Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19830718_regular39 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE JULY 18, 1983 EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner and Mayor Courtney. ROBERT HUGHES COMMENDED. Mr. Rosland commended Robert Hughes for his many years of service to the City of Edina, beginning on May 20, 1959, when he started his employ- ment as stock boy at the 50th Street municipal liquor store. At present, Mr. Hughes acts as assistant manager at the Vernon Avenue store when the store manager is absent and is responsible for all ordering. bearing the Edina Logo. steadfast service to the City. Mr. Rosland presented him with a silver pen Members of the Council expressed their appreciation for his ZUPPKEWOOD PRELIMINARY'PLAT.APPR0VED. Affidavits of Notice were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. subject property, generally located south of Evanswood Lane and west of Blake Road, measures 2.67 acres and is zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District, and that it is improved with a single family dwelling which fronts on Blake Road. ponents are requesting a three lot subdivision of the property. approximately 58,700 square feet and would be retained for the existing.dwe1ling. Lots 1 and 2 would measure approximately 35,300 and 22,300 square feet respectively and would constitute new buildable lots, both fronting on Evanswood Lane. The pro- posed lots are similar in size to approved surrounding subdivisions and conform in all respects to the Zoning Ordinance. of the lots relative to Evanswood Lane in that the gradual curve from west to north results in an unusually large boulevard in the vicinity of Lot 1 and a somewhat unusual relationship between a driveway which would serve Lot 1 and the existing driveway for the home located to the north. Therefore, staff had suggested that the proposed lot lines be modified in order to provide a better orientation with Evanswood and to avoid driveway conflict with the home to the north. Commission had approved the proposed subdivision subject to the modification of the lot lines as suggested by staff and subdivision dedicakion. that the proponents had now submitted arevised plat showing the altered lot lines which staff had approved. subject to: 1) subdivision dedication, and 2) the extention of the sanitary sewer on Evanswood Lane, south to the property line of Lot 1. Member Bredesen offered the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject to parkland dedication and extention of the sanitary sewer as recommended by staff: RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY PLAT Planner Larsen advised that the The pro- Lot 3 would measure Staff had been concerned with the orientation The Planning Mr. Larsen reported Staff would now recommend approval of the subdivision No comments being heard, APPROVAL FOR ZUPPKEWOOD BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "Zuppkewood", platted by Juanita and Ralph Allison and pre- sented at the regular meeting of the City Council of July 18, 1983, be and is hereby granted preliminary approval. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. SMABY REPLAT OF LOT 5, GARDEN PARK PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED. were presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen reported that the subject property,generally located north of Grove Street and Wesf: of: MNS Railroad, 4easures .approximately 2.5 acres in area and is zoned R-1 Single Family Dwelling District. vacated Garden Avenue and abuts Garden Park on the north. ing a five lot subdivision of the property. 160 feet (12,800 square feet in area). 12.5 feet by 160 feet; with the easterly 50 feet encumbered by an easement for the NSP power lines and no building can occur within an easement area. Mr. Larsen explained that the proposed subdivision designates approximately the northerly 78 feet as an outlot and the proponent suggests that this outlot be dedicated to the City to satisfy the dedication requirement. Street have been replatted in recent years in a manner similar to the proponent's request. leaves Lot 5 with a building area of approximately 55 to 60 feet in width. Community Development and Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed subdivision conditioned upon the dedication of Outlot A as a subdivision dedication. Member Richards asked if Lot 5 would require a setback variance because of the restricted buildable area. Mr. Larsen responded that staff had looked at that aspect and had concluded there should be no problem in building a house on the approximately 55 foot width area and explained that the house could be positioned right up to the easement line. No further comments being heard, Member Turner Affidavits of Notice City The property includes a portion of The proponent is request- Lots 1 through 4 measure 80 feet by Lot 5, which abuts the MNS Railroad, measures Several properties south of Grove The size of Lot 5 is necessitated because of the utility easement and The 7/18/83 offered the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject to the dedication of Outlot A as a subdivision dedication: RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELININARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR SMABY REPLAT OF LOT 5, GARDEN PARK BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled "Smaby Replat of Lot 5, Garden Park", platted by Allison M. and Philip C. Smaby and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of July 18, 1983, be and is hereby granted preliminary approval. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. I DEED RESTRICTION RELEASE AUTHORIZED FOR TARGET STORES/YORKTOWN. that Council had discussed the request of Target Stores/Yorktown for release of Mr. Larsen recalled certain deed restrictions and amendment of grant of easement for Lot 1, Block 2, Yorktown at its last meeting, and that the request had been made so as to permit a parking area to be constructed and maintained adjacent and contiguous to the south side of the existing building. for review the matter of relocation of the curb cut as it would affect traffic safety on Hazelton Road. Traffic Safety Committee at its meeting of July 12, 1983, and no significant traffic The Committee and staff would recommend that the deed restriction be released subject to staff approval of final plans with regard to a maximum 8% grade for the driveway and relocation of fire hydrants and light poles. graphic illustrating the issues that the Traffic Safety Committee had reviewed and how they were to be resolved. offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: Council had referred to the Traffic Safety Committee Mr. Larsen reported that this matter has been considered by the - concerns were noted with the exception of the potential grade of the driveway. Engineer Hoffman presented a No further comments being heard, Member Richards A RESOLUTION RELEASING CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS IN A DECLARATION OF RESTRICTIONS AND PROTECTIVE COVENANTS AND GRANTING CERTAIN CONSENTS PURSUANT TO A GRANT OF EASEMENT -WHEREAS, Yorktown Investment Co., Inc., a Minnesota corporation, Glacier Sand and Gravel Company, a Minnesota corporation, and George J. Ablah and Virginia L. Ablah, husband and wife (hereinafter together called "Former Owners"), have executed and delivered that certain instrument dated May 3, 1972 entitled "Declaration of Res- trictions and Protective Covenants," filed as Document No. 1033727 in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Ninnesota (the "Declaration"); and WHEREAS, the Declaration applies, in part, to Lot 1, Block 2, Yorktown, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (the "Subject Lot"); and WHEREAS, the Subject Lot is defined in the Declaration as being one of the Yorktown Lots; and WHEREAS, the Declaration provides, in part, at Paragraph 8, page 6: - 1 *- '. -_ "The covenants and restrictions herein contained may be released only by the Village of Edina and may be released as to any one or more of the Yorktown Lots by the Village of Edina, at any time and from time to time by its sole act. the Edina Village Council and shall be effectiye only upon the recording of such resolution in the same office in which this instrument has been recorded"; Any such release shall be made or done by resolution of and WHEREAS, Former Owners did, by instrument entitled "Grant of Easement" dated May 3, 1972, filed as Document No.: 1033728 in the office of the-Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County (the "Easement"), !grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the Village of Edina certain easements and rights in and over the Subject Lot; and WHEREAS, the present owner of the Subject Lot, Dayton-Hudson Corporation, a Minnesota corporation, (the "Present Owner"), has petitioned the City of Edina (formerly the Vilxage of Edina) to release a portion of the restrictions applicable to the Subject Lot, as contained in the Declaration, and to modify the easements in and over the Subject Lot as contained in and granted by the Easement; and WHEREAS, the City of Edina, by its City Council, is willing to partially release said restrictions, and modify said easements, all as provided in the following resolutions; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, that the provisions of paragraph 5(a)(i) of the Declaration, which read as follows: "No driveway or parking area shall be constructed or maintained closer than 35 feet to the sides or front of any building located upon the lot, except for driveways along the sides of a building used to pick up merchandise purchased from the business operation on the lot, and except for maneuvering space on the sides of a building for trucks to load and unload"; are released so as to permit, and only to the extent necessary to permit, (i) a parking area and driveway to be constructed and maintained adjacent and contiguous to the south side of the existing building as shown on a drawing entitled "Target 7 1181 83 Center Southdale (Site Work) Sheet #Al", dated July 27,. 