Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19831003_regularMINUTES OF THE REGULAR HEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL OCTOBER 3, 1983 93 Answering rollcall were Members Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner and Mayor Courtney. WILLIAM MCMAHON COMMENDED. City Manager Rosland introduced William McMahon and commended him for his years of service to the City. He noted that Mr. McMahon began his employment with the City of Edina in September of 1966 with the Sewer Department, duties included lift station maintenance and sewer maintenance. Since the summer of 1969 he has been employed in the Park and Recreation Maintenance Department until present, with his responsibilities including the planting of trees, planting from seed the 50 flower beds within the City, and operating the greenhouse. Mr. Rosland stated that Mr. McMahon has been a faithful, hardworking employee to the City of Edina and he presented him with a silver pen bearing the Edina Logo. Mr. Rosland along with the Council Members congratulated and thanked Mr. McMahon for his dedicated service. MINUTES of the Regular Meeting of September 19, 1983 were approved as submitted by motion of Member Turner, seconded by Member Schmidt. Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. MINUTES of the Special Budget Meetings of September 19, 22 and 26, 1983 were approved as submitted by motion of Member Schmidt, seconded by Member Bredesen. Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-255. Mr. Rosland indicated that the Public Hearing of Street Improvement No. BA-255 had been continued from tne-September 19, 1983 meeting so that staff could review the cost figures for this construction project. Improvement No. BA-255 showing total construction cost of $37,207.65, proposed to be assessed against 580.76 assessable feet at $64.07 per foot against estimated assessment of $73.83 per foot. Mr. Hoffman explained that the total construction cost listed on the revised analysis of assessment is less the State aid contri- bution. NO further comments being heard, Member Bredesen offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: Mr. Rosland presented Analysis of Assessment for Street BESOLUTION ADOPTING AND CONFIRMING SPECIAL ASSESSMENT LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF .PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows: 1. ment rolls for the improvement hereinafter referred to, and at such hearing held on October 3, 1983, has considered all oral and written objections presented against the levy of such assessment. 2. Each of the assessments as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the office of the City Clerk for the following improvement: does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvement upon the lot, tract or parcel of land so assessed, and all of said assessments are hereby adopted and confirmed as the proper assessments on account of said improvement to be spread against the benefited lots, parcels and tracts of land described therein. 3. The assessments shall be payable in equal annual installments, the first of said installments, together with interest at a rate of 11&% per annum, on the entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1984, to be payable with the general taxes for the year 1984. The number of such annual installments shall be as follows: STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-255 10 Years The City has given notice of hearing as required by law on the proposed assess- Street Improvement No. BA-255 NAME OF IMPROVEMENT Number of Installments 4. of this resolution and a certified duplicate of said assessments with each then unpaid installment and interest set forth separately, to be extended on the tax lists of the County in accordance with this resolution. 5. by a county, by a political subdivision, or by the owner of any right-of-way as required by Minnesota Statutes, Section 429.061, Subdivision 4, and if any such assessment is not paid in a single installment, the City Treasurer shall arrange for collection thereof in installments, as set forth in said section. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Richards. The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor a copy The Clerk shall also mail notice of any special assessment which may be payable Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. APPEAL OF DECISION BY BOARD OF APPEALS AND ADJUSTMENTS WITHDRAWN. Mr. Hughes advised Council that Mr. Lyall Olson has withdrawn his appeal from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments decision approving a 4.6 percent Lot Coverage Variance and a 4 foot Side Street Setback Variance for Kathleen Knutson at 5445 York Avenue South. No formal action was taken. 10/3/83 CJ~FINAL REZONING FROM PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO PC-2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT All FINAL PLAT OF GLASER'S ADDITION TO EDINA APPROVED. noted that Council had granted preliminary rezoning and platting approval for Glaser's Addition to Edina on September 19, 1983. Glaser returned with final plans and requested final rezoning to PC-2, Planned. Commercial District. The final plans contained site, landscape, utility and grading plans as well as building elevations. Mr. Hughes indicated that the aforementioned items were reviewed by the Community Development and Planning COmm- ission at their September 28, 1983 meeting, and the Commission recommended final rezoning approval conditioned upon final platting, increase in the number of land- scape materials along the interior property lines where appropriate and subdivision dedication. Mr. Glaser presented a graphic illustrating the completed landscape plan and the completed elevational drawing of the structure. being heard, Member Richards moved approval of final rezoning and final plat approva subject to the landscaping commitment made by the developer and subject to a $28,000 subdivision dedication fee and offered Ordinance No. 811-A174 for Second Reading as follows: Mr. Hughes --_ The proponent, Kenneth "Chip" 1 No further comments ORDINANCE NO; 811-A174 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 811) FROM PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT BY REZONING PROPERTY TO PC-2 PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: amended by adding the follbwing thereto: by the addition of the following property: Section 1. Paragraph 7 of Section 9 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is "The extent of the Planned Commercial District (Sub-District PC-2) is enlarged Lot 4, Block 1, Replat of Edina Interchange Center." Sec. 2. Paragraph 2 of Section 10 of Ordinance No. 811 of the City is amended by adding the following thereto: ing property : The extent of the Planned Industrial District is reduced by removing the follow- It Lot 4, Block 1, Replat of Edina Interchange Center." Sec. 3. Dublication. .. Motion for adoption of the Ordinance was seconded by Member Bredesen. