HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-04-20 Council Regular Meeting MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL
HELD AT CITY HALL
APRIL 20,2004
7:00 P.M.
ROLLCALL Answering rollcall were Members Hovland, Kelly, Masica and Mayor Maetzold.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by
Member Masica approving the Council Consent Agenda as presented.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Hovland, Kelly, Masica,Maetzold
Motion carried.
*MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 7, 2004, AND SPECIAL MEETING OF
APRIL 7, 2004, AND BOARD OF APPEALS AND EQUALIZATION OF APRIL 12, 2004,
APPROVED Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Masica, approving
the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of the Edina City Council for April 7, 2004, and Special
Council Meeting of April 7, 2004, and Board of Appeals and Equalization Meeting of April 12,
2004.
Motion carried on rollcall vote-four ayes.
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-31 APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EDINA
SCHOOL DISTRICT 273 BOND REFERENDUM PROTECTS AND ADDITIONS TO EDINA
HIGH SCHOOL, VALLEY VIEW AND SOUTH VIEW MIDDLE SCHOOLS, THE EDINA
COMMUNITY CENTER AND ATHLETIC FIELDS Affidavits of Notice were presented,
approved and ordered placed on file.
Presentation by Planner
Planner Larsen informed the Council the Edina School District was seeking a Conditional Use
Permit to allow construction of various additions and site improvements to the South
View/Edina Community Center and Valley View/Edina High School campuses. He added these
additions were a result of the November 2003 School District Capital Improvement Bond
Referendum. Mr. Larsen said the proposed improvements met all City Code requirements with
the exception of the Edina Community Center parking, which was deficient. However, Mr.
Larsen pointed out that over 100 spaces had been added to this campus. Mr. Larsen introduced
Ted Rozeboom, Rozeboom, Miller Architects Inc., the principal architect for the Edina School
District.
Member Masica asked how many spaces Edina's Code would require to comply relative to
parking. Mr. Larsen said that Edina Code would require one parking space per three seats in the
largest venue, which would be the stadium containing 4700 seats. He added that with the
reconfiguration of the lots adding 100 spaces parking issues should be eased considerably on the
site.
Proponent Presentation
Ted Rozeboom, Rozeboom, Miller Architects, Inc. reviewed the additions to the buildings and
sites for both the South View Middle School/Edina Community Center/Normandale Elementary
School site and the Edina High School/Valley View Middle School site as follows:
Page 1
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
South View Middle School/Edina Community Center/Normandale Elementary School Site:
• Building Addition to South View Middle School
• Building Addition to Normandale Elementary School Portion of Edina Community Center
Building
• Parking Lots Reconfiguration Adding 100 Plus Parking Spaces Overall
• New Pedestrian Walkways Redirecting Foot Traffic
• New building entrance plazas clearly identifying public entrances
• Reconfiguration of bus loops/drop off&pick up locations
• Relocation and renovation of playing and practice fields
• Installation of artificial turf on Kuhlman Field
• Widening of running track around Kuhlman Field
Edina High School/ Valley View Middle School Site:
• Building addition and remodel of classroom spaces at Edina High School
• Building addition and remodel of classroom spaces at Valley View Middle School
• Relocation of existing entry drive/ring road to the westerly edge of site
• Redesign and location of building entries and bus turn-arounds for both schools
• Relocation and renovation of playing and practice fields
• Parking lot reconfiguration
• Relocation and redesign of exterior walkways
Mr. Rozeboom said that some guiding tenets that were followed included:
• Enhancing safety (separation of traffic)
• Maximizing parking
• Preserving green space
• Increase of practice fields
• Clarify public entrances
He added that the design also looked at programmatic considerations and proximities, both for
daily use and for after hours use; tying into and expanding upon the existing palette of materials
in place at each site; attending to natural light in both the renovations and additions; attention to
the building images in non-daylight hours. Mr. Rozeboom complimented the District 273 staff on
the effort put into the thoughtful design process of the proposed improvements. Mr. Rozeboom
introduced Jay Pomeroy, the landscape architect from the Civil Engineering firm of Anderson-
Johnson Associates, Inc.
Mayor Maetzold asked if the new McCarthy field location was planned to be a storm water
holding area and whether the new pool would be competition sized. Mr. Rozeboom replied that
McCarthy field would be used for storm water if needed, and that the new pool would have eight
lanes, a diving well and seating for up to 200.
Member Hovland asked if the new perimeter road at the High School was intended to be used in
one or two directions; and how would ingress/egress be controlled. Member Hovland expressed
some concern over the proposed orientation of the parking lot to the "ring road". Mr. Rozeboom
said the ring road would be a two-way road. Mr. Pomeroy said that reorientation of the parking
lot would be reviewed because it was a good suggestion.
Page 2
Minutes/Edina City Council/Apri120,2004
Member Masica asked if the Edina Community Center Parking lot would meet future needs as
well as current needs. Mr. Rozeboom replied that with 780 parking spaces the day time needs of
the facility would be met, but that special events parking would not be met because of the
volume needed to satisfy Kuhlman s 4700 seats. He added the redesign of the two campuses was
challenging because of the finite land available. He added he felt the proposed design was a
dramatic improvement with the least effect on the neighborhood. Mr. Rozeboom said they
moved the road away from the building creating more pedestrian safety, defined the entries, and
added 69 new parking stalls.
Member Hovland asked about Valley View Middle School/Edina High School site access from
Valley View Road. Mr. Rozeboom said the ingress/egress remained the same.
Member Kelly asked about work proposed to be completed at the High School fields down the
hill. He also asked if there would be any gain of gymnasiums at South View. Mr. Rozeboom said
fieldwork was not scheduled in the current phase of improvements. School Board Member
Peyton Robb said that the new gymnasium at South View would increase the available practice
space because of its size and configuration.
Member Masica asked what was happening in the spaces vacated by classroom relocation to the
new building additions. She also complimented the district on their attention to increasing the
light in the buildings. Mr. Rozeboom said that there was several areas that were being
reconfigured based upon program and proximity.