1983, (the "Drawing"), a copy of which is in the permanent records of the City of Edina, and (ii) closure of the existing Easterly curb cut and access driveway to Hazelton Road as shown on the Drawing and relocation of such curb cut and access driveway to the new location shown on the Drawing, all to be done at the sole cost and expense of the owner of the Subject Lot, including, without limitation, payment by such owner of the cost of moving fire hydrants and other public or private utilities affected by such closure and relocation; provided, however, that said release shall continue and be effective only so long as the building now existing on the Subject Lot, or any replacement building of the same size, shape, height and location of the exist- ing building, remains on the Subject Lot, and upon demolition or removal of the existing or any such replacement building without replacing the same.with a building of the same size, shape, height and location as the then prior building, the pro- visions of paragraph 5(a)(i) of the Declaration shall be reinstated, and the new curb cut and access driveway shown on the Drawing shall be removed and the curb replaced and the area of the new access driveway restored with a berm, sod and vegetation to a condition continuous with, similar to and esthetically compatible with (all as reasonably determined by the City of Edina) the then existing berming, sod and vegetation along the Southerly line of the Subject lot, all at the expense of the owner of the Subject Lot; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the consent of the City of Edina is hereby given to the closure of the existing Easterly curb cut and access driveway along the South- erly line of the Subject Lot and relocation of such curb cut and access driveway from the location shown in the Drawing (being the same location shown in Exhibit A to the Easement) to the new location shown on the Drawing, all to be done at the sole cost and expense of the owner of the Subject Lot, including, without limit- ation, payment by such owner of the cost of moving fire hydrants and other public or private utilities affected by such closure and relocation; provided, however, that this consent shall be effective and continue only so long as the release given pursuant to the foregoing Resolution is effective and continues, as provided in the foregoing Resolution, and upon termination of this consent the provisions of the Easement relative to the location of curb cuts and access driveways shall again apply and be binding on the owners, occupiers and encumbrancers of the Subject Lot ; BE IT FURTHER RFSOLVED, that the closure of the existing curb cut and access drive- way and the relocation and construction of the new curb cut and access driveway shall be done only pursuant to plans and specifications which must be approved in writing by the City Engineer of the City of Edina prior to the issuance by the City of Edina of any permits for, or the start of any work on, such closure or relocation. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk of the City of Edina, once these Reso- lutions become effective, is directed to furnish to Present Owner a true and correct ~opy of these Resolutions, in recordable form; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that these Resolutions shall be effective only upon execu- tion of the Consent and Agreement below set out by Present Owner, and the recording of a copy of these Resolutions in the same office in which the Declaration and Easement are recorded. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA ON THE 18th day of July, 1983. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen. I P cy) 00 33 ig i Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Courtney Abstained: Turner. Resolution adopted. - -_ AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT INDOOR SOCCER ARENAS IN PID DISTRICT DISCUSSED; NO ACTION TAKEN. as to .form and ordered placed on file. pursuing the leasing of a building at 7225 Washington Avenue for use as an indoor soccer arena. This building is zoned Planned Industrial District. Staff has advised the proponents that such a use is not presently permitted in the PID Dis- trict. Ordinance to permit the proposed arena. In addition to a soccer facility, roller hockey will be provided during the summer. Some limited retail sales, refreshment stands and amusement machines would also be desirable in connection with this use. The proponents stress that the proposed use is designed for participants, not spectators, thus very limited bleacher seating would be provided. ed out that the Zoning Ordinance presently permits several athletic and health re- lated uses in the PID District: handball courts, tennis clubs, roller skating arenas, and aerobic dance studios. The rationale for allowing handball, tennis and aerobic dance studios in the PID District focused on the need for athletic oriented facili- ties in close proximity to the daytime office and industrial population. concerned that the proposed use does not follow this rationale. Mr. Larsen advised that the Community Development and Planning Commission recommended that indoor soccer arenas be added to the list of permitted uses in the PID District, but that no amusement machines be allowed. Affidavits of"otice were presented by Clerk, approved Mr. Larsen advised that the proponents are Therefore, the pr0ponenE.s have petitioned the City to amend its