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Ordinance adopted. ATTEST: A'cting City C&&k Mgmber Richards then offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESQLUTION GRANTING FINAL PLAT APPROVAL FOR GLASER'S ADDITION TO EDINA BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that certain plat entitled Glaser's Addition to Edina, platted by Kenneth "Chip" Glaser, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of October 3, 1983, be and is Eereby granted final plat approval conditioned upon a $28,000.00 subdivision dedication. Mr. Glaser called for discussion on the subdivision dedication fee requesting that Council 1) contemplate reverting the subdivision dedication fee onto the property occupied by the Minnesota Federal building rather than their division of the property, and 2) consider applying the 1983 assessed market value of $3.00 a square foot (which was used for tax purposes for 1983) on the property, rather than the $4.65 a square foot that was currently being placed upon the property by the City for the purpose of ascertaining the subdivision dedication fee. that the $350,000 was the City's judgment as to what the market value of the property was, not an assessed value. Member Bredesen explained that the concept of the park dedication fee applied to new developers and that the new development in fact would be Mr. Glaser's, not the Minnesota Federal parcel. NQ further discussion was heard. RollcalT : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. Member Richards clarified I LOTS 5 AND 6, BLOCK 1, OAK RIDGE OF EDINA, LOT DIVISION APPROVED. Mr. Hughes presented petition to divide Lots 5 and 6, Block 1, Oak Ridge of Edina generally located west of Highway 100 and south of Nob Hill Drive in which the Community Development and Planning Commission granted approval of a lot division at its August 31, 1983 meeting, which transferred five feet from Lot 6 to Lot 5. The proponent now wishes to amend the request by transferring fifteen feet instead of five feet. a caution that a variance request for Lot 6 will be considered as a self-imposed hardship. resolution and moved its adoption: Mr. Hughes informed Council that Staff recommended approval with No objections being heard, Member Bredesen offered the following 10/3/83 (b 5 m .- RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land; WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels") described as follows: Lot 6, Block 1, Oak Ridge of Edina; and Lot 5 and the west 15 feet of Lot 6, Block 1, Oak Ridge of Edina; an'd Lot 6 except the west 15 feet thereof, Block 1, Oak Ridge of Edina; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 811; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby.approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance-No. 811 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. OUTLOT Cy WALNUT RIDGE THIRD ADDITIONy LOT DIVISION APPROVED. petition to divide Outlot Cy Walnut Ridge Third Addition generally located north of Vernon Avenue and west of Lincoln Drive in which the proponents have requested a simple lot division to split the property in approximately equal halves. buildings on the southerly half would be converted to condominiums while the buildings on the northerly half would remain rentals. their intent to convert the north half at a later date. The existing tennis court and swimming pool will be located on the condominium parcel, however, private ease- ments will be provided to allow use of these facilities by residents of the rental buildings. Likewise, private easements will be extended to cover the driveway from Vernon Avenue to allow access for the rental apartment parcel which will be land- locked as a result of the division. for utility lines presently located on the property. Member Richards offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: WHEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: Mr. Hughes presented The The proponents have stated Easements will also be extended to the City No objections being heard, RESOLTJTIOK / Outlot Cy Walnut Ridge Third Addition, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and .- WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called rrParcelsr') described .as follows : Outlot C, Walnut Ridge Third Addition, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota, except the north 426.50 feet thereof; and The North 426.50 feet of Outlot C. Walnut Ridge Third Addition, according to the plat thereof on file or of record in the office of Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and . WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Reguxations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 811; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 811 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Bredesen. Member Turner commented that the aforementioned division would mean a loss of 30° rental units to the City Of Edina, and she informed Council that she did not advocate the City intervening. Rollcall : Ayes: Resolution adopted. Bredesen, Richards Schmidt, Turner, Courtney 10/3/83 7- !3@T '3 1, SIOUX TRAIL FOURTH ADDITION- Nr. Hughes.presented petition to divide Lot 1, Block 1, Sioux Trail Fourth Addition generally locafed at &Caul-ey'Trail.and Valley View Road in which the proponents request a party wall division of. a two resolution and moved its adoption: MEREAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land; d'qelling* NO objections being heard, Member Bredesen offered the '$allowing \ RESOLUTION That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Sioux Trail Fourth Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof which lies easterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of North 80 degrees 57 minutes 10 seconds East, along the southerly line of said Lot 1, a distance of 20.60 feet to the beginning of the line to be described; thence North 10 degrees 42 minutes 18 seconds West a dis- tance of 164.60 feet and said line there terminating; and WHEREAS, the owner has requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels") described as follows : That Part of Lot 1, Block 1, Sioux Trail Fourth Addition, according to the recorded plat thereof which lies easterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 1; thence on an assumed bearing of North 80 degrees 57 minutes 10 seconds East, along the southerly line of said Lot 1, a distance of 20.60 feet to the beginning of the line to be described; thence North 10 degrees 42 minutes 18 seconds West a distance of 164.60 feet and said line there terminating. And which 1ie.S northerly Of the following described line and its extensions: Commencing at <he southeast corner of said lot; thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 14 minutes 32 seconds West, along the easterly line of said Lot 1, a distance of 59-48 feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described;. thence South 79 degrees 15 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 104.23 feet; thence South 10 degrees 44 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 2.13 feet; thence South 79 degrees 15 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 62.17 feet to the first above described line and said line .there terminating; and I ' - . I That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Sioux Trail Fourth Addition, according . to the recorded plat thereof which lies easterly of a line described as follows: Commencing at the southwest corner of said Lot 1; thence 0x1 an assumed bearing of North 80 degrees 57 minutes 10 seconds East, along-the southerly line of said Lot 1, a distance of 20.60 feet to the beginning of the line to be described; thence North 10 degrees 42 minutes 18 seconds \Jest a dis- tance of 164.60 feet and said line there terminating- And which lies southerly of the following described line and its extensions: Commencing at the southeast corner of said lot; thence on an assumed bearing of North 0 degrees 14 minutes 32 seconds West, along the easterly line of said Lot 1, a distance of 59.48 'feet to the point of beginning of the line to be described; -thence South 79 degrees 15 minutes 44 seconds West a dis- tance of 104.23 feet; thence South 10 degrees 44 minutes 16 seconds East a distance of 2.13 feet; thence South 79 degrees 15 minutes 44 seconds West a distance of 62.17 feet to the first above described line and said line there T-~EREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and - Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 811; NOTJ, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance NO* 801 and Ordinance No. 811 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the terminating; and -. I .- pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. prior approval Member Turner. of this 10/3/83 97 HEARING DATES SET FOR VARIOUS PLANNING MATTERS. Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Richards, setting October 17, 1983 as the hearing date for the following Planning matters with the motion being unanimously approved: 1. Hedberg & Sons Company - R-1 Single Family Dwelling District to POD-1 Planned Office District and Preliminary Plat Approval of Hedberg Parklawn Acres - Generally located east of France Avenue and north of Parklawn Avenue extended. 2. Haymaker - Lots 3, 4, 5, Block 4, Grandview Heights - R-1 Single Family Dwelling District to PRD-3 Planned Residential District - Generally located south of Interlachen Boulevard, west of Summit Avenue and north of Vernon Avenue. West 70th Street and east of Lanham Lane. Drive and Lee Valley Road. 3. Replat of Lot 3, Black 3, Carolane Addition - Generally located south of 4. Replat of Lot 1, Block 1, Knollview Addition - Generally located at Shannon BID AWARDED FOR WATERMAIN EXTENTION, IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-351. Mr. Rosland presented tabulation of bids for watermain extention on 5400, 5406 and 5408 York Avenue South, Improvement No. WM-351. Low bidder shown was Raymond E. Haeg Plumbing, Inc. at $5,439.00; Hopkins Plumbing & Heating Company at $6,509.45;- bid to recommended low bidder Raymond E. Haeg Plumbing, Inc. was seconded by Member Turner. - and G.L. Contracting, Inc. at $8,070.00. Member Schmidt's motion for award of w Ayes : Bredesen, Richards , Schmidt , Turner, Courtney Motion carried. CD P (L> m Q: CONCERN OF RESIDENT DISCUSSED. Mr. George Babcock, 6916 Mark Terrace Drive, commented on the issue of Edina residents being allowed under the current ordinance to keep recreational vehicles in their driveways, and he asked Council to consider bringing.,,the issue before the public at a future meeting. He emphasized concern with the following problems related to the issue: 1) lowers property values, and 2) it creates unsightliness. Mayor Courtney pointed out that Council had previously publicized, reviewed and pas'sed an ordinance on the issue. .Mr. Hughes explained that the ordinance permits recreational vehicles to be stored in normal driveway areas provided they are no closer than 15 feet from the street or 5 feet from an adjoin- ing property line. Mr. Courtney assured Mr. Babcock that Council would discuss the option to once again bring the issue to a future meeting, and he would notifiy Mr. Babcock of their decision. No further action was taken. DEED RESTRICTION RELEASE AUTHORIZED FOR WENDY'S RESTAURANT/YORKTOWN. advised Council of a request by Wendy's Restaurant/Yorktown Fashion Mall for lifting of a deed restriction on Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 6, Yorktown as it pertains to restaurants. He noted that the deed restriction states that only restaurants which are designed for customers to sit down to order and to eat shall be constructed and maintained within the Yorktown area. Mr. Hughes suggested that a general amendment to the Yorktown restrictions be made whereby only fast food restaurants located in freestanding buildings should be prohibited; if they are located as a *tenant within a mall-type building, they should be permitted. Mr. Hughes clarified the reason restrictions were imposed on the Yorktown area was to avoid drive-in restaurants on a freestanding basis with their related traffic problems and general unsightliness. The proponent, Mr. William Sledz was present and stated that their proposed cafeteria-style restaurant was in demand. Mr. Richards pointed out to Mr. Sledz that their particular proposal to lift a deed restriction on their parcel would be limited to restaurants such as theirs, but the initial Yorktown Declaration of Protective Covenants would remain in effect for new developers of freestanding structures. Mr. Sledz confirmed that his intentions were to put a restaurant into an already existing structure.as part of an overall mall facility. No further discussion being heard, Member Richards offered the following resolution and moved its adoption with conditions being that in the event the City incurs costs for drafting modifications of the deed restriction it would be paid by the proponent: WHEREAS, certain real estate situated in the City of Edina, Hennepin County, Minnesota, described as follows: Mr. Hughes RESOLUTION Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, Block 1; Lot 1, Block 2; Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 3; Lot 1, Block 4; Lot I, Block 5; Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, Block 6; and Lots 1, 2 and 3, Block 7, all in Yorktown, accord- int to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota (hereinafter called the "Yorktown Lots") is subject to certain restrictions and protective covenants as set forth in the Declaration of Restrictions and Protective Covenants dated May 3, 1972 filed for record June 8, 1972 in the office of the Registrar of Titles, Hennepin County, Minnesota as Document No. 1033727; and WHEREAS, one of the restrictions to which the said property is so subject is as follows : 10/3/83 "Only restaurants which are designed for customers to sit down to order and to eat shall be constructed and maintained on any Yorktown Lot; provided, however, that this restriction shall not apply to restaurants which are operated as a department or division, and as an ancillary use, in a building not designed or used primarily for the operation of a restaurant."; and WHEREAS, the city has been asked to release these restrictions to permit certain restaurant uses and the City Council deems it advisable to do so; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the covenant and restriction contained in said Declaration of Restriction and Protective Covenants Document No. 1033727 be modified by amending paragraph 4 thereof to read as follows: I "Only restaurants which are designed for customers to sit down to order and to eat shall be constructed and maintained on any Yorktown Lot; provided, however, that this restriction shall not apply to restaurants which are operated in a building not designed or used primarily for the operation of a restaurant." Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Schmidt. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. JOINT COUNCIL/SCHOOL BOARD I-EETING SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 10, 1983 FOR WOODDALE SCHOOL DISCUSSION. Mr. Rosland presented to Council a resolution, drafted by the School, for discussion regarding the Wooddale School Property along with an alternate resolution regarding same. He stated that Council would be considering the proposals presented in the resolutions at the October 10 meeting as to whether the City of Edina would take on the Wooddale School Property. Richards stated that he and Member Turner recently attended a meeting with rep- resentatives from the School Board at which the proposed conveyance of the School property and the School building was discussed. Turner voiced a desire to retain the property in public ownership due to the lack of park property in northeast Edina. issues remain open for discussion as to any obligations the City may incur. Member Turner elaborated that persons should state their questions so that Council could present them at the joint Council/School Board meeting on the 10th. Richards noted questions could include 1) financial commitments for the mainten- ance of the building 2) lease agreements 3) what type of public hearings might be held 4) what to do with the building if the City were to take over the property 5) the interest of St. Stephens Church 6) roadway configuration as it relates to 50th Street 7) possible uses for the building 8) The School Board's future use of Cahill School and Highland School. Member Richards also stressed that input from the Park Department should be received regarding this issue. Cornwell, 4905 Browndale Avenue addressed the concern of the lack of park space in the area. Mr. Foster Dunwiddie, 4638 Casco Avenue, addressed the'historical importance of the structure and stated that the Heritage Preservation Board has expressed their concern about the future of the School and the possibility of designafing it as a Heritage Preservation District. Donna Skagerberg, 6001' Rillarney Lane, asked that Council consider the Historical Society's position on the issue. Mike Ducar, 4616 Wooddale Avenue South, encouraged Council to look at the School property playground by addressing costs involved with the property not only to nearby residents but the community as a whole. Judy Schmidt, 4619 Edina Boulevard also addyessed the playground issue and stressed its importance to the children in the Edina community. was taken. Member He stated that he and Member Member Richards advised that these Member Mrs. Joan No further discussion was..heard; no formal action OFF-SALE BEER LICENSE FOR INTERLACHEN K. SERVICE APPROVED. Council was advised of the receipt of an application for Off-sale Beer License for the Interlachen K. Service, 5200 Interlachen Boulevard. Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Turner for issuance of an Off-sale Beer License to the Interlachen K. Service at 5200 Interlachen Boulevard upon approval by the Police Department. I Ayes : Bredesen, Richards , Schmidt , Turner, Courtney Motion carried. TALL GRASS IN LAWN PROBLEMS BY RESIDENTS DISCUSSED. Mr. Rosland advised Council of a letter received from Mr. Harry Weingartner, 7137 Glouchester Avenue, a newspaper article on weed control in the City of St. Louis Park, and a copy of the City of Richfield's ordinance regarding same. Mr. Rosland indicated that the City of Edina's present ordinance declares a 12" weed height as a nuisance, and the Weingartners propose that the City consider revising that ordinance from a height of 12" to a 6" level. neighbor who has refused to mow his lawn, and they submitted reasons for grass cutting as follows: problems 2) possible breeding grounds for rodents, and 3) impairs property value. Mr. Weingartner also expressed that the City of St. Louis Park has a seven day warning period while the City of Richfield has a 3-5 day warning period to ensure that property owners abide by their ordinances. Mr. Stephen Davies, 4720 Dunberry .The Weingartnefs then-addressed Council regarding past problems with their 1) breeding of insects and mosquitos and related health 99 representing Carol Bros, 7209 Heatherton Circle, was prese t and ttest d to the Weingartner's problem with their neighbor. also present with similar problems and spoke in favor of a more restrictive ordinance requirement: Russell Thiem, 6017 View Lane, and Doris Tansil, 4517 Sedum Lane. Mr. Rosland indicated that when the subject ordinance was originally adopted the City was then a country, and subsequently the ordinance has not since been updated. be revised to reflect the 6" height limit with a more reasonable length of notification to residents. Mayor Courtney seconded the motion. Member Richards voiced concern on the cost of delivering this kind of service and he opined that more facts should be gathered on the issue such as 1) would there be a need for additional staff 2) worker's compensation insurance, unemployment insurance, PERA contributions. the Planning Commission's advice, and to call on the City of St. Louis Park and Richfield to inquire as to what costs they actually incurred. Mr. Rosland advised that the City would be instructing their attorneys to draft an ordinance with the above motioned changes. No further action was taken. The following residents were Member Schmidt motioned that the present ordinance He advised Council to reflect on the issue and also request Ayes: Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Nayes: Bredesen, Richards Motion carried. * DRAFT STATEMENT OF PURPOSE/COMMITTEE ON ALTERNATIVE STUTEGIES FOR DELIVERING MUNICIPAL SERVICES DISCUSSED. It was noted that Council had received a draft Statement of Purpose for a Committee on Alternative Strategies for Delivering Municipal Services at their September 19, 1983 meeting. 'Member Bredesen pointed out that Council should think about who might be qualified to chair such a Committee. Member Turner indicated her interest in moving ahead in the matter and proceed with deciding on a chairperson for the Committee as suggested by Member Bredesen. ' Member Richards felt that Council should submit names of possible chairperson candidates by Friday, October 7, so that Council could reflect on them and take action on the issue after the joint Council/School Board meeting on October 10. Mayor Courtney clarified then that Council would be submitting to him'by. October 7, names of-individuals to chair the Committee on Alternative Strategies for Delivering.Municipa1 Services. STAFF/COUNCIL GOVERNMENTAL LIAISON ASSIGNMENTS DISCUSSED. Mr Rodand reminded Council that discussion on Staff/Council Governmental Liaison Assignments had been 'continued from- their September 19, 1983 meeting, and once again Staff was suggesting Council representation to various intergovernmental bodies as noted in the draft document presented at that meeting. Member Turner indicated that current issues regarding the Metropolitan Council on 1) their proposed involve- ment in economic development, and 2) their proposed involvement in establishing a housing fund were going to be heard on October 6, and she recommended Council initiate the new Council IntergoSernmental Policy in regard to these issues. Mr. Hughes indicated that Staff was planning on attending the aforementioned hearings. and stated it would be a proper time to reexamine its continued role as a planning agency in the metropolitan area. how Council Members would be notified on particular issues affecting their representation areas. to his attention, and in turn he would be forwarding information to the Council Members. No action was taken. Member Richards questioned the actual role of the Metropolitan Council Member Bredesen questioned Mr. Rosland as to Mr. Rosland pointed out that Staff would bring information PDBLIC HEARING ,PROPOSED AND EXPENDITURES AUTHORIZED FOR TREE TRIMMING PROGRAM. Mr. Rosland indicated to Council that Staff had contacted several foresters in search of an answer as to what was the best time of the year for trimming trees. He indicated that staff recommends 1) the Davey Environmental Services proceed immediately with a tree inventory of the City of Edina and that they start in the Country Club area where the largest trees in the community are located, 2) that the trees for the City be trimmed between the 15th of September and the 1st of April with the estimated cost average being approximately $75.00 a tree, and 3) that &'ne City publish notice-of an assessment hearing to be conducted in November for the tree trimming program. Mr. Rosland indicated that some particular situations will deal with persons having more than one tree on their property, and he recommended they be assessed approximately 1/3 of the cost and that the costs be assessed only to property owners with trees on their parcels that need trimming. Member Bredesen stated he did not agree that the assessments be given on the basis of assessing property owners who happen to have trees on their parcels, instead he felt that entire neighborhoods benefit from all the trees in the area. ments whereby everyone would be assessed equally. with Member Bredesen's suggestion then in mind that notifications be mailed out to that effect. Member Richards motioned to notify every resident in the Country Club and Morningside area of the proposal for a public hearing and to authorize the expenditure of monies to initiate the tree inventory program. Member Bredesen seconded the motion. His viewpoint was that the trimmings should be listed as public improve- Mr. Rosland commented that 10/3/83 .- .