Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE <br />EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL <br />OCTOBER 17, 1988 <br />319 <br />Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner and Mayor Courtney <br />COMMENDATION PRESENTED TO DOUGLAS R. TAYL,OR. Mayor Courtney presented the <br />following commendation to Douglas R. Taylor: <br />"The City,of Edina wishes to commend you for your efforts in apprehending a <br />burglar on September 24, 1988. <br />On that date you arrived home to find an unknown man inside your apartment. <br />overcame his physical resistance, restrained this man and summoned police <br />officers, who took custody of the man, who was subsequently identified as Gregory <br />Quamme. Quamme was a wanted felon. <br />from his vehicle which links him to numerous burglaries which occurred in <br />Burnsville, Bloomington and Edina. <br />Your efforts in this apprehension have aided in removing a very active criminal <br />from our streets and deserves the praise and honor of the citizens of Edina. <br />C. Wayne Courtney, Mayor" <br />You <br />Stolen property was recovered from him and <br />CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED. <br />Member Turner to approve and adopt the consent agenda items as presented. <br />Motion was made by Member Kelly and seconded by <br />Rollcall : <br />Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney <br />Motion carried. <br />PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR BERENBERG FIRST ADDITION DENIED UPON ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF <br />FACT. Planner Craig Larsen stated that the public hearing on preliminary plat <br />approval for Berenberg First Addition had been continued by the Council at its <br />meeting of October 3, 1988 and that the Council had directed staff and the City <br />Attorney to prepare findings and reasons to support denial of the plat for further <br />review knd final action by the Council. He advised that the findings have been <br />prepared and reviewed by the City Attorney and that copies have been mailed to the <br />affected parties. Gary Grandrud, 8400 Normandale Boulevard, attorney representing <br />Danny Berenberg, directed the Council's attention to his letter dated October 17, <br />1988 which had been hand delivered and to which was attached a legal memorandum <br />dated October 12, 1988 from Mark A. Otness regarding Berenberg First Addition. He <br />urged the Council to carefully consider the legal issues and recent Minnesota <br />Supreme Court decisions in situations similar to the Berenberg application <br />referenced in the memorandum. <br />Mr. Walz stated that he had reviewed the subject memorandum and that in looking at <br />the Council Agenda he noted an item to amend the Subdivision Ordinance No. 801. <br />He said it was his understanding that Ordinance No. 801 is the ordinance that <br />presently provides the standards for review of the proposed subdivision. It is <br />Mr. Berenberg's position that he has met the standards in the existing ordinance. <br />In reading the text of the proposed amendment, Mr. Walz said that it appears to be <br />a bootstrap effort to justify, after the fact, some of the findings that have been <br />proposed in connection with the Berenberg subdivision. <br />appears to be an admission that the standards in the present ordinance are not <br />sufficient to authorize the rejection of the proposed subdivision. James Van <br />Valkenburg, representing concerned neighbors, commented that he had read the <br />Findings and had submitted comments thereon. He stated that the neighbors are in <br />favor of the Findings and urged the Council to adopt them. <br />clarification on the comment made by Mr. Walz that the proposed amendment to <br />Ordinance No. 801 is meant to cover this subject. <br />the Findings before the Council make no reference to the amendment to Ordinance <br />No. 801. <br />what action the Council will take on the ordinance amendment. <br />that the two agenda items came together at this time. <br />to reaffirm what the Comprehensive Plan says and what the practice of the <br />Community Development and Planning Commission and the City Council has been, but <br />the two items are not tied. Motion was made by Member Turner to adopt the <br />Findings, Decision and Reasons as presented by staff (copy attached) and to deny <br />the application for the proposed subdivision entitled Berenberg First Addition. <br />Motion was seconded by Member Smith. <br />He then introduced Frank Walz, Best & Flanagan. <br />He said further that it <br />Member Smith asked for <br />Attorney Erickson opined that <br />The Findings are based upon the existing ordinance and it is not known <br />It just so happens <br />The ordinance amendment is <br />Rollcall : <br />Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner <br />Nays: Courtney <br />Motion carried. ' <br />Mayor Courtney said that he voted no because he was not sure the City could defend <br />its decision in a court of law. <br />PRELIMINARY REZONING AND PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED FOR ERHARDT ADDITION. Planner <br />Craig Larsen recalled that the public hearing on preliminary rezoning and <br />preliminary plat for the Erhardt Addition had been continued by the Council at its <br />meeting of September 19, 1988 to give the proponents time to revise the plat and <br />provide information on the sizes and dimensions of other lots in the area. <br />proponent has submitted a revised preliminary plat which changes the common rear <br />lot line. <br />feet deep the lot still is below the required 120 feet. <br />The <br />The revised plat provides the required 25 foot rear yard, but at 107 <br />The proponent has also