begin clearing the site this year, the construction would begin in the fall of 1997 and be completed in 1998.

Livingston opened the public hearing for comments from the audience.

Josie Thomas, 230 Wyndham Circle, asked about the elevations of the other sites and how the integrity of the existing containment is checked. On what kind of schedule is the checking done? Thomas said she was concerned the clearing of the trees would change the drainage on the site. Wexford Heights lies below the reservoir.

Kramer said the other available site for the new reservoir is in Edina, which is the second choice. The Edina site is less desirable because it is low and would require a $1 million pumping station. When Minneapolis has reservoirs at both the New Brighton and Edina sites, Minneapolis would have two days' water storage. The priority is to get the New Brighton site built. Then, Minneapolis would like to build a reservoir on their site in Columbia Heights. The Fridley site is almost totally developed.

Thomas asked again about the checking the reservoir for water containment. Kramer said that they designed the reinforced concrete reservoir for 100-year storage. The City of Minneapolis repaired the Columbia Heights reservoir few years ago. Minneapolis built that reservoir in the 1800's. The reservoirs are checked every ten to fifteen years. The concrete installed at the Columbia Heights reservoir in 1913 now tests out at 7,000–8,000 pounds per square inch, which is an excellent number. Modern concrete will not fail.

Izraelev explained the structural design of the proposed reservoir. Kramer said the City of Minneapolis would hire a consultant to go over the design. Kramer said the concrete in reservoirs, because it is moist, cures well and becomes stronger. The reason Minneapolis inspects the reservoirs only every 10 to 15 years is that a reservoir must be drained and a thorough inspection done from the inside. A pictorial record is kept. The reservoir is cleaned and chlorinated. The reason there was damage at the Columbia Heights reservoir, built in 1897, is trees were growing on top of the reservoir. Also, it was built using old-style concrete. Now, the Minneapolis Water Works keeps roots away from the structures.

Thomas asked about the change of drainage on the site and where would it be directed. Whitaker said the roof of the reservoir, which is under the soil and on top of the concrete, will have a roofing membrane that will collect water. There will be a drain tile system around the perimeter of the reservoir. The drainage from the roof will not impact Wexford Heights. The drainage from the rest of the site will not change. The water will be directed to a storm sewer or a low area on the property. Whitaker stated Minneapolis would complete the drainage design later. The rehab of the Columbia Heights site included installing a roof membrane and drain tile.

Mattila stated the Rice Creek Watershed District and the City Engineer must approve the drainage plan.

Bill Thomas, 230 Wyndham Circle, stated the reservoir would be 30 feet from the edge of the road and Minneapolis is proposing small Caragana and Amur maples. All the large trees will be cleared. Thomas stated the Minneapolis people have done a really good job of not telling how thick the walls of the tank are going to be.

Izraelev responded the walls would be 24 inches thick. Kramer pointed out they would plant trees on the boulevard.

Craig Faher, 420 Wyndham Circle West, said he was concerned about the loss of thousands of trees from this beautiful undeveloped area. The property has wildlife habitats and a significant deer herd. The length of construction is pretty frightening for adjacent property owners. Two and a one half years are a long time to deal with noise and dirt.

Whitaker said we could address the time line in the contract. Whitaker stated he felt two and a half years was too long a construction estimate. Kramer commented that two and a half years would include site clearing, fill compaction, and the actual construction. There would be periods where there would be no activity on the site.

Faher asked again about the wildlife habitat. Kramer said that cutting down old trees was sad, but Minneapolis purchased the site to supply water for the City of Minneapolis. Faher said that, as for environmental impact, another site would be less damaging.

Whitaker said the City of Minneapolis would eventually develop all the sites to provide Minneapolis and the seven suburbs with a two-day water supply. The Hilltop site is important to the City of Minneapolis' emergency planning because of the gravity factor in a power outage. Kramer mentioned all of the sites have woods and wildlife.

Josie Thomas asked if the Edina site has the same type of habitat as the New Brighton site. Whitaker responded part of the Edina site is heavily wooded and part is open. There is deer on the Fridley site. Whitaker said he understood the residents' concerns and perhaps Minneapolis could talk to the DNR to see if something could be done about the site.