- I00 Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Motion carried. DR. PAUL CARSON'S GIFT OF LAND ACCEPTED. Mr. Rosland reminded Council that they had previously authorized a survey to obtain a legal description of Dr. Paul Carson's property, located east of Blake Road and south of Mirror Lakes Drive, space park. second parcel Tqould be dedicated next year. Provisions for the land dedication are that 1) the land would be strictly open space, 2) the City would be provided with a five foot maintenance easement to allow the practice of forestry methods in the future if needed, and 3) there would be no public access. out to Council that two basic actions were needed by them: 1) approval of a lot division, 2nd 2) acceptance of the gift and agreement to pay real estate taxes. Actorney Erickson mentioned that the Carsons have made two reasonable requests:. 1) that the five foot easement over the home property (lot where the property is situated) can be moved by them if they wish in the future as long as it is five feet wide and gives the City access to the balance of the property, and 2) that the City install a fence along the northerly and northwesterly boundary of the property. Council Members recognized Dr. Carson for his generous gift of land to the City of Edina and extended their many thanks. the following resolutions approving the lot division and acceptance of the gift and agreement to pay real estate taxes: which the Carsons have offered the land to the City of Edina as a natural open He advised that one of the parcels would be dedicated this year and a I Hr. Rosland pointed Member Richards then offered RESOLUTION ORDERING APPROVAL OF LOT DIVISION WHERFAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land; WHEREAS, the owner has requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels") described as follows : Lot 1, Block 1, Carson's Hill; axd That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Carson's Hill described as follows: . Beginning at the northeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 0 degrees 21 minutes 48 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said Lot 1, a distance of 599.49 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 89 degrees 57 minutes 37 seconds West, along the south line of said Lot 1, a distance of 361.23 feet to the southwest corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence North 0 degrees 21 minutes 55 seconds East, along the west line of said Lot 1, a distance of 203.87 feet; thence North 77 degrees 04 minutes 53 seconds East, a distance of 32.76 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 52.87 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 76.83 feet and a central angle of 39 degrees 25 minutes 36 seconds; thence North 37 degrees 39 minutes 17 seconds East, tangent to said curve, a distance of 70.67 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 25.83 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the southeast, having a radius of 63.16 feet and a central angle of 23 degrees 26 minutes 03 seconds; thence North 61 degrees 05 minutes 20 seconds East, tangent to said last curve, a distance of 80.10 feet; thence northerly a distance of 81.23 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the west, having a radius of 44.61 feet and a central angle of 104 degrees 20 minutes 10 seconds; thence North 43 degrees 14 minutes 50 seconds West, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 53.84 feet; thence northerly a distance of 36.35 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the east, having a radius of 31.50 feet and a central angle of 66 degrees 06 minutes 52 seconds; thence North 22 degrees 52 minutes 02 seconds East, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 115.65 feet to a point in the north line of said Lot 1, distant 142.48 feet west from the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on a bearing of East, along the North line of said"- Lot 1, a distance of 142.48 feet to the point of beginning except that part thereof lying northerly of a line extending from a point in the westerly line of said Lot 1 distant 203.87 feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof to a point in the easterly line of said Lot distant 203.87 feet northerly of the southeasterly corner thereof; and I That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Carson's Hill described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 0 degrees 21 minutes 48 seconds Vest, assumed bearing, along the east line of said Lot 1, a distance of 599.49 feet to the'southeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 89 1013183 p. 0 5 m degrees 57 minutes 37 seconds West, along the south line of said Lot 1, a distance of 361.23 feet to the southwest corner of said T,ot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence North 0 degrees 21 minutes 55 seconds East, along the west line of said Lot 1, a distance of 203.87 feet; thence North 77 degrees 04 minutes 53 seconds East, a distance of 32.76 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 52.87 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the north- west, having a radius of 76.83 feet and a central angle of 39 degrees East, tangent to said curve, a distance of 70.67 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 25.83 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the southeast, having a radius of 63.16 feet and a central angle of 23 degrees 26 minutes 03 seconds; thence North 61 degrees 05 minutes 20 seconds East, tangent to said last curve, a distance of 80.10 feet; thence northerly a distance of 81.23 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the west, having a radius of 44.61 feet and a central angle of 104 degrees 20 minutes 10 seconds; thence North 43 degrees 14 minutes 50 seconds West, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 53.84 feet; thence northerly a distance of 36.35 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the east, having,a radius of 31.50 feet and a central angle of 66 degrees 06 minutes 52 seconds; thence North 22 degrees 52 minutes 02 seconds East, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 115.65 feet to a point in the north line of said Lot 1, distant 142.48 feet west from the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on a bearing of East, along the North line of said Lot 1, a distance of 142.48 feet to the point of beginning, except that part thereof lying southerly of a line extending from a point in the westerly -line of said Lot 1 distant 203.87 feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof to a point in the easterly line of said Lot distant 203.87 feet northerly of the southeasterly cornerathereof; and ' 25 minutes 36 s<conds; thence North 37 degrees 39 minutes 17 seconds Lot 1, Block 1, Carson's Hili, except the following described parcel: Beginning at the northeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 0 degrees 21 minutes 48 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the-east line of said Lot 1, a distance of 599.49 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 1, said point,being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 89 degrees 57 minutes 37 seconds West, along the south line of said Lot 1, a distance of 361.23 feet to the southwest corner of said Lot 1, said ., point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence North 0 degrees distance of 203.87 feet; thence North 77 degrees 04 minutes 53 seconds East, a distance of 32.76 feet; thence northeasterly a dis- tance of 52.87 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the north- west, having a'radius of 76.83 feet and a central angle of 39 degrees 25 minutes 36 seconds; thence North 37 degrees 39 minutes 17 seconds East, tangent to said curve, a distance of 70.67 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 25.83 feet along a tangential . curtre, concave to the southeast, having a radius of 63.16 feet and a central angle of 23 degrees 26 minutes 03 seconds; thence North 61 degrees 05 minutes 20 seconds East, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 80.10 feet; thence northerly a distance of 81.23 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the west, having a radius of 44.61 feet and a central angle of 104 degrees 20 minutes 10 seconds; thence North 43 degrees 14 minutes 50 seconds West, tangent to said said curve, a distance of 53.84 feet; thence northerly a distance of 36.35 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the east, having a radius of 31.50 feet and a central angle of 66 degrees East, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 115.65 feet to a point in the north line of said Lot 1 distant 142.48 feet west from the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on a bearing of East, along the north line of said Lot 1, a distance of 142.48 feet to the point of beginning; and . 