Zoning Mr. Larsen point- I Staff is Barry Reed, representing the proponents , was . I 7 I18 I83 present and explained that the proponents are each involved in amateur soccer in the state and are very commited to the growth of the sport. The proposed soccer arena would give adults and children who have made soccer their sport of choice an opportunity to continue to develop their skills. He stated that they believe the proposed use is supportive of what the City is trying to do with its own recrea- tional programs. that the teams would play their game, have some refreshments and leave. Daytime leagues would be encouraged and other daytime uses such as aerobic classes would be encouraged. cipated that approximately 30 players would attend each game so no parking problems should occur. a pro shop would offer indoor soccer equipment only, that a health bar would offer. juices or soft drinks and snacks. objection to the soccer and roller hockey use but could not support the retail uses, specifically the amusement machines. Mr. Reed responded that the purpose of the proposed soccer arena was to offer a first rate indoor soccer facility, that the intent was to offer refreshments as a service to the people who came to play and that there was no interest in having the amusement machines in the facility. In response to Member Turner's question as to the rationale for the previous use of the subject property as a roller skating rink, Mrs. Schmidt stated that at the time it was felt this would provide a desirable activity for the junior high school age youth, at a time when that activity was a fad. Member Bredesen offered a motion approving an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance to permit indoor soccer arenas as a principal use in the PID District, without the allowance of amusement machines. . The motion failed for lack of a second. be stated. within the PID District and that she was opposed to the retail use aspect. Schmidt voiced concern for problems of parking when competition would be going on that would bring more people to the arena. aspect should be studied. these reasons: 1) that the athletic use is consistant with other types of allowed athletic uses in the PID District, 2) that the prpposed use could have an application for people working in the area, 3) that the refreshments offered would be minimal, and 4) limited seating would discourage big crowds so there would be no parking pro- . blem. Member Richards submitted that Council should spend more time to consider wha uses should be allowed in the PID District; that it should be demonstrated how the proposed use would serve the daytime workers in this community and that additional Ordinance. No additional action was taken. Mr. Reed advised that there would be minimal spectator involvement, As to parking, 80 spaces are provided on the site and it is anti- I With reference to the minimal retail uses, Mr. Reed stated that Mayor Courtney stated that he would have no .. Mr. Reed asked that the concerns of Council Member Turner stated that the proposed use was an inconsistant land use Member Mayor Courtney concurred that the traffic Member Bredesen stated that his support was predicated on facts would have to be presented before he could support a motion to amend the - AMENDMENT TO ZONING ORDINANCE TO PERMIT ASSESSORY APAIXIMF"I'MES IN THE R-1 DISTRICT DISCUSSED; AMENDMENT TO BE DRAFTED FOR CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS. Affidavits of Notice were presented by the Clerk, approved as to form and ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen advised that this proposal has been considered by the Community Development and Planning Commission on two occasions. It was initiated by a request of the prep- erty owner of 4544 France Avenue to rezone his property, an existing single family home from R-1 to R-2 District in order to re-establish the use of his home as a duplex. This property was used legally as a duplex in Morningside and became a legal non- conforming duplex upon annexation by Edina. Sometime'ago the use of the structure reverted to single family use for more than a year and lost its non-conforming status. Jon DeMars Victorsen, the proponent, has requested to regain the R-2 District use. Staff, based on policies contained in the Comprehensive Plan, has recommended that this type of proposal is better treated as an accessory apartment in a single family dwelling. to address requests for accessory :apartments. and District standards unchanged 2nd demand that all provisions of the R-2 Two Family District be met, 2) require that properties be rezoned to R-2 and grant variances on a case by case basis, 3) all'ow accessory apartments as a right in a new zoning dis- trict, or 4) adopt a Conditional Use Permit system to address accessory apartments. Mr. Larsen then reviewed a list of draft standards which staff had prepared for a Conditional Use Permit system. recommended the adoption of a Conditional Use Permit system to regulate accessory apartments and also recommended that the proponent receive a Conditional Use Permit for his apartment. The Commission had also recommended that the draft standards be revised to