Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />MINUTES <br />OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE <br />EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL <br />AUGUST 3, 1987 <br />472 <br />a* Tirp <br />Answering rollcall were Members Richards, Smith, Turner and Mayor Courtney. <br />CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED. <br />Member Turner to adopt the consent agenda as presented. <br />Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by <br />Rollcall : <br />Ayes: Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney <br />Motion carried. <br />*MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF JULY 20 AND THE SPECIAL MEETING OF JULY 27, <br />1987 APPROVED. <br />approve the minutes of the Regular Council Meeting of July 20 and the Special <br />Meeting of July 27, 1987. <br />*FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BUILDING EXPANSION - CINEPLEX ODEON CORPORATION (EDINA i <br />THEATRE) CONTINUED TO 9/14/87. <br />Member Turner to continue the public hearing on Final Development Plan for <br />September 14, 1987, <br />Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Turner to <br />Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. <br />Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by I I <br />I <br />Building Expansion of Cineplex Odeon Corporation (Edina Theatre) to the meeting of i <br />! Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. <br />REPORT GIVEN ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. <br />attention to information provided by Planner Craig Larsen to aid the Council in <br />their review of the Comprehensive Plan. <br />density, medium density, and high density residential from the Plan. <br />designation was then related to the appropriate Zoning District for which density <br />ranges are provided. Also included were the multi-unit projects and their actual <br />density which the Council has approved since adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in <br />1980. Mayor Courtney commented that there seemed to be some inconsistencies <br />between the allowed units per acre in the Comprehensive Plan and the allowed units <br />per acre in the Zoning Ordinance. <br />projects approved since adoption of the Plan seem to be in the mid-range of the <br />density allowances in the Zoning Ordinance. In some cases the proponents asked <br />for the maximum units per acre but the approval granted was more in the middle <br />range, <br />into account many properties in the City that were already zoned and developed. <br />The goal was .to not make them non-conforming by adoption of the Zoning Ordinance <br />and this resulted in the density ranges contained in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. <br />Hughes added that the range of densities allowed in the Zoning Ordinance are <br />firmed up by a schedule of allowances contained in the Ordinance (i.e. underground <br />parking, reduced lot coverage, spacing, distance to freeway interchange). Under <br />the present Zoning Ordinance a developer can earn increased density through better <br />construction and locating structures as far as they can from other residential <br />buildings. Member Smith referred to the ComDrehensive Plan definition for medium <br />Manager Rosland directed the Council's <br />The .report listed definitions of low 1 <br />Each <br />1 <br />I <br />Assistant Manager Hughes responded that the <br />I . He said that when the Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1984 we had to take <br />density-residential and suggested that similir language be drafted for the <br />definition for high density residential and brought back for the Council's review <br />and decision on changes to the definitions. <br />in definitions should be sent to the Community Development and Planning Commission <br />to be heard as the same time they consider the land use designation changes which <br />the Council has suggested. No formal action was taken. <br />CDBG PROGRAM AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY APPROVED. <br />that the City of Edina and 42 other Hennepin County communities jointly receive <br />Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds through Hennepin County. Edina's <br />participation is made possible by a Joint Cooperation Agreement with the county. <br />The existing agreement expires October 1, 1987. <br />provides federal funds for local community development activities it is necessary <br />to execute a new agreement to cover the next three years. <br />formatting, there are only a few changes from the Joint Cooperation Agreement in <br />effect since 1984. <br />limiting the number of activities to three per community per year and each to a <br />minimum of $7,500 (exceptions are joint activities and instances where the <br />planning allocation is less than $7,500). <br />provision for crediting program income back to the community from which it <br />The Council agreed that any changes <br />Manager Rosland advised <br />To continue the program which <br />Othe? than some <br />One is the inclusion of the current administrative policy <br />The new agreement also includes a new <br />i <br />1 <br />! <br />I' <br />I <br />I <br />originates for reprogramming to eligible and fundable activities. <br />recommend execution of the agreement. <br />activities per community per year would affect any program the City is now <br />running. Assistant Manager Hughes said staff did not feel it would eliminate any <br />basic programs such as handicapped accessibility, housing rehabilitation and land <br />acquisition programs. <br />existing multi-city program and would be exempt. <br />that Hennepin County for administrative purposes is using the three activity limit <br />as a way to encourage cities to sponsor joint programs,like the H.O.M.E. program, <br />instead of having each of the individual cities running small programs. <br />Richards moved adoption of the following resolution: <br />Staff would <br />Member Turner asked if the limit of three <br />1 The H.O.M.E. program would still qualify as it is an <br />He said his understanding was <br />Member