21 minutes 55 seconds East, along the west line of said Lot 1, a ' 06 minutes 52 seconds; thence North 22 degrees 52 minutes 02 seconds WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 801 and 811; NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved the the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 801 and Ordinance No. 811 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof 10/3/83 102as separate tracts of land but are not waived for any other provision thereof , and subject , however, to the other purpose or as to any provision that no further subdivison be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for those ordinances. RESOLUTION ORDERING ACCEPTANCE OF GIFT AND AGREEEiENT TO PAY REAL ESTATE TAXES WHEREAS, Dr. K. Paul Carson, Jr. and Mrs. Mary F. Carson have offered to give to Edina, as a natural open space park, a portion of their property east of Blake Road and south of Mirror Lakes; and WHEREAS, acceptance of the gift is in the best interest of Edina, and will further the general welfare of its citizens. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved: of the land in Edina, described as follows: I 1. That Edina accept the generous gift by Dr. and Ws. K. Paul Carson, Jr., That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Carson's Hill described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 0 degrees 21 minutes 48 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said Lot 1, a distance of 599.49 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 89 degrees 57 minutes 37 seconds West, along the south line of said Lot 1, a distance of 361.23 feet to the southwest corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence North 0 degrees 21 minutes 55 seconds East, along the west line of said Lot 1, a distance of 203.87 feet; thence North 77 degrees 04 minutes 53 seconds East, a distance of 32.76 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 52.87 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 76.83 feet and a central angle of 39 .degrees 25 minutes 36 seconds; thence North 37 degrees 39 minutes 17 seconds East, tangent to said curve, a distance of 70.67 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 25.83 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the southeast, having a radius of 63.16 feet and a central angle of 23 degrees 26 minutes 03 seconds; thence North 61 degrees 05 minutes 20 seconds East, tangent to said last curve, a distance of 80.10 feet; thence northerly a distance of 81.23 feet along a tangential Curve, concave to .the west, having a radius of 44.61 feet and a central angle of 104 degrees 20 minutes 10 seconds; thence North 43 degrees 14 minutes 50 seconds West, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 53.84 feet; thence northerly a distance of 36.35 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the east, having a radius of 31.50 feet and a central angle of 66 degrees 06 minutes 52 seconds; thence North 22 degrees 52 minutes 02 seconds East, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 115.65 feet to a point in the north line of said Lot 1, distant 142.48 feet west from the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on a bearing of East, along the North line of said Lot 1, a distance of 142.48 feet to the point of beginning, said part of Lot 1 being hereinafter referred to as Tract A. and the following portion of Tract A is EXCEPTED from this conveyance, to-wit: northerly of a line extending from a point in the westerly line of said Lot 1 distant 203.87 feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof to a point in the easterly line of said Lot distant 203.87 feet northerly of the southeasterly corner thereof ____ .-- That part thereof lying . together with access easements to be described in the deed to Edina, and subject to the restrictions to be contained in said deed relating to the use of the land, the use and relocation of the access easements, and the requirement for construction of a fence along the northerly and northwesterly boundary of the property. 2. That Edina also accept the generous gift by Dr. and Hrs. K. Paul Carson, Jr., to be made prior to October 10, 1985, of the land in Edina adjoining the first gift and described as follows: That part of Lot 1, Block 1, Carson's Hill described as follows: Beginning at the northeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 0 degrees 21 minutes 48 seconds West, assumed bearing, along the east line of said Lot 1, a distance of 599.49 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence South 89 degrees 57 minutes 37 seconds West, along the south line of said Lot 1, a distance of 361.23 feet to the southwest corner of said Lot 1, said point being marked by a Judicial Landmark; thence North 0 degrees 21 minutes 55 seconds East, along the west line of said Lot 1, a distance of 203.87 feet; thence North 77 degrees 04 minutes 53 seconds East, a distance of 32.76 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 52.87 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the northwest, having a radius of 76.83 feet and a central angle of 39 degrees 25 minutes 36 seconds; thence North 37 degrees 39 minutes 17 seconds East, tangent to said curve, a distance of 70.67 feet; thence northeasterly a distance of 25.83 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the southeast, having a radius of 63.16 feet and a central angle of 23 degrees 26 minutes 03 seconds; thence North 61 degrees 05 minutes 20 D I 1013183 103 seconds East, tangent to said last curve, a distance of 80.10 feet; thence northerly a distance of 81.23 feet along a tangential cune, concave to the west, having a radius of 44.61 feet and a central angle of 104 degrees 20 minutes 10 seconds; thence North 43 degrees 14 minutes 50 seconds West, tangent to last said curve, a distance of 53.84 feet; thence northerly a distance of 36.35 feet along a tangential curve, concave to the east, having a radius of 31.50 feet and a central angle of 66 degrees 06 minutes 52 seconds; thence North 22 degrees 52 minutes 02 seconds East,.tangent to last said curve, a distance of 115.65 feet to a point in the north line of said Lot 1, distant 142.48 feet west from the northeast corner of said Lot 1; thence on a bearing of East, along the North line of said Lot 1, a distance of 142.48 feet to the point of beginning, said part of Lot 1 being hereinafter referred to as Tract A, and the following portion of Tract Ais EXCEPTED from this conveyance, to-wit: southarly of a line extending from a point in the westerly line of said Lot 1 distant 203.87 feet northerly of the southwest corner thereof to a point in the easterly line of said Lot distant 203.87 feet northerly of the southeasterly corner thereof That part thereof lying together with access easements to be described in the deed to Edina, and subject to the restrictions to be contained in said deed similar to those in the deed of the first gift. That Edina, in consideration of the gift of the property to be deeded to Edina prior to October'lO, 1985, and described above, agrees to pay the real estate taxes payable in 1984 and 1985 on said property to be given to Edina prior to October 10, 1985. Motion for adoption of the resolutions was seconded by Member Turner. 