Public Comment
Peter Johnson, 6704 Rosemary Lane, expressed concern about breaks in the fence to the
neighborhood and pedestrians walking across the service road. Traffic using this road will
increase past his home causing more noise, trash, etc.
Ronald Johnson, 6700 Rosemary Lane, stated he had no particular objection to the proposed
plans, but he had not in his 28 years, heard of any accidents happening with the accesses to the
schools, as they currently exist. He pointed out that four openings in the fence have been actually
installed by the School District, which students use. Mr. Johnson expressed a greater concern
regarding Valley View Road from Antrim to Gleason when students are coming to or leaving the
school. He said he felt they really need four lanes at that point. Mr. Johnson also asked about
storm water since the pond has frequently flooded and was a concern. He added that he had not
received any notices for the meeting. Mr. Pomeroy said the District was working with the
watershed districts and the City Engineer. They were lowering the street and increasing the size
of the storm sewer pipe. Mr. Rozeboom added that they had met with Mr. Johnson and his wife
regarding this exact issue.
Ruth Hamilton, 6613 Nordic Circle, stated that no one along Nordic Circle was personally
contacted by the School District. Ms. Hamilton reported that her backyard abutted one of the
openings in the chain link fence. She said she was concerned about safety with the road next to
the fence. Ms. Hamilton said that she liked the roadway next to the school because many times
people need to use it when accessing the buildings. She asked about the safety of people crossing
the roadway.
Page 3
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
David Arenson, 6708 Rosemary Lane, asked how many feet the road would be from the property
line. Mr. Pomeroy answered that the road would end up being between 30 and 70 feet from the
property line.
Jon Demars Victorsen, 7213 Cornelia Drive, questioned the handicapped access to the High
School's Activities entrance. Mr. Demars Victorsen said that currently there was a split entry
with steps. Mr. Rozeboom said the new entrance will be installed at the lower grade and also
have access to an elevator. He added there would be a reception area staffed at the main level as
well.
Marie Fesenmaier, 5713 Concord Avenue, representing the Edina Community Center Association
as their President, expressed concern about how the student drop off/pick up area will be
controlled. Ms. Fesenmaier asked several questions about the changes to the campus of the Edina
Community Center and South View Middle School. She commented that during events,
spectators park on both side of Concord Avenue, which was very dangerous. Ms. Fesenmaier
requested that parking be restricted to only one side of the street or some areas signed no parking
so walkers have some areas to cross. Ms. Fesenmaier asked when Concord was scheduled for
reconstruction. Ms. Fesenmaier also stated she had not received any notices from the School
District regarding the proposed improvements. Mayor Maetzold suggested the parking question
be directed to the City's Traffic Safety Committee and Mr. Houle stated South View Lane was
two to three years from reconstruction with Concord Avenue being three to four years away.
David O. Bie, 6760 Valley View Road, asked if the fence would be disturbed in any way. Mr.
Pomeroy said that it would not be disturbed since the new roadway will match the existing slope.
Dr. Ken Dragseth, Superintendent of ISD 273 stated the District's publication Front Page
Back Page
had been sent to every Edina resident within the last two weeks.
Mayor Maetzold commented that the Council understood many people had difficulties with
communication,but stated his overall opinion that the proposed improvements were an excellent
plan and suggested the project move ahead.
Member Kelly agreed that the plan as presented was a good plan. He expressed his concern that
not enough dialogue had taken place with adjacent neighbors and suggested adding a condition
to the approval of the Conditional Use Permit requiring the District to meet with adjacent
property owners especially at Edina High School with the relocation of the road and where site
ingress/egress was a concern.
Manager Hughes summarized the conditions the Council wished to add to the approval:
additional dialogue with adjacent property owners on the west side of the High School and the
final grading drainage shall be approved by the City Engineer.
The Council concurred with Mr. Hughes summarization of conditions.
Dr. Dragseth stated the School District appreciated the input and had no difficulty in looking at
better fencing and landscaping for the improvements. He pointed out that the hill to Nordic
Circle was very steep. He urged the Council to favorably consider the requested Conditional Use
Permit stating the proposed plan was a huge improvement.
Page 4
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
Member Kelly made a motion to close the public hearing. Member Masica seconded the
motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and motion its adoption with three
conditions as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-31
GRANTING A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
TO EDINA SCHOOL DISTRICT 273
WHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Code Section 850 (the Zoning Ordinance)
have been met;and
WHEREAS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by Code Section No.
850.04 Subd.4 have been satisfied:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council hereby grants a
Conditional Use Permit to Edina School District 273,to allow the additions and renovations to:
South View Middle School, Valley View Middle School, Edina Community Center, Athletic
Fields, and Edina High School conditioned upon:
1. Minnehaha and Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Permits;and
2. Edina School District meeting with adjacent property owners to discuss ingress/egress
from Edina High School and landscaping; and
3. Final grading and drainage to be approved by the City Engineer.
Passed and adopted this 201h day of April 2004.
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Ayes: Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
*SET HEARING DATE OF MAY 4,2004, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2004-07- SECTION
850 FENCE HEIGHT STANDARDS Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by
Member Masica setting May 4, 2004, as hearing date amending Ordinance No. 2004-07, Section
850, Fence Height Standards.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -four ayes.
ORDINANCE NO. 2004-04 ADOPTED AMENDING SECTIONS 105, 185, 400, 410 AND
ADOPTING CURRENT MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE Mr. Hughes noted the
Council had granted first reading to the ordinance adopted the current Minnesota State Building
Code at their last meeting. He said the corrections staff noticed had been made and the ordinance
was ready for adoption.
Member Masica asked if the name of the Construction Board of Appeals had been changed.
Building Official Kirchman said the name of the Board would remain the same.
Member Masica made a motion granting second reading to Ordinance No. 2004-04 as follows:
EDINA ORDINANCE NO. 2004-04
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 105,185,400, and 410
OF THE CITY CODE TO PROVIDE UPDATES TO THE
MINNESOTA STATE BUILDING CODE AND
REMOVING ALL REFERENCES TO THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE,
Page 5
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS:
Section 1. Subsection 105.05 Definitions is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Construction Board of Appeals. The board which hears and decides appeals of orders,
decisions or determinations made by the Building Official relative to the application
and interpretation of the Building Code, pursuant to Seetion 204 of the Unifor n
Building C MSBC 1300.0230,as defined in Section 410 of this Code."