limit accessory apartments to 40% of the floor area of the building and that an owner wishing to establish a home occupation would be subject to a review of his Conditional Use Permit. Com@ssion and also the Council, and detailed plans would be required showing site plans, elevations, materials, landscaping, etc. Mr. Larsen then presented a graphic showing detailed plans for the apartment proposed by Mr. Victorsen and explained how the standards for a Conditional Use Permit would apply. Member Turner stated her support for the concept of accessory housing and establishment of a process to allow At the last Planning C<mmission meeting, staff presented alternatives These were: 1) leave the Ordinance . I The Planning Commission at its June 29, 1983 meeting The process would consist of a hearing before the Planning 7/18/83 43 and regulate such use. other than those on France Avenue, 2) for the long term, would this possibly be ex- panded to other areas, 3) is the standard that every accessory unit must provide at least one enclosed parking space too large a requirement. the amendment would address only the houses facing France Avenue; accessory apart- ments in suburban areas do not have an established market and the demand has not been proven; and that the Planning Commission had discussed the parking requirement and felt it best to leave the requirement stand and address problem sites on a case by case basis. whether the present Planning staff could handle the work created; if the City will be confronted with adopting the system uniformily throughout the City; and if monitoring the system will be a burden that will fall on the City or be self regulated by the property owners. the work load created by the system would be similar to a rezoning request and would not be a problem; that there may be other areas in the City with similar circumstances. in the future; and that the Conditional Use Permit would run with the property and would not be reviewed under a change of ownership. concern that other areas of the City may request that the system be extended resulting in an increased density. Mr. Larsen pointed out that it would be limited to one accessory apartment per lot. James Van Valkenburg, representing the proponent, noted that the draft standards for a Conditional Use Permit system would be limited to areas designated for low density attached dwelling units by the Comprehensive Plan so that it would not be City wide. Mr. Victorsen, the proponent, gave a summary of the different uses along France Avenue in the immediate area. a graphic showing the details of the proposed accessoxy apartment and stated that there would be no external modiciations with the exception of a change in the southwest corner.of the roof. Mrs. Mary Jo Aiken, 4548 France Avenue, stated she was appearing in support of the 36 neighbors who had signed a letter of objection to the proposed rezoning of the subject:property. She reviewed the objections as stated in.the letter and strongly encouraged Council to reject the request for an accessory apartment and urged that it remain a single family dwelling. followed regarding what action Council should consider in view of the issues raised. City Attorney Erickson explained that if so desired Council could consider two amendments to the Zoning Ordinance: 1) to allow accessory dwelling units within the R-1 District, specifying limits, and 2) to provide a method for Conditional Use Permits to allow such accessory units in the area designated. The draft amendments by state statute would go to the Planning Commission for their recommendation and then come back to Council for action. Mr. Erickson added, that if Coucil adopted those two amendments, a third step would be to consider granting of requests for such Conditional Use. The question was raised of spot zoning and Mr. Erickson pointed out that the areas designated would be pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan which would establish the logic and reasons for the areas designated. thereupon made a motion to direct staff and the City Attorney to prepare draft amendments to the Zoning Ordinance: 1) to allow accessory housing in the R-1 District and which would address the question of areas to be designated, and 2) to establish a Conditional Use Permit process. Member Bredesen recommended that the staff and the Planning Commission take a broad look at the concept of accessory housing and its application to this community and also suggested that there be input from the community. would be a major change in zoning philosophy and needs to be studied carefully. She questioned 1) how this would affect any existing units Mr. Larsen responded that Member Richards asked if the Conditional Use Permit system were adopted Mr. Larsen explained that staff anticipates that Member Bredesen also voiced his He also presented Discussion Member Turner Motion was seconded by Member Schmidt,. Member Turner added that this Rollcall : Ayes: - Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS DISCUSSED. Mrs. Alison Fuhr commented that the subject of accessory housing and affordable housing has been a concern of many communities and suggested that it may be