HomeMy WebLinkAbout19860915_regular246 MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
SEPTEMBER 15, 1986
Answering rollcall ere Members Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Mayor
Courtney.
PUBLIC HEARINGS CONDUCTED ON NlBEROUS ASSESSMENTS. Affidavits of Notice were
presented by Clerk, approved as to form and ordered place on file.
having been given, public hearings were conducted and action taken as herein-
after recorded on the following proposed assessments:
,
Due notice
1. STREET GRADING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-143
2. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST .S .-179
3. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-373 I Location: Antrim Terrace in Edina Oaks Addition
Location: Antrim Terrace in Edina Oaks Addition
Location: Antrim Terrace in Edina Oaks Addition
Location: Antrim Terrace in Edina Oaks Addition
4. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-358
Improvements listed under 1, 2, 3 and 4 above-affecting the same properties,
public hearing was conducted concurrently.
of assessment for Street Grading Improvement No. (2-143 showing total construction
cost of $7,085.75 proposed to be assessed against 5 assessable lots at $1,417.15
each, against estimated assessment of $1,701.64 per lot. Analysis of assessment
for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S.-179 was given as*total cost for construction
$4,882.50 proposed to be assessed against 5 assessable lots at $976.50 per