Section 2. Subsection 185.01 is hereby amended by deleting the Building Code Compliance
Inspection fees for Residential or Commercial properties.
Section 3. Subsection 400.01 of Section 400 Construction Board of Appeals is hereby amended
to read as follows:
"400.01 Establishment. The Council does hereby establish the Construction
Board of Appeals (the 'Board") pursuant to Seetion 105 A--f the 1-1-n-i—form Building Code
(UBC) MSBC Chapter 1300.0230, adopted by Section 410 of this Code."
Section 4. Subsection 400.02. Powers and Duties of Section 400 Construction Board of Appeals
is hereby amended to read as follows:
"400.02 Powers and Duties. The Board shall:
A. Fulfill duties imposed upon it by Beetien1AS of the—UBC MSBC chapter
1300.0230.
B. Consider appeals from any order, requirement, permit, decision, refusal or
determination made by the Building Official or the Sanitarian in the application or
interpretation of this Code regulating (i) construction, alteration, moving or
demolition of buildings, (ii) the construction, installation, alteration or removal of
plumbing, gas piping or equipment,water softening or filtering equipment, (iii) the
installation, alteration or removal of electrical wiring and equipment, or (iv)
excavations under Section 420 of this Code. The Board shall not hear any appeal
from, nor have any jurisdiction over, actions taken by any official of the City under
c,.,,,.io- ,n-2 of the T TuC-or under Section 470 of this Code, or any section of this Code
enforced by means of the procedures set forth in Section 470 of this Code.
C. Study and review new types of materials and methods of construction, and
advise the Building Official and the Council as to the suitability of alternate
materials and types of construction to assist in progressive development of the
provisions of the building, plumbing, heating, gas piping, and electrical codes or
sections of this Code,and to make recommendations relative to the Codes.
D. Study and review from time to time the building, plumbing,heating,gas piping,
and electrical codes or sections of this Code and similar code provisions applicable
in communities surrounding the City and such other codes as may come to their
attention, and recommend to the Council such new legislation as the Board may
deem desirable.
E. Consider matters referred to the Board by the Council or by the Building Official
and make recommendations relative to them."
Section 5. Subsection 400.08 Change of Name of Section 400 Construction Board of Appeals
shall hereby be amended to read as follows:
"400.08 Change of Name. All references in all sections of this Code to the
Building Construction Appeals Board or to the Building Construction Codes
Commission shall mean and refer to the Board of Appeals created by Seetio 105 of the
UBE MSBC Chapter 1300.0230, and called the Construction Board of Appeals in this
Code."
Section 6. Section 410 Building Code is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Section 410 - Building Code
Page 6
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
Section 16State Building Code Adopted. There is hereby adopted and
incorporated herein by reference, as a section of this Code, the
Minnesota State Building Code (the "MSBC") as promulgated
by the State Department of Administration pursuant to M.S.
16B.59 through 16B.75. The Minnesota State Building Code
includes the following chapters of Minnesota Rules:
2. 1300, Administration of the Minnesota State Building Code;
3. 1301,Building Official Certification;
4. 1302, State Building Code Construction Approvals;
5. 1303,Minnesota Provisions;
6. 1305, Adoption of the 2000 International Building Code;
7. 1307, Elevators and Related Devices;
8. 1309, Adoption of the 2000 International Residential Code;
9. 1311, Adoption of the 2000 Guidelines for the Rehabilitation of Existing
Buildings;
10. 1315, Adoption of the 2002 National Electrical Code;
11. 1325, Solar Energy Systems;
12. 1330, Fallout Shelters;
13. 1335, Floodproofing Regulations;
14. 1341,Minnesota Accessibility Code;
15. 1346, Adoption of the Minnesota State Mechanical Code,
16. 1350,Manufactured Homes;
17. 1360, Prefabricated Structures;
18. 1361,Industrialized/Modular Buildings;
19. 1370, Storm Shelters (Manufactured Home Parks);
20. 4715,Minnesota Plumbing Code;and
21. 7670,7672,7674, 7676 and 7678,Minnesota Energy Code
m ta- `tH l -TUISB c n eff ecc-virn czvb cr v,�1998, Adoption
includes wing the following, but only the following, listed optional
provisions of the MSBC and of the 1997 Edition of the Uniform Building Gode
asp =gated by the international Conferenee of Building Offieials (the
" T�except, however, that fees shall be as provided in this Section. The
optional provisions which are hereby adopted are as follows:
A. Chapter 1306 with , 8, or F eceupaneies with 2-,000 or more
gross square feet) 1306.0020, Subp. 2 and 1306.0030, item E, option 1, of the
MSBC relating to Special Fire Protection Systems.
B. Chapter 1335, parts 1335.0600 to 1335.1200 of the MSBC relating to
Floodproofing.
Section 16Fees and Surcharges.
Subd. 1 Fees. Permit fees required authorized by the MSBC or the UBG shall
be in the amounts set forth in Section 185 of this Code.
Subd. 2 Other Permit Related Fees. Reinspection fees, inspections outside
normal business hours, inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated and fees
for additional plan review required by loss, changes, additions or revisions to plans
shall be in the amounts set forth in Section 185 of this Code.
Subd. 3 Investigation Fee. If work for which a permit is required by the code
has been commenced without first obtaining a permit, a special investigation shall be
made before a permit may be issued for the work. An investigation fee, as authorized
by MSBC Chapter 1300.0160 Subp. 8, shall be collected, and is in addition to the
required permit fees. The investigation fee shall be equal to the permit fee.
Page 7
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
Subd. 4 Outside Consultant Fees. Plan review, inspections and/or consultation
fees for outside consultants may be collected and shall comprise the actual costs to the
City.
Subd. 2 5 Surcharge. In addition to the fees charged pursuant to Subd. 1 of this
Subsection, each applicant for a permit shall pay a surcharge to the City in the amount
set forth in M.S. 16B.70 to be remitted to the State Department of Administration
pursuant to M.S.16B.70.