3. Rollcall : Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolutions adopted. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT YEAR IX ADMINISTRATIVE GUIDES FOR HOUSING REHABILITATION GRANT PROGRAM ADOPTED. Mr. Hughes advised Council that yearly the Council has adopted guidelines for administering the Community Development Block Grant Rehabilitation Program that specifies the income limits that are used for providing assistance as well as total amount of assets. Staff recommends that Council adopt the proposed guidelines and that the City Manager be authorized to sign repayment agreements that are used to secure 'grant funds for five years. Member Schmidt therupon offered the following resolution and moved its adoption: BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby adopt"Procedura1 Guides, Urban Hennepin County Housing Rehabilitation Grant Program Year IX" for providing housing rehabilitation grants to eligible homeowners within the City of Edina as funded by the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager of the City of Edina be authorized and directed to sign Repayment Agreements for the City of Edina for Housing Rehabilitation Grants funded by the Urban Hennepin County Community Development Block Grant Program. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner. RESOLUTION Rollcall: Ayes: Bredesen, Richards, Schmidt, Turner, Courtney Resolution adopted. POLICY -DEVELOPMENT MEETING SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 24, 1983, DISCUSSED. Member Turner advised-Council that she 'will-be unable to attend the sepcial Zoning O'tdinance Review scheduled for October 24, 1983. Mr. Rosland noted that the Policy Develop- ment Session Schedule may be revised at the Regular Council Meeting on October 17. EDINA COMMUNITY TASK FORCE I1 POSTER NOTED. attention a poster which was recently published by the Edina Community Task Force I1 in regard to chemical abuse problems. throughout the Edina community. . Member Turner brought to Council's She stated that the posters would be posted ANNUAL ICMA CONFERENCE NOTED. Mr. Rosland mentioned that perhaps he would be attend- ing this year's Annual ICMA Conference in Kansas City on October 9-13. ORDINANCE NO. 612 AND ORDINANCE NO. 645 GRANTED FIRST READING. Mr. Rosland advised Council that Ordinance No. 612 was an ordinance adopting the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and the National Fire Code establishing a Bureau of Fire Prevention, requiring permits, and authorizing establishment of fire lanes wIiile Ordinance No. 645 requires permits for and inspection of installation of fire protection systems. only as the ordinances were being reviewed by the City Attorney. Paulfranz stated these ordinances basically represent an update to follow the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and clarified that they do not present any significant changes in the Fire Department practice. No. 612 essentially updated an existing No. 611 Ordinance, and that Ordinance He recommended that council consider First Reading Fire Marshall, Attorney Erickson noted that Ordinance 10/ 3/ 83 . No. 645 was a new ordinance putting into ordinance form a present practice of the Fire Department. No. 612 for First Reading as follows: No further comments being heard, Member Turner offered Ordinance ORDINANCE NO. 612 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE MINNESOTA UNIFORM FIRE CODE AND THE NATIONAL FIRE CODE BY REFERENCE, REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 611, ESTABLISHING A BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION, REQUIRING PERMITS, AUTHORIZING ESTABLISHMENT OF FIRE LANES 1 AND DPOSING A PENALTY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: I Section 1. Adoption of Codes and Standards. herein by reference as an ordinance of the City: (a) There is adopted and incorporated The Minnesota Uniform Fire Code as promulgated by the Department of Administration of the State of Minnesota and published in the State Register and dated April 11, 1983 (which Code is hereinafter referred to as the IIMUFCI') with the changes hereinafter set forth; and (b) The National Fire Code of the National Fire Protection Association, 1982 Edition, (hereinafter referred to as "NFC"), Volumes 1 through 16. Sec. 2. Codes on File. One copy of each of the following codes, each marked "Official Copy", shall be filed in the office of the Clerk prior to publi- cation of this ordinance and shall remain on file and available for use and examination by the public: The National Fire Code of'th'e National Fire Protection Association, 1982 Edition, Volumes 1 through 10; (NFC) 1982 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code, as published by the International Conference of Building Officials and the Western Fire Chiefs Association (hereinafter ref erred to as "UFC1') . (a) The Minnesota Uniform .Fire Code (INFC)' ' (b) (c) The Clerk shall furnish copies of said codes or standards at cost to any person upon request. Sec. 3. Definitions. (a) (b) (c) Sec. 4. Establishment of the Bureau of Fire Prevention. (a) Wherever the word "jurisdiction" is used, it shall mean the City of Edina. Wherever the term "corporation counsel" is used, it shall mean the Attorney for the City of Edina. Wherever the term "chief" is used, it shall mean the Chief of the Edina Fire Department or his designated representative. The Bureau of Fire Prevention is hereby established in the Fire Department of the City. the Fire Department. be the Chief of the Fire Department, an Assistant Chief of the Fire Depart- ment and all Inspectors of the Fire Department from time to time appointed by the Chief of the Fire Department. A report of the Bureau of Fire Prevention shall be made annually and transmitted to the Manager. ordinance with such statistics as the Chief of the Fire Department may wish to include therein; the Chief of the Fire Department shall also recommend any amendments to this ordinance which in his judgement shall be desirable. I It shall be operated under the supervision of the Chief of The members of the Bureau of Fire Prevention shall (b) It shall contain all proceedings under this Sec. 5. Enforcement; Appeals. The provisions of this ordinance shall -be enforced by the Building Official and the Bureau of Fire Prevention in accordance with Sections 3 through 10, inclusive, off Ordinance No. 471. Appeals from any order made by the Building Official or the Bureau of Fire Prevention shall be made in accordance with Sections 3 through 10, inclusive, or Ordinance No. 471. each annual renewal thereof shall be established by Ordinance No. 171. unless otherwise noted shall expire one year from the date of issuance. Sec. 6. Permit Fee. The fee for each permit required by this ordinance and for All permits Sec. 7. Orders Establishing Fire Lanes. The Bureau of Fire Prevention is hereby authorized to order the establish- ment of fire lanes on public or private property as may be necessary in order that the travel of fire equipment may not be interfered with and that access to fire hydrants or buildings may not be obstructed. Fire lanes in existence prior to March 5, 1980, shall be marked by a sign bearing the words, "NO PARKING, FIRE LANE" or similar message. New fire lanes ordered established or existing fire lanes ordered modified after March 5, 1980, shall be marked by signs, double-faced, not more than 50 feet apart, bearing the words, "NO PARKING, FIRE LANE", and the adjacent curb or roadway shall be striped yellow to clearly define limits of the fire lane. the sign or signs shall be erected by the City, and when on private property, they shall be erected by the owner at his expense within 30 days after he has been notified of the order. on or otherwise occupy or obstruct the fire lane. When the