Faher asked why all the reservoirs are on the north side of Minneapolis. Kramer answered that is the location of the water treatment plant.

Whitaker outlined the history of the Minneapolis Water Works. The City of Minneapolis established the Water Works in 1867 to fight mill fires. In 1872, Minneapolis built the first pump station on the site of the old Fujiya restaurant. During the cholera and typhoid epidemic at the turn of the century, the water supply kept moving upstream because of contamination by the sewer system. Belgium began chlorinating water in 1902 and Minneapolis began chlorinating in 1910. Minneapolis pumped water from the river at Camden to the open reservoirs in Columbia Heights.

Faher asked what is the emergency for which Minneapolis is planning. Kramer said Minneapolis studied four different scenarios with a consultant: a short-term spill in the river, a long-term spill in the river, a plant emergency caused by weather, or a draw-down situation. Kramer gave a detailed summary of the water works emergency plans.

Josie Thomas said it was always difficult to argue for animals or aesthetics against other needs. Thomas asked if the Minneapolis Water Works is really saying that this is only one site with any elevation available.

Kramer answered that, of the available sites, the New Brighton site is the highest point in the Metropolitan area. Normally, the Waterworks operates by feeding water by gravity into the system and by pumping water into the system. Those pressures must match. If the Water Works operated at a lower point, we could not match the pressure.

Whitaker interjected that the New Brighton site is the only site from which we can feed water to Minneapolis by gravity without a pump station.

O'Brien asked if the City of Minneapolis has generators available during a power outage. Kramer answered they cannot keep the water supply running by using a generator. We would require a huge generator and is impractical. The City of Minneapolis spends about $2 million on electrical costs. In case of an emergency, there is no way to generate enough power to handle the capacity.

Kramer said the proposed reservoir would be a part of the Minneapolis Water Works emergency plan to have a two-day water supply. The Water Works planning is part of the City of Minneapolis' overall emergency plan. The City of Minneapolis and the Corps of Engineers have studied how to handle a chemical spill in the river, identified potential spill sites, developed a computer program to decide how long it takes for a spill to pass, and many other components of a complete emergency plan. The City of Minneapolis is also negotiating with the City of St. Paul on a possible interconnection.

Blomquist asked if Minneapolis and St. Paul have discussed where an interconnection might occur. Kramer responded they have discussed a connection at 36th and Talmadge in Northeast Minneapolis. Minneapolis can supply St. Paul from its system pressure, but St. Paul cannot supply Minneapolis. Therefore, Minneapolis would have to build a pump station for St. Paul to supply water to Minneapolis. The proposed interconnect would not happen for some time.

Josie Thomas asked what the process would be for the proposed reservoir in terms of public hearings. Would this be the only public hearing or is it one of a series of public hearings?

Livingston responded that, after this public hearing is closed, the Planning Commission will forward a recommendation to the City Council. Then, the City Council will consider and vote on the proposal at its meeting on September 24. Mattila said the concerned citizens were welcome to attend that meeting to voice their concerns, although the City Council meeting is not a public hearing. It is a public meeting.

Faher commented that it seemed that Minneapolis' concern deals with maintenance. Would it not be more practical to depend on St. Paul for part of the usage, storage, flow and to do maintenance versus building a new reservoir?

Kramer answered it would not be more practical because mixing waters requires special treatment. Mixing water could be done in case of an emergency but it would result in some water quality problems. Kramer briefly described some problems that can happen when waters are mixed.

Mike Ellis, 4832 Stinson Boulevard, asked if the Minneapolis Water Works built a reservoir on its Edina site would it be the same size as the proposed New Brighton reservoir.

Kramer responded the sizes would be about the same. Ellis asked if the proposed reservoir could be smaller like the one in Edina to keep at least the trees along the street. Kramer said the City of Minneapolis Water Works would try to save as many trees as possible. The City Forester's idea of boulevard trees is a good one.

Larry Taft, 3805 East Upland Crest in Columbia Heights, asked why Minneapolis could not center the proposed reservoir on the site. Kramer answered the slope of the elevation has to be taken into account to achieve the needed flow.