Subd. 3 6 Additional Surcharge. In addition to the fees charged pursuant to
Subd. 1 and Subd. 2 5 of this Subsection, each building permit issued for work that
requires a licensed residential building contractor, remodeler, or specialty contractor
pursuant to, and as defined in M.S. 326.83 and 326.84 (Chapter 306, 1991 Session Laws),
shall pay to the City a surcharge as allowed by M.S. 326.86, and in the amount set forth
in Section 185 of this Code.
Seetion 17Codes on File. One eepy of eaeh of the following,- eaeh marked
"O leial-Copy", is on file in the offieeof the-Clerk
remain on file for use and examination by the publie:
I'he-St-ate-Building Code regulations known and iden l Chapters 1300,-
1330 13^02, 130•�-1306, -1307-, 1315, 1325, 1.350-1335, 1340-1346, -1350;-1360-zv6r
1270 4715 and 7670
The-UBC,with all appendiees.
The -1996 Edition of the National Eleetrieal Code (NEC) as approved by
The 1987 American National Standard Safety Code for Elevators and Esealaters
adopted the-Ameriean- atienl Standards institute and the America
Seeiety of Engineers (ANSI/ASME)A17i--98'7,together with supplement
A47.1 (a) -1988 and ANSI A-17.3 1986 as published by the Ameriean Soeie"
M-e-e-h-anieal Engineers.
Chapters -1 to 20 of the Edition of the Unit,,,.... Meehanical Code,
promulgated by the Intern-ational Conference of Building Officials and the
inter-national Association of Numbing and .=eehanieal O neials,with
Minnesota_Energy!'..,a.,as et out in Chapter 7670 of Mi....esot.. Rules,-1998
N4i, ness„}„ Plumbing!''ode � et out i.. Chapter 471 5 f Minnesota Rule 1998
�.��..a..,.,...H��H��......b ......... H.� .�.,. .,.. cziuprcrs»-in-n=rr�rcc�vccrzcazc�z»v.
interim Guidelines for Building Occupant Proteetion-from Tornadoes-a �
Extreme W4nds, T-R 83A-, january 1980, Sections 1 and 2-, published by
Federal HL LZliGf Zetie , ,
The -197-2 Ed-itio-in of flwed- Pro-o-fing Regulationsl as promulgated by the Off
of the Chief Engi..eer U.S.S A rnp 7A7....1.i«.ra.... ll !'
, . .
410.04 410.03 Organization and Enforcement. The organization of the Building
Department of the City, and enforcement of this Section, shall be as established by
Chapter 1 of the UBC Chapter 1300 of the Minnesota State Building Code.
410.05 410.04 Penalty. Any person who violates or fails to comply with any provision
of this Section shall be subject to the penalties provided by Subsection 100.09 of this
Code, and shall also be subject to other penalties and remedies available to the City
under the MSBC."
Section 7. Subdivision 8 of Subsection 430.03 License Requirements of Section 430 shall
hereby amended to read as follows:
"Subd. 8 Fee Fees and Surcharges. All applications for licenses shall be accompanied by
a fee in the amount set forth in Section 185 of this Code.
Section 180ther Permit Related Fees. Reinspection fees, inspections
outside normal business hours, inspections for which no fee is
Page 8
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
sRecifically indicated and fees for additional plan review
required by loss, changes, additions or revisions to plans shall
be in the amounts set forth in Section 185 of this Code.
Section 19Investigation Fee. If work for which a permit is required by the
code has been commenced without first obtaining a permit, a
special investigation shall be made before a permit may be
issued for the work. An investigation fee, as authorized by
MSBC Chapter 1300.0160 Subp. 8, shall be collected, and is in
addition to the required permit fees. The investigation fee shall
be equal to the permit fee.
Section 20Outside Consultant Fees. Plan review, inspections and/or
consultation fees for outside consultants may be collected and
shall comprise the actual costs to the City.
C. Surcharge. In addition to the fees charged pursuant to Subd. 1 of this
Subsection, each applicant for a permit shall pay a surcharge to the City in the amount
set forth in M.S. 16B.70 to be remitted to the State Department of Administration
pursuant to M.S.16B.70."
Section 8. Subsection 185.01 is hereby amended by adding the following fee category:
43 430.03 Other Permit Related $47.0 Per hour or the total hourly cost to City,
0 Subd. 8 Fees 0 whichever is greatest (includes supervision,
overhead, equipment, hourly wages and
fringe benefits of employees involved
Section 9. Subsection 435.07 Permit Fee of Section 435 is hereby amended to read as
follows:
435.07 Permit Fee Fees and Surcharges. The--fee fees and surcharges for a permit
required by this Section shall be in the amount set forth in Section 185 of this Code.
Subd. 1 Other Permit Related Fees. Re-inspection fees, inspections outside
normal business hours,inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated and
fees for additional plan review required by loss, changes, additions or revisions
to plans shall be in the amounts set forth in Section 185 of this Code.
Subd. 2 Investigation Fee. If work for which a permit is required by the code
has been commenced without first obtaining a permit, a special investigation shall be
made before a permit may be issued for the work. An investigation fee, as authorized
by MSBC Chapter 1300.0160 Subp. 8, shall be collected, and is in addition to the
required permit fees. The investigation fee shall be equal to the permit fee.
Subd. 3 Outside Consultant Fees. Plan review, inspections and/or consultation
fees for outside consultants may be collected and shall comprise the actual costs to the
City.
Subd. 4 Surcharge. In addition to the fees charged pursuant to Subd. 1 of this
Subsection, each applicant for a permit shall pay a surcharge to the City in the amount
set forth in M.S. 16B.70 to be remitted to the State Department of Administration
pursuant to M.S. 16B.70."
Section 10. Subsection 185.01 is hereby amended by adding the following fee category:
43 435.07 Other Permit $47.00 Per hour or the total hourly cost to City,
5 Subd. 2 Related Fees whichever is greatest (includes supervision,
overhead, equipment, hourly wages and
fringe benefits of employees involved
Section 11. Subsection 440.04 Fee of Section 440 is hereby amended to read as follows:
"440.04 Fee Fees and Surcharges. Applications for permits pursuant to this Section
shall be accompanied by the-fee-fees set out in Section 185 of this Code.