fire lane is on public property or public right-of-way, Thereafter, no person shall park a vehicle Whenever an Inspector or Police Officer finds a vehicle unattended and 10/3/83 105 obstructing a fire lane, such Inspector or Police Officer is hereby authorized to provide for removal of such vehicle to the nearest convenient garage or other place of safety outside the limits of the fire lane, at the expense of the owner. (e) Violations of this section are exempted from the provisions of Sections 8 & 9 of this ordinance and instead shall be governed and enforced by Section 21.04 of Ordinance No. 1401. Sec. 8. Violation. No person shall be convicted of violating this ordinance unless he or she shall have been given notice of the violation in writing and a reasonable time to comply. order made pursuant hereto, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to a fine not exceeding $500.00, or imprisonment for a period not exceeding ninety (90) days with cost of prosecution in either case to be added. guilty of a separate offense for each and every day or portion thereof during which any violation of any of the provisions of this ordinance is committed, continued or permitted. Sec. 9. Penalty. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance or any Each such person shall be deemed Sec. 10. Amendments to the Minnesota Uniform Fire Code and Uniform Fire Code. (a) Article 4, "Permits and Certificates'' of the UFC as adopted by MUFC, is included in its entirety. (aa) Section 4.101, No. 38 of UFC, Places of Assembly, is amended to read: "38. Places of Assembly. entertainment, amusement, drinking, dining or awaiting transportation, with an occupant load in excess of 150 persons." Section 10.301 of UFC as adopted by MLJFC is amended by adding thereto a new subsection (f), reading as follows: "(f) Permits for installations of fire protection systems shall be secured as provided for in City Ordinance No. 645, and fees established as provided for in City Ordinance No. 171." Section 10.307 (a) of UFC as adopted by MUFC is amended by adding a new paragraph to read as follows: "Electric magnetic door holders shall be installed on all fire doors located in area separation walls. holders are installed on stairway or smoke barrier doors, they shall be controlled and released by smoke detectors. All electric magnetic door holders shall be connected to the alarm and detection system in such a way that the doors will automatically close upon activation of the alarm system." for Installation, Inspection and Maintenance of fire alarm systems shall be according to referenced NFC Standards." Section 11.204 of MUFC is amended by identifying the first paragraph as (a), and adding a new paragraph to read: "(b) Tests to establish flame retardant quality shall be as provided for in "NFC" Standard NFPA No. 701.'' Article 82, "Liquified Petroleum Gases'' of the UFC as adopted by MUFC is included in its entirety. Section 82.102 of UFC is amended by adding a new sub-section (c) to read as follows: "(c) Where a single container or the aggregate of interconnected containers is 500 or more gallons water capacity, the installer shall obtain a permit and plan approval from the Chief." Section 82.105 (b) is deleted and a new section 82.105(b) is included to read as follows: "(b) storage capacity in excess of 1,000 gallons shall be protected by one or more of the following methods: 1) Mounded in an approved manner, or, 2) Protected with an approved insulation on such areas that may be subject to impingement of ignited gas from pipelines or other leakage, or, Protected by an approved system for application of water, or, Protected by other approved means." Sec. 11. Interpretation. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of To operate a place of assembly for purposes of (b) (c) When door . (d) Section 10.307(c) of UFC as adopted by MUFC is amended to read: "(c) Standard (e) (f) (g) (h) All single container installations with a total water 3) Protected by fire walls,of approved conaCruqtion,-or, : , _. .. 4) 5) the MUFC and the provisions of this ordinance, the more stringent provision shall apply. Provided, however, that no provision of this ordinance shall be interpreted to exceed the requirements of the Minnesota State Building Code, as adopted by the ordinances of the City of Edina. entirety. passage and publication. Member Schmidt then offered Ordinance No. 645 for Firs't Reading as follows: Sec. 12. Repealer. Ordinance No. 611-A1 and No. 611-A2 are repealed in their Sec. 13. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its ORDINANCE NO. 645 AN ORDINANCE REQUIRING PERMITS OF PLANS AND INSPECTION FOR INSTALLATION OF FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: Section 1. Codes and Standards. All installations of fire protection equipment shall be installed in accordance with appropriate City Ordinances and current Building 10/3/83 106 and Fire Code Provisions, as provided for in City Ordinance. Sec. 2. Permit Required. Each person, before installing, reinstalling, extend- ing, altering, or modifying any fire protection system, including fire alarm systems, fixed fire extinguishing, including automatic sprinklers, and fire department stand- pipe systems and any other fire protection systems, shall make application to the City of Edina office of the Building Official for a permit for that purpose and shall furnish a full description of the work together with plans and specifications as required by the Building Official or Fire Marshal. by the Building Official or Fire Marshal or a special inspector so designated and shall be approved by either of them. and before closure or concealment. be made before approval of the system will be made. mitted with the final inspection. Sec. 3. Inspection. All installations installed under permit shall be inspected Inspection shall be made during installation A final inspection and full operating test shal Final test report will be sub- 'I Sec. 4. Permit Fees. (a) All sprinkler permit and plan review fees shall be based on a per-head schedule and shall include any additions, modifications, changes or relocations of sprinkler heads. FEE NUMBER OF HEADS 1 --- 5 $30.00 (Minimum fee) 6 -- 25 26 -- 50 51 - 200 - -$30.00 for first five (5), plus $20.00 for each additional 10 or fraction thereof $70.00 for first 25, plus $15.00 for each additional 10 or fraction thereof $115.00 for the first 50, plus $10.00 for each additional10 or fraction thereof $265.00 for the first 200, plus $5.00 for each additional 10 or fraction thereof 201+ (b) Fire pump installation and associated hardware, $40.00 (c) Standpipe installation - First standpipe, $40.00; $5.00 for each additional (d) standpipe. Fire Alarm and Other Fire Extinguishing Systems - Permit fees shall be as provided for in current building code fee schedule and be based on total cost of the installation, including all parts and labor. 65% of the permit fee shall be charged as a plan check fee. In addition, I Sec. 5. Sec. 6. All fees shall also include an additional 50C state surcharge, not to The City shall have the power to collect such fees by whatever means exceed $1,000 permit fee. necessary including instituting civil action against the installer, owner, occupant, or agent. passage and publication. Sec. 7. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately upon its CLAIMS PAID. the following Claims as per Pre-List: Art Center $760.34, Swimming Pool Fund $4,940.00, Golf Course Fund $7,964.28, Recreation Center Fund, $4,136.50, Gun Range Fund $25.00, Waterwork Fund $7,566.44, Sewer Rental Fund $311.00, Liquor Dispensary Fund $4,108.15, Construction Fund $46.40, Perm. Imp. Revolving Fund $731.66, Imp. Bond Redemption Fund $4.00, Total $112,356.92. Motion of Member Turner was seconded by Member Schmidt for payment of General Fund $77,317.03, Park Fund $5,446.12, There being no further business, Mayor Courtney declared the meeting adjourned at 9:47 p.m.