a means of bringing people into the community to keep up the level of population. and involve preserving the htegrity of our neighborhoods for the people living here. With reference to the recently released 1980 Census figures for Edina, Member Bredesen indicated that the number of households increased even though the number of people in those households declined. Charles Roberts, 4919 Arden Avenue, asked if the 50th Street improvement was to be discussed at this meeting and if So, why notices had not been sent to property owners in the area. meeting and that notices would be sent in advance of any hearing. explained that a public hearing would be scheduled within the next couple of months. Jack Curtis, 4400 West 50th Street, suggested that the staff publish the facts re- garding the status of West 50th Street in the Edina Sun inasmuch as rumors are abounding regarding the matter. No action was taken. Member Richards replied that the issues are broader No action was taken. Mayor Courtney advised that it was not an agenda item for this Engineer Hoffman TRAFFIC SAFETY MINUTES OF JULY 12, 1983, APPROVED. Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Turner, to approve Section A, and acknowledge Sections B and C of the Traffic Safety Minutes of July 12, 1983. c 7/18/83 Ayes : Motion carried. Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt; Turner, Courtney CHAPTER 259, 1983 LEGISLATION DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland advised Council that under Chapter 259 which was passed by the 1983 Legislature, off-sale liquor stores are now allowed to offer samples of wine and cordials for tasting. also permits the sale of non-intoxicating and intoxicating liquor on state primary and general election days. No action was taken. The legislation LEGISLATORS/COUNCILS MEETING SCHEDULED. Mr. Rosland reminded the Council that a breakfast meeting has been scheduled with Council and Legislators on Friday, July 29 at 7:30 a.m. Member Bredesen noted that he will be unable to attend. CASCADE LANE HIGH WATER DISCUSSED. Because the recent high rains has worsened the Cascade Lane high water situation, Member Turner asked if the survey to be done by 'I the City could be done soon so that decisions can be made to aleviate the condition. Engineer Hoffman stated that,:under.the new policy adopted by the Minnehaha-Creek Watershed District, they would be throttling back the dam if the creek overbanks. He also stated that the survey would be accomplished as quickly as possible. OPEN MEETING LAW DISCUSSED. regarding the Open Meeting Law, Member Richards asked that Mr. Erickson summarize the case and the decision and report same to staff and members of the Council. In light of the recent Minnesota Supreme Court decision NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS FOR WEST 60TH STREET OCCUPANTS DISCUSSED. advised that he had met with four neighbors of the residence at 3113 West 60th Street who had complained about problems created by the occupants with regard to increased traffic, disturbance of peace, litter, etc. Mr. Rosland stated that the matter would be turned over to the Police Department for investigation as to ordinance yiolations. No action-was taken. Mayor Courtney . AMM STUDY COMMITTEE DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland advised that the Association of Metro- politan Municipalities Board of Directors will be making appointments to begin the I process of developing legislative policy for the 1985-86 Legislative Biennium. He indicated that Mr. Dalen serves on the Municipal Revenues Gommittee, that Mr. Hoffman serves on the Transportation Committee and that Mrs. Turner's term on the Housing Committee will terminate. consider serving on the Metropolitan Agencies Committee; Members Schmidt or Turner on the Housing Committee and Mayor Courtney on the General Legislation Committee. He indicated that names must be submitted by July 25th and asked that the Council Members determine between themselves which names should be submitted. I Mr. Rosland suggested that Members Bredesen and Richards MEETING CALLED TO DISCUSS LABOR NEGOTIATIONS STRATEGY. Council call a special closed meeting immediately following adjournment of the Council Meeting, in the Manager Conference Room, to consider strategy for labor negotiations. Upon motion made and seconded, the holding of a special closed meeting to discuss labor negotiations strategy was approved by a unanimous vote. Mr. Rosland recommended that STUDY APPROVED FOR DEVELOPMENT OF MlTNICIPAL PARKING Rp;Mp. Mr. Rosland recalled that staff has been working on developing a parking ramp to be built on City property, generally located in the Danens building area, which would abut the Jerry Paulson property, for the purpose of providing cold storage for City equipment on the ground level and public parking on the upper levels. existing traffic and parking problems for the Vernon Avenue shopping area. Mr. Rosland stated that the cost allocated to ithe parking portion of the project would be assessed and that Mr. Paulsen has indicated this is within his budget. that the City expend $4,500.00 for a preliminary design and firm cost estimates.on this