Page 9
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
Subd. 1 Other Permit Related Fees. Reinspection fees, inspections outside
normal business hours,inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated and
fees for additional plan review required by loss, changes, additions or revisions
to plans shall be in the amounts set forth in Section 185 of this Code.
Subd. 2 Investigation Fee. If work for which a permit is required by the code
has been commenced without first obtaining a permit, a special investigation shall be
made before a permit may be issued for the work. An investigation fee, as authorized
by MSBC Chapter 1300.0160 Subp. 8, shall be collected, and is in addition to the
required permit fees.The investigation fee shall be equal to the permit fee.
Subd. 3 Outside Consultant Fees. Plan review, inspections and/or consultation
fees for outside consultants may be collected and shall comprise the actual costs to the
City.
Subd. 4 Surcharge. In addition to the fees charged pursuant to Subd. 1 of this
Subsection, each applicant for a permit shall pay a surcharge to the City in the amount
set forth in M.S. 16B.70 to be remitted to the State Department of Administration
pursuant to M.S.16B.70."
Section 12. Subsection 185.01 is hereby amended by adding the following fee category:
44 440.02 Other Permit $47.0 Per hour or the total hourly cost to City,
0 Subd.2 Related Fees 0 whichever is greatest (includes supervision,
overhead, equipment, hourly wages and
fringe benefits of employees involved
Section 13. Subdivision 3 Proximity to Power Lines of Subsection 815.05 of section 815
is hereby amended to read as follows:
"Subd. 3 Proximity to Power Lines. No antenna, dish antenna or tower shall
exceed a height equal to the distance from the base of the antenna, dish antenna or
tower to the nearest overhead electrical power line (except individual service drops),
less five feet. Monopoles designed to comply with the wind loading requirements of
the Uniform Building Gede International Building Code need not conform to the
requirements of this Subd.3."
Section 14. Subsection 830.05 Permit of Section 830 is hereby amended to read:
"Subd. 1 Application. Prior to engaging in any activity requiring a permit, an
application shall be submitted to the Building Official on forms provided by the
Building Official. The application shall be accompanied by a schedule for the
commencement and completion of the work. The applieation shall be accompanied by
the fee =~ `t'^ a Rt sOF for-th in 8eeti on 14r of this, Cede. The application shall also be
accompanied by a plan drawn at a scale of not less than one inch equals 30 feet which
contains the following information:
A. Location of trees to be removed.
B. Existing and proposed buildings and structures.
C. Existing and proposed contours.
D. Provisions for temporary and permanent erosion control.
E. Proposed revegetation of disturbed area.
F. Provisions for temporary and permanent drainage.
Subd. 2 Fees and Surcharges Applications for permits pursuant to this Section shall be
accompanied by the fees set out in Section 185 of this Code.
Section 210ther Permit Related Fees. Reinspection fees, inspections
outside normal business hours, inspections for which no fee is
specifically indicated and fees for additional plan review
required by loss, changes, additions or revisions to plans shall
be in the amounts set forth in Section 185 of this Code.
Page 10
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
B. Investigation Fee. If work for which a permit is required by the code has been
commenced without first obtaining a permit, a special investigation shall be made
before a permit may be issued for the work. An investigation fee, as authorized by
MSBC Chapter 1300.0160 Subp. 8, shall be collected, and is in addition to the required
permit fees. The investigation fee shall be equal to the permit fee.
C. Outside Consultant Fees. Plan review, inspections and/or consultation fees for
outside consultants may be collected and shall comprise the actual costs to the City.
D. Surcharge. In addition to the fees charged pursuant to Subd. 1 of this
Subsection, each applicant for a permit shall pay a surcharge to the City in the amount
set forth in M.S. 16B.70 to be remitted to the State Department of Administration
pursuant to M.S. 16B.70."
Section 15. Subsection 185.01 is hereby amended by adding the following fee category:
83 830.05 Other Permit $47.0 Per hour or the total hourly cost to City,
0 Subd. 2 Related Fees 0 whichever is greatest (includes supervision,
overhead, equipment, hourly wages and
fringe benefits of employees involved
Section 16 Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect after it adoption and
publication according to law.
Passed and adopted 20th day of April 2004.
First Reading: April 7,2004
Second Reading: April 20, 2004
Published: April 29, 2004
Attest ' `4°� �¢-r;c-M-�v7-
Debra A. Mangen, City Cle k Dennis F. Maetzold, Mayor
Member Kelly seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Aye: Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Ordinance Adopted.
ORDINANCE NO. 2004-05 ADOPTED ESTABLISHING A DISORDERLY HOUSE
ORDINANCE Mr. Hughes said that this would be the second reading for a proposed ordinance
to define and regulate disorderly houses. He stated the proposed ordinance would allow the
City to take actions against the property's owner as well as the tenant. Mr. Hughes explained the
ordinance had been modeled after Minnesota State Statute 609.33 with a broader range of
violations specified, adding that both owner occupied and rental housing would be covered by
the proposed ordinance.
Public Comment
Jon Demars Victorsen, 7213 Cornelia Drive, stated he was a landlord and property owner in
Edina. He said he felt the proposed ordinance was unnecessary since the "Disorderly" house
statute already existed. Mr. Demars Victorsen said that in his review of complaints there had
only been 25 and only a fifth of those involved rental housing. He added the ordinance was just
reiterating language already contained in every standard housing lease. Mr. Demars Victorsen
suggested a more proactive approach would be forming a collaborative such as the Bloomington
Housing Collaborative. He expressed concern that the definition of habitual was vague.
Mr. Hughes noted the proposed ordinance was not specific to rental housing, but was an attempt
to provide some more options for enforcement. He added he was familiar with the Bloomington
Page 11
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
Collaborative and stated he believed that Edina was attempting to establish a similar
collaborative. Mr. Hughes stated that habitually was a term defined in statute and with a body of
case law supporting the definition. He said that Items. E, F, G, and H had been added to Edina's
ordinance making it more restrictive that State law.
