HomeMy WebLinkAbout19851112_special30 MINUTES
OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
NOVEMBER 12, 1985 -.
!T&?Edina City Council held a closed meeting on November 12, 1985, at 4:45 p.m.
regarding the litigation against the Homart Development Company and the City
of Bloomington.
-.
Present were Members Kelly, Richards, Turner and Courtney. Also present were
Kenneth Rosland, Gordon Hughes, Fran Hoffman, Ceil Smith, Marcella Daehn and
Attorney Thomas Erickson.
The Council reviewed and discussed a draft of a proposed settlement of the
lawsuit and directed Mr. Erickson to contact the defendants regarding several
issues.
discussed by the Council.
No formal action was taken by the Council and no other business was
..
City Clerk
MINUTES
OF THE SPECIAL 3EETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD NOVEMBER 13, 1985
The Edina City Council met in special session on November 13, 1985, at 4 p.m.
in the offices of Mr. Frederick S. Richards, at 4344 IDS Tower, Minneaspolis,
Minnesota. Council Members in attendance were Peggy Kelly, Fred Richards, :
Leslie Turner and C. Wayne Courtney.
Fran Hoffman, Becky Comstock from Dorsey & Whitney, and Thomas Erickson, City
Attorney, also from Dorsey & Whitney.
Also in attendance were Kenneth Rosland,
The meeting was called to discuss possible settlement of the lawsuit against
Homart and of the Metropolitan Significance Review instituted by Edina in
connection with the Homart Project.
Thomas Erickson to present the current status of settlement negotiations.
Mr. Erickson advised as follows:
substantially the same as now negotiated except for the following changes:
I The Mayor opened the meeting and then asked
1. The agreement presented to the City Council on November 12, 1985 was
(a) Paragraph 4 has been changed to provide that Homart's share of
of the cost of the turn lane shall not exceed $40,000 and that the con-
struction of the turn lane shall include signalization.
In Paragraph 9 the square footage in the first three Phases is
now stated to be "gross floor area."
Paragraph 11 relative to the 1-494 corridor study to be under-
taken by the Metropolitan Council now also privides that the study "shall
include, among other aspects, transportation improvements, mass transit
usage and land useage."
changes in the language of the agreement.
2. There were three open issues: (1) to date Edina has insisted that the
agreement relative to the restriction on construction of Phase IV (restricted
by the vehicle trips) should be of record, and thereby give notice of owners of
Phase IV. As an alternate, Edina has
suggested that Bloomington adopy a zoning and/or land use ordinance implementing
the provisions of the Settlement Agreement; that Bloomington also agree to give
notice to Edina of development plans for the Homart site and not to approve any
development plan or issue building permits, except for Phase I, until the
ordinance is effective.
this concept and that Floyd Olson, city attorney, had approved the concept,
although neither had seen the exact language that we proposed.
asked for some direction of Council as to whether they would accept the zoning
ordinance and remove any requirement that the agreements with Homart be recorded.
The Settlement Agreement presently requires that Bloomington initiate
the traffic study by notice to Metropolitan Council, and Metropolitan Council
would then see to the selection of a group of experts who would prepare criteria,
and those criteria would be used to complete the traffic study after Phases I, I1
and 111 were complete and occupied; on the basis of that study the Metropolitan
Council would determine the size of Phase IV. Homart wants to put a time frame
of 120 days or 180 days (the 180-day figure being our number) on this process
so that Homart will be able to plan.
objection to the 180 or the 120 days so long as the parties to the Agreement
retain their rights and obligations notwithstanding failure to comply with that
deadline.
(b)
(c)
(d) There are also a number of other insignificant nonsubstantive
Homart has objected to that recording.
Peter Coyle has advised us that Homart had approved
Mr. Erickson
3.
We advised the Council that we had no