Taft said the Commission should pay attention to proposed truck traffic. How many cement trucks would it take to carry the proposed 24" of concrete for the reservoir? Kramer responded that the proposed reservoir would require about 4,600 truckloads of cement.

Kramer said, about a year and a half ago, Minneapolis cleaned the reservoir for the first time since the 60's. The cleaning took from September 1994 to April 1995. There were 7,500 18-wheel tractor trailer trips going in and out of this complex during that period. We would space the trips over a long period.

John Seward, 190 32nd Avenue NW, said those trucks went by our house and it was very noisy. Seward said he complained to the City Council. Seward said he did not know who gave the City of Minneapolis Water Works the permission to use County Road E. Where are all these trucks going to go?

Kramer responded the proposed truck route would go from I-694 to south on Silver Lake Road, and west on 5th Street to enter the north side of the site. Seward said that, as a Ramsey County resident, he is paying for the road. Who will pay for the wear on the road? Seward said the area residents had lived through two years of construction on Silver Lake Road and he is tired of construction noise. Seward asked if anyone has done an environmental impact study on the noise.

Kramer answered the City of Minneapolis Water Works is trying to come up with the least disruptive plan possible. Seward said the area was totally residential.

Kramer said construction would occur during normal business hours, six days per week.

Livingston asked if there were more comments from the audience. There was no response. Motion by Knuth, seconded by O'Brien to close the public hearing. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

Knuth stated she sympathized and understands the concerns of area residents. Those of us who live farther away may not be able fully to appreciate those concerns. Having lived next to construction sites herself, Knuth said she had to look at a larger picture than the inconvenience to her family. The Minneapolis Water Works has convincingly outlined the need for a reservoir in New Brighton. No one can be so parochial to only consider New Brighton's needs. There is a larger picture that must be considered. Knuth said she was grateful to the Minneapolis Water Works for considering the larger picture in terms of emergency planning. Knuth said she was sorry the construction would inconvenience some New Brighton residents, but was certain the Water Works would be as sensitive as possible to their concerns.

Zisla asked how specific the landscape plan is for the west boulevard. Mattila said the City Forester recommended that a formal landscape plan be submitted showing the Caragana and Amur Maple shrubs on the banks of the reservoir and American Linden, Oak, or Norway Maple trees at 15 foot intervals outside the fence. The City of Minneapolis has agreed to put this plan together. Zisla asked if the plan would be ready for the City Council approval at its next meeting. Mattila responded that is the hope.

Blomquist stated we have raised three primary issues tonight. First, Blomquist said, Minneapolis should develop a better, more specific plan than the one presented tonight. The length of construction and the traffic generaedt were issues that need to be more clearly defined. Blomquist said he agreed for the need for the project, but felt Minneapolis must address these issues.

Motion by Blomquist, seconded by O'Brien, to continue the public hearing until the applicant submits more specific plans.

Zisla asked how this motion would impact the construction schedule. What would be the mechanism for reviewing the construction traffic? The traffic issue came up when the City of Minneapolis cleared soil from the site. Minneapolis was concerned when New Brighton suggested they cover their trucks to contain the dirt. They should deal those issues in a formal rather than a causal manner.

Mattila stated the issues outlined by Blomquist are issues that we should address. The motion could be rephrased to direct Staff to work with the applicant to address those issues before next Tuesday's City Council meeting so we can bring the proposal to the City Council as soon as possible. Blomquist answered he felt they should bring back the proposal to the Planning Commission so the Commission can address it in a public hearing.

Zisla asked about the project cost. Izraelev responded $15 million would be the cost. Zisla asked about the date Staff received the application. Mattila responded August 30. Livingston asked if a continuation would hamper the Minneapolis Water Works construction schedule. Whitaker responded they would do whatever New Brighton requires, but it would set the schedule back. A month delay may be okay, but longer would be very difficult.

Zisla stated the proposal makes sense, but he felt the three issues should be considered.

Izraelev said the construction would take place over a two-year period and should lessen the impact on traffic and noise. The concrete work must go forward on a schedule decided by the nature of concrete construction. Zisla said that was the sort of information he would like to see in black and white.

Schiferl stated the routing of the traffic is a problem for him. He would like to see some options on truck routing.