Member Masica stated her belief that the proposed ordinance would aid landlords in dealing
with a problem tenant.
Karin Ritter, 4812 West 62nd Street, stated she did not believe the proposed ordinance would aid
her neighborhood in dealing with the negative issue they have lived with for months. She said
she would like to see greater detail in the ordinance and stated she was very disappointed with
the limitations of the proposed ordinance.
Diane Andersen, 6129 Ryan Avenue, shared some of the research she had done on ordinances
adopted in other jurisdictions, stated her disappointment with the Police Department's
communications and that the neighborhood was not able be involved in drafting the ordinances.
Ms. Andersen said she felt that her concerns had not been validated and she feared that the
proposed ordinance would not give them the relief they deserve.
Member Kelly stated that he believed the proposed ordinance was strong enough to be of use in
circumstances that would meet the definition of disorderly house.
Mr. Hughes pointed out that the proposed ordinance would become part of a larger City Code
and state law. He said violation of the City Code can be either a misdemeanor or gross
misdemeanor with a fine of up to $1,000 plus jail time. Mr. Hughes added the proposed
ordinance in his opinion would give additional tools to the police,but stressed there still must be
evidence of a violation.
Deputy Police Chief Ken Carlson, said the Police Department had reviewed calls for service
between March 1,2003 and January 14,2004, in the area of 6100-6400 Parnell,4600-4900 West 62nd
and 6400 Ryan Avenue. He reported that he located only one incident where a citation could be
issued that of an underage consumption of alcohol. Mr. Carlson added that the Police
Department intended to assign an officer to the situation with instructions to watch for specific
violations.
Jerry Paar, 6201 Virginia Avenue, stated he believed the adoption of the proposed ordinance
would be a step in the right direction. However,he said he felt a huge portion of the problem has
been the Edina Police Department's reaction to the neighbors. He expressed his frustration that
residents calling in with eyewitness accounts of blatant violations being told that was not enough
for a citation. Mr. Paar expressed his opinion that the Edina Police Department would not be a
help to the concerned citizens in his neighborhood.
Mr. Carlson responded that eyewitness accounts were enough to begin asking questions, but that
citations could not be written until there was more evidence. He urged the neighbors to work
with the Police Department in notifying them of problems and allow them to work together to
solve their issues. Mr. Carlson stated that the Edina Police Department would use the tools given
them by the Disorderly House ordinance to assist the neighbors.
Page 12
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
Following a brief council discussion Member Masica made a motion to grant second reading to
Ordinance NO. 2004-5 as follows:
EDINA ORDINANCE NO. 2004-5
AN ORDINANCE ADDING NEW
SECTION 1080 OF THE CITY CODE -
DISORDERLY HOUSE
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ORDAINS:
Section 1. The following new Section 1080 is added to the City Code:
1080.01 Declaration; Purpose. The Council finds and declares that citizens of the
City should be able to enjoy on their properties a sense of well-being, tranquility and
security; that the keeping of a disorderly house tends to cause emotional disturbances
and distress to occupants of surrounding properties and visitors to such properties and
tends to interfere with and obstruct their sense of well-being,tranquility and security.
1080.02. Definition. A disorderly house means a building, dwelling, place or
premises in which actions or conducts habitually occurs in violation of laws related to:
A. Sale of intoxicating liquor, intoxicating malt liquor or 3.2 percent malt
liquor;
B. Gambling;
C. Prostitution as defined in M.S. 609.321, Subd. 9 or acts relating to
prostitution;
D. Sale or possession of controlled substances as defined in M.S. 152.01,
Subd. 4;
E. Possession of firearms or weapons;
F. Causing, maintaining or permitting a nuisance that annoys, injures or
endangers the health,comfort or repose of the public;
G. Disorderly conduct as defined in M.S. 609.72;or
H. Open house party as defined in Section 905 of this Code.
1080.03. Owning or Operating a Disorderly House. No person may own, lease,
operate, manage, maintain, or conduct a disorderly house, or invite or attempt to invite
others to visit or remain in the disorderly house.
1080.04. Additional Remedies. Upon any violation of Subsection 1080.03, the
City may exercise, with or separately from any remedies and at the same and separate
times, all and any legal and equitable remedies then available to the City by this Code
or State Law to enforce Subsection 1080.03, including, without limitation, injunctive
relief.
Section 2. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon passage and publication.
First Reading: April 7, 2004
Second Reading: April 20,2004
Publication: April 29, 2004
Attest , i , �_ Lo
Debra lk"MarAg nv,\;fflty Cl� k Dennis F. Maetzold, Mayor
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Rollcall:
Aye: Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Ordinance Adopted.
*HEARING DATE SET OF MAY 4, 2004, ORDINANCE NO. 2004-8 AMENDING SECTIONS
900 AND 1230 TO PERMIT ISSUANCE OF WINE AND ON-SALE LIQUOR LICENSE AT
BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE Member Hovland made a motion, seconded by Member Masica
to set May 4, 2004 as the hearing date for consideration of Ordinance No. 2004-8 amending
Page 13
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
Sections 900 and 1230 of the Edina City Code to permit the issuance of Wine On-Sale Licenses
at Braemar Golf Course.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -four ayes.
*AWARD OF BID FOR 400 KW PORTABLE POWER GENERATOR Motion made by Member
Hovland and seconded by Member Masica approving the award of bid for a 400 kW Portable
Generator for the Utility Fund to recommended sole bidder, Ziegler Power Systems at
$88,902.00.
Motion carried on rollcall vote-four ayes.
*AWARD OF BID FOR WINDOWS FOR GRANGE HALL AND CAHILL SCHOOL
BUILDINGS Motion made by Member Hovland and seconded by Member Masica approving
the award of bid for windows for Grange Hall and Cahill School Buildings to recommended
low bidder, A-Craft Windows at$22,977.37.
Motion carried on rollcall vote-four ayes.
*AWARD OF BID FOR TREATMENT OF LAKES AND PONDS Motion made by Member
Hovland and seconded by Member Masica approving the award of bid for the treatment of
Edina lakes and ponds for 2004, to recommended low bidder, Lake Management, Inc., at
$25,755.27.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -four ayes.