proposed project. authorize expending $4,500.000 for the design and cost study. The public parking would alleviate the It is now recommended Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Richards to I Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. ORDINANCE NO. 175 ADOPTED; SECOND READING VAIVED (ORDINANCE PENALTY PROVISIONS). Mr. Rosland explained that: Ordinance No. 175 codifies penalties for violation of any City ordinance into one ordinance and also increases the penalty to $700.00 or 90 days in jail as stated in the new state statute. Mr. Erickson noted that the new statute, and therefore this ordinance if adopted, becomes effective August 1, 1983, and if so desired, Council could waive Second Reading. Elember Bredesen offered Ordinance No. 175 and moved its adoption with waiver of Second Reading as foll8ws: ORDINANCE NO. 175 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING THE FINE AND IMPRISONMENT PENALTY PROVISIONS, IF ANY, OF ORDINANCES HERETOFORE ENACTED, AND PRESCRIBING A'FINE AND IMPRISONMENT PEANLTY FOR THE VIOLATION OF ORDINANCES HERETOFORE OR HEREAFTER ENACTED \ 1 ./ . .d 7/i8/83 45 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: the City of Edina shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine not exceeding $700.00 prosecution in any case to be added. any ordinance of the City of Edina is committed, or permitted to continue, shall constitute a separate violation and shall be punishable as a separate violation. Sec. 3. Petty Misdemeanors. Any violation of an ordinance of the City of Edina which is made a petty misdemeanor by the specific provisions of that ordinance shall continue to be a petty misdemeanor, the provisions of Section 1 of this ordinance not withstanding. Sec. 4. Additional Penalties. The penalties provided in this ordinance are in addition to any and all other penalties, other than fines and imprisonment, imposed by any ordinance of the City of Edina or statute of the State of Minnesota. Sec. 5. Applicability. The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to all ordinances of the City of Edina, whether heretofore or hereafter enacted. Sec. 6. Partial Invalidity. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unen- , forceable, as to any person or circumstance, the application of such section, sub- section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it shall be held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby, and all provisions of this ordinance, in all other respects, shall be and remain valid and enforceable. of the City of Edina, to the extent inconsistent with or contrary to the penalties set out in this ordinance, are hereby repealed. its passage and publication but not earlier than August 1, 1983. Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Turner. Section 1. Misdemeanor. Any person violating any provision of any ordinance of or imprisonment for a period not exceeding 90 days, or both, with costs of Sec. 2. Continuing Violations. Each day that a violation of any provision of Sec. 7. Repealer. The fine and imprisonment penalty provisions of all ordinances Sec. 8. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Ordinance adopted. ATTEST : ORDINANCE NO. 116 GRANTED FIRST READING. had directed staff to prepare for review a draft of an interim ordinance which would impose a moratium prohibiting the construction of new, or the expansion of existing non-profit institutions in the R-1 District. Mr. Larsen advised that 5 a notice with the draft ordinance attached had been mailed to all institutions in the R-1 District that would be affected by this proposed ordinance, notifying them that this would be discussed at the July 18 Council meeting. The ordinance would prohibit the City Council and staff from accepting or processing any new plats or subdivisions, accepting or issuing any building permits, accepting and processing any variances, and would prohibit construction of any new or the expan- sion of any existing parking facilities in the R-1 District, except for single family detached dwellings and improvements within public parks. speaking in opposition to the ordinance imposing a moratorium on certain uses in the R-1 District were the following: Jim Curry, representing St. Stephens Episco- pal Church; Dennis Walker, representing Cathedral of Praise now occupying the High- lands School building; Jack Hodnett and Robert Bowler, trustees of Our Lady of Grace Church; Paul Anderson, member of Grace Church; Douglas Plolich, chairman of trustees at Colony Park Baptist Church and Skip Goodmanson, administrator of Normandale Luth- eran Church. Some of the reasons and concerns stated in opposition were, 1) that the moratorium period of one year was too long, 2) that it is directed specifically against churches, 3) that churches are being penalized because of a specific problem i.e. that of Grace Church, 4) that it would stop even the planning process for churches who are experiencing considerable growth. was Paul Williams, 5221 France Avenue, who stated that some form of guidelines are needed with which to judge institutional development in the R-1 District, but he suggested that the period should be changed