Zisla said he would like to see something about the relative height of the reservoir in relation to the proposed landscaping. Zisla said he would like to know about the size of the proposed trees at the time of construction, not 40 years from now.

Livingston asked for a vote on the motion to continue the public hearing. The vote was 5 Ayes - 0 Nays, Livingston abstained because he is an employee of the City of Minneapolis. Motion Carried.

Livingston said the public hearing would be continued to the October 15, 1996, Planning Commission meeting.

Seward asked if the residents in the area were notified of the public hearing. Mattila said residents were notified. Seward said the notification was pretty vague. Mattila said the City of New Brighton went farther than was legally necessary. The law requires the city to publish the notice in the city's legal newspaper. As a courtesy, New Brighton notifies people within 350 feet of the project by mail. New Brighton also notified people within 350 feet in Columbia Heights.

Zisla asked if the City should encourage applicants to hold neighborhood meetings before they come before the Planning Commission. Mattila said the City did encourage neighborhood meetings but, typically, for a project of this magnitude, the public hearing is probably the best setting for the meeting.

Schiferl stated that the developer of Wexford Heights put on several neighborhood meetings.

Blomquist asked, if the applicant develops these plans before the date of the public hearing, could they be made available at City Hall for residents to study. Mattila said that was always part of the public hearing notice.

LP-318/NC-104	9:05p.m.–9:20 p.m.	Robert Osterbauer

Mattila reviewed the case report concerning a request for a site plan review and nonconforming use permit to construct two garage buildings on an existing apartment site. Mattila showed slides of the site.

Zisla asked what the garages would look like. Mattila said the garages would have vinyl siding with steel doors. Mattila introduced Dr. Robert Osterbauer, the owner of the apartment complex.

Vernon Hoium, attorney for Dr. Osterbauer, said he would represent Dr. Osterbauer this evening.

Schiferl asked about the location of the tool shed and the playground area. Osterbauer said the playground was on the property of the adjoining apartment complex. A chain link fence divides the two properties.

Livingston asked for comments from the audience. There was no response.

Motion by Zisla, seconded by Knuth, to close the public hearing. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

Knuth commented that the appearance of the apartments would be improved by the proposed garages, dumpster enclosure and landscaping.

The commission briefly discussed the lack of concrete curbing and the drainage on the site. Mattila answered there are no current flooding problems on the site.

Zisla pointed out the applicant is not being required by the City to make any improvements to the site.

Osterbauer said he was bringing the proposal is to improve the look of the complex. Osterbauer said he did not anticipate the improvement would be economically profitable, but would just make the complex look nicer.

Livingston asked if the number of parking stalls has caused a problem in the past. Mattila said he had not noticed a parking overflow problem.

Motion by Blomquist, seconded by Knuth, to recommend adopting the resolution recommending approval of NC-104 and approval of LP-318, subject to conditions. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

LP-319/NC-105	9:20 p.m.–9:40 p.m.	New Brighton Amoco

Mattila outlined the case report concerning an application for site plan review and nonconforming use permit to enclose a patio on an existing service station.

Zisla commented the site was a "tight site" and the Planning Commission approved proposals in the past to help make it a viable business. Zisla said he drove by and the site looked like its being overrun with vehicles being parked on the grass area. Zisla said he was concerned that, in view of the "tight site," it would be appropriate that the site is kept neat.

Bob Smith, owner of New Brighton Amoco, said there was a problem with vehicles about which Mr. Zisla talked to him. Since talking with Mr. Zisla, the problem ceased to exist. Smith said last week he took over the adjacent Sinclair station and the additional space will solve his parking situation.

Livingston asked if anyone in the audience wished to speak. There was no response.

Motion by Zisla, seconded by Knuth, to close the public hearing. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

Motion by Zisla, seconded by Blomquist, to adopt the resolution recommending approval of NC-105, subject to condition. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried.

General Business - None

Announcements and Updates - None

Adjourn

Motion by Livingston, seconded by Blomquist, to adjourn the meeting. 6 Ayes - 0 Nays. Motion Carried. The meeting was adjourned at 9:40 p.m.

_______________________________________

Erny Mattila, City Planner