*TRAFFIC SAFETY STAFF REVIEW OF APRIL 1,2004,APPROVED Motion made by
Member Hovland and seconded by Member Masica approving the Traffic Safety Staff Review
of April 1,2004, Section A as follows:
1. Approve Parking Restrictions on the west side of the 5600 block of St. Andrews
Avenue stating NO PARKING MONDAY- FRIDAY 8:AM-6:00 PM,and
consistent with restrictions presently on Dalrymple Road and Sherwood
Avenue;and
2. Change 15 minute parking restrictions in front of South View Middle School at
4725 South View Lane back to original 2 hour parking restrictions;and
Sections B and C.
Motion carried on rollcall vote-four ayes.
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-32 ADOPTED - RECEIVING FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR NOISE
ABATEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. TH 62 AT VALLEY VIEW ROAD - IMPROVEMENT
NO. SA-6 Engineer Houle stated the Engineering Department had completed the feasibility
study responding to a petition signed by 24 persons representing 16 properties requesting a noise
abatement improvement along TH 62 at Valley View Road. Mr. Houle stated that staff reviewed
the potential project for Noise Abatement Improvement TH 62 at Valley View Road,
Improvement No. SA-6 and felt there was not local support to fund the project through the
special assessment process as allowed under State Statute Chapter 429. He stated that TH62 was
constructed in the 1970's without noise abatement walls, adding that traffic dramatically since
1975. Mr. Houle said the homes between Valley View Road and TH62 were approximately 20-30
feet below TH62.
Mr. Houle explained that he held two neighborhood informational meetings in July and October
of 2003. He said two surveys were taken with communications received from residents either by
letter or comments on the surveys. Mr. Houle stated the project would consist of constructing an
Page 14
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
eight-foot high concrete "Type F" barrier with a wooden screen on top along the outer edge of
the shoulder on TH62. He said this type of barrier reduces tire noise.
Mr. Houle said there was legislation in the House that would require MnDOT to construct sound
barriers whenever adding bus shoulders or striping for bus lanes, but at this time the only
support from MnDOT would be in covering Engineering and Construction Administration costs.
He reviewed the estimated project costs and potential special assessments for the project:
Project Costs:
• Estimated Construction Cost- $167,000
• Cost is the difference in cost from a normal steel guard safety rail.
• MnDOT will fund Engineering and Construction Administration costs.
Proposed Assessments:
• Option A-$16,000 per lot for properties between Valley View Road and TH62
• Option B - $11,700 per lot for properties between Valley View Road and TH62
$ 5,200 per lot for properties north of Valley View Road
Mr. Houle said almost every property owner would like a barrier, but there was an
overwhelming lack of support of owners willing to pay for the installation. He added the
petitioners had been made aware of staff's recommendation not to proceed with Improvement
SA-6 Noise Abatement.
Member Masica questioned what would happen to the decibel level with installation of a bus
lane and whether more buses would be using TH62. Mr. Houle said he was not an expert on
noise levels, and that it seemed logical that more busses would be using TH62 given the
condition of I-494.
Alexei Sacks, 6321 Valley View Road, said he believes, 1) this was a missed opportunity to get
state funding for the project. 2) many residents would approve a sound wall if it were funded, 3)
the Jersey barrier in place when they bought their home did help and he requested when TH62
was reconstructed that sound abatement be a part of the reconstruction, and 4) he encouraged the
bill before the legislature for sound abatement because of the "quality of life" issue.
Member Masica inquired if MnDOT could be encouraged to pre-plan for a bus shoulder during
reconstruction of a roadway. Mr. Houle said they could be encouraged to reinforce the shoulder
of the road during reconstruction.
Member Hovland asked if this project was handled differently because it came forward via
petition and whether the petition form was clear. Mr. Houle explained the petition form states
clearly that by signing the form, " ...the Council may assess the costs of these improvements
against benefiting properties". He added when a petition was received, he notifies the neighbors
that a petition has been received and that a potential for assessment exists. Mr. Houle said staff
would review the petition form.
Member Hovland made a motion introducing Resolution No. 2004-32 and moving its adoption
as follows:
RESOLUTION NO. 2004-32
RECEIVING FEASIBILITY REPORT
NOISE ABATEMENT IMPROVEMENT NO. SA-6
Page 15
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
WHEREAS, the Edina City Council received a petition May 20, 2003 signed by sixteen
residents requesting sound mitigation walls be installed along the north side of TH62 from
the CP Rail Bridge to Hillside Road;and
WHEREAS, the Edina City Council directed the City Engineer to prepare a feasibility report
on the requested improvement;and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has prepared said feasibility report, which provides
information regarding whether the proposed project is necessary,cost effective,and feasible.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL that the feasibility
report be formally received.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to direct City staff to not proceed with the project for Noise
Abatement Improvement for north side of TH62 from CP Rail Bridge to Hillside Road,
Improvement No. SA-6.
Adopted this 20th day of April 2004. Member Masica seconded the motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Kelly,Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
*RESOLUTION NOS. 2004-33, 2004-34 & 2004-35 ADOPTED APPROVING "NO PARKING"
ON VALLEY VIEW ROAD AND WOODDALE AVENUE Member Hovland made a motion,
seconded by Member Masica introducing the following resolution and moving its adoption:
RESOLUTON NO.2004-33
RELATING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON
S.A.P.120-150-08 (VALLEY VIEW ROAD)
WEST 64TH STREET TO WOODDALE AVENUE
WHEREAS, the City of Edina has planned the improvement of MSAS 150 Valley View
Road from West 641h Street to Wooddale Avenue;and
WHEREAS,the City of Edina will be expending Municipal Street Aid Funds on the
improvement of this Street,and
WHEREAS,this improvement does not provide adequate width for parking on both
sides of the street;and approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street
project must therefore be conditioned upon certain parking restrictions.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS THEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Edina shall ban the parking of motor vehicles on the west side of MSAS 150 Valley View Road
from West 64th Street to Brookview Avenue and on both sides of MSAS 150 Valley View Road
from Brookview Avenue to Wooddale Avenue,at all times.
Passed and adopted this 20th day of April 2004.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -four ayes.