to 60 to 90 days. land explained that under the present Zoning Ordinance, what institutions are allowed to do by way of expansion in the R-1 District does not signal the Council, who are the decision makers for the community and that the growth of various churches does .. impact neighborhoods, therefore, that growth should be addressed by the Council in making decisions which will affect those neighborhoods. Member Richards commented that Council must respond to all the needs of all the citizens of Edina; that there are no better institutions in the City than our churches and schools but that the effect on our single family homes is of great concern and the moratorium is proposed (IMPOSING A MORATORIUM ON CERTAIN USES IN THE R-1 DISTRICT) Mr. Rosland recalled that at the last meeting Council Appearing and Speaking in favor of the ordinance In response, Mr. Ros- 7 /18/ 83 as a means to get a better handle on the issue. Member Schmidt .voiced her objection to a moratorium, stating that the Zoning Ordinance could be studied and revised if necessary without imposing a moratorium. Member Bredesen submitted that he felt the one year period was too long and that improvements such as providing handicapped access should be allowed, but that he supported a moratorium. He added that Council needs to consider the question of what a church or any non-profit institition can do in the R-1 District and pointed out that the community was built on single family residential neighborhoods; that any thing the City does that has an impact on those neighborhoods is of great concern and that the churches have grown far beyond what was envisioned when the Zoning Ordinance was adopted. Member Bredesen then offered Ordinance No. 116 for First Reading, subject to, before Second Reading, substituting 90 days instead of a period of one year for the moratorium and to changing the language in the ordinance to allow modifications to existing non-profit insti4tutions such as handicapped access, air conditioning or office space, as follows: ~- 46 ORDINANCE NO. 116 AN ORDINANCE PROHIBITING CONSTRUCTION OF NEW IMPROVEMENTS AND EXCEPT FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLINGS AND IMPROVEMENTS EXPANSION OF EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS ON LAND IN THE R-1 ZONING DISTRICT WITHIN PUBLIC PARKS AND USES ACCESSORY THERETO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Purpose. The Edina Comprehensive Plan ("The Plan") was adopted by the Edina City Council on December 21, 1981 and approved by the Metropolitan Council on October- 8, 1981, all pursuant to Minnesota Statute, Sections 473.851 through 473.872 ("The Metropolitan Land Planning Act"). Edina is now conducting studies for the purpose of considering adoption of official controls, including a zoning ordinance and a subdivision ordinance, to implement the Plan. The zoning ordinance being considered will regulate and control, among other things, the size and impact on neighboring property of non-residential imprevements in the R-1 Zoning District, as established by the existing zoning ordinance of Edina. ordinances are being considered, such improvements are continuing, and may continue, to be constructed and to expand and increase in size. test the planning process and the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Edina, it is necessary and desirable to impose the following moratorium. However, while the new. Therefore, in order to pro- Sec. 2. Moratorium. From the effective date of this ordinance and for a period of one year from the effective date of this ordinance, subject to earlier termina- tion or extension by the Edina City Council, the Edina City Council and the Edina City Staff shall not 1) accept, or continue to process, any new plat or subdivision, 2) accept any applications for, or issue any building permits, 3) 'accept any appli- cations for or continue to process any variances from any existing platting, sub- division or building ordinances of the City, or 4) allow the construction of any new or the expansion of any existing parking facilities which will or may result in the construction of new improvements on any land in the R-1 Zoning District, including, without limitations, any increase in the percentage of building coverage, hard surface coverage, floor area or height of such improvements, except, however, for single family detached dwellings and uses accessory thereto and improvements within public parks. B Motion for First Reading of the ordinance was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Turner, Courtney Nays: Schmidt Motion was carried. CLAIMS PAID. of the following Claims as per Pre-List: $19,195.44; Art Center $10,561.835 Swimming Pool $4,906.72; Golf Course $11,302.79; Recreation Center $6,368.69; Gun Range $394.37; Water Fund $21,704.20; Sewer Fund $4,673.48; Liquor Fund $125,678.82; Construction $76 , 715.83; Total $367,513.40. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded3 by Member Richard for payment General Fund $86,011.23; Park Fund Ayes: Motion carried. Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Council's agenda having been covered, the Mayor declared 10:07 p.m. 2Arn-U City Clerk