Member Hovland made a motion, seconded by Member Masica introducing the following
resolution and moving its adoption:
RESOLUTON NO. 2004-34
RELATING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON
S.A.P.120-151-08 (VALLEY VIEW ROAD)
FROM TRACY AVENUE TO VALLEY LANE
WHEREAS, the City of Edina has planned the improvement of MSAS 151 Valley View
Road from Tracy Avenue to Valley Lane;and
WHEREAS, the City of Edina,will be expending Municipal Street Aid Funds on the
improvement of this Street,and
Page 16
Minutes/Edina City Council/Apri120,2004
WHEREAS, this improvement does not provide adequate width for parking on both
sides of the street; and approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street
project must therefore be conditioned upon certain parking restrictions.
NOW,THEREFORE,IT IS THEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Edina, shall ban the parking of motor vehicles on both sides of MSAS 151 Valley View Road
from Tracy Avenue to Valley Lane,at all times.
Passed and adopted this 20th day of April 2004.
Motion carried on rollcall vote -four ayes.
Member Hovland made a motion, seconded by Member Masica introducing the following
resolution and moving its adoption:
RESOLUTON NO. 2004-35
RELATING TO PARKING RESTRICTIONS ON
S.A.P.120-150-07(WOODDALE AVENUE)
FROM VALLEY VIEW ROAD TO WEST 56TH STREET
WHEREAS, the City of Edina, has planned the improvement of MSAS 150 Wooddale
Avenue from Valley View Road to West 56th Street; and
WHEREAS, the City of Edina, will be expending Municipal Street Aid Funds on the
improvement of this Street,and
WHEREAS, this improvement does not provide adequate width for parking on both
sides of the street; and approval of the proposed construction as a Municipal State Aid Street
project must therefore be conditioned upon certain parking restrictions.
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS THEREBY RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Edina, shall ban the parking of motor vehicles on the west side of MSAS 150 Wooddale
Avenue from Valley View Road to West 56th Street, at all times.
Passed and adopted this 20th day of April 2004.
Motion carried on rollcall vote-four ayes.
PRESENTATION BY CITY PROSECUTOR Marsh Halberg, City Prosecutor with Thomsen,
Nybeck Law Firm, said he has been the City's prosecutor for 22 years and wanted to become
reacquainted with the Council and staff. He elaborated that because of budgetary restraints, the
business in the Court House was constantly being restructured. Mr. Halberg explained he and an
associate work three days a week in Court representing Edina. Edina was third in citations of the
five cities using the Court House, behind Minneapolis and Bloomington. Mr. Halberg noted that
the type of offenses has changed since he began prosecuting cases for Edina. English was not the
first language any longer and because of economics,more persons qualify for public defense.
Following a brief discussion, the Council thanked Mr. Halberg for his presentation.
*CONFIRMATION OF CLAIMS PAID Member Hovland made a motion and Member Masica
seconded the motion approving payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the
Check Register dated April 7, 2004, and consisting of 27 pages: General Fund $106,324.37;
Communications Fund$14,629.25;Working Capital Fund$92,028.81;Art Center Fund$8,341.64;
Golf Dome Fund $13,777.83; Aquatic Center Fund $478.75; Golf Course Fund $24,732.77; Ice
Arena Fund $25,197.87; Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund $15,228.49; Liquor Fund
$151,885.78; Utility Fund $54,372.40; Storm Sewer Fund $2,814.20; Recycling Fund $32,171.80;
Payroll Fund $688.15; TOTAL $542,672.11; and for approval of payment of claims dated April
14, 2004, and consisting of 25 pages: General Fund $172,343.87; Communications Fund
$1,011.99; Working Capital Fund $180,875.49; Art Center Fund $3,269.85; Golf Dome Fund
$161.83; Aquatic Center Fund $37.28; Golf Course Fund $71,087.20; Ice Arena Fund $9,446.98;
Page 17
Minutes/Edina City Council/April 20,2004
Edinborough/Centennial Lakes Fund $13,379.08; Liquor Fund $102,037.54, Utility Fund
$277,360.14; PSTF Fund$849.70 TOTAL$831,860.95.
Motion carried on rollcall vote-four ayes.
CONCERN OF RESIDENT Sandy Jackson, 6208/10 France Avenue, had asked to be on the
Agenda for the April 20,2004,meeting. Ms. Jackson failed to appear.
2004 BOARD OF APPEAL AND EQUALIZATION RECONVENED Mayor Maetzold explained
at the April 12th Board of Appeal and Equalization meeting, three property owners appealed their
2004 property valuations, two in person and one via letter. He stated the purpose of the
reconvened meeting was to take formal action on those appeals. The original date for the
reconvened meeting had been set for Monday April 26, 2004, but it was decided to move to the
April 20,2004, regular Council meeting due to the small number of cases under review.
The Board did not request additional information on the Appeals from the Assessing
Department.
Member Hovland commented that after doing the math on the differences in the three assessed
values,he concurred with staff's recommendation.
Member Kelly made a motion to sustain the values of the three properties as presented.
Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Member Masica said she took a windshield tour of the subject properties and felt the proposed
assessment on property on Branson Street was high. She also viewed the comparable home on
Jefferson. Following a brief discussion, the Mayor suggested if the motion maker and seconded
agreed the Board act on each case separately. Member Kelly withdrew his motion. Member
Hovland concurred and withdrew his second.
Member Kelly made a motion to sustain the assessor's suggested value of $321,600.00 for the
property of Alex Zhuravel at 5812 Hansen Road. Member Masica seconded the motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Masica made a motion to sustain the assessor's suggested value of $314,900 for the
property of John J. Carlson at 5509 Merritt Circle. Member Kelly seconded the motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Kelly, Masica, Maetzold
Motion carried.
Member Kelly made a motion to sustain the assessor's suggested value of $239,200 for the
property of Patrick Fleetham at 4300 Branson Street. Member Hovland seconded the motion.
Ayes: Hovland, Kelly, Maetzold
Nay: Masica
Motion carried.
There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Maetzold declared the meeting
adjourned at 10:05 P.M.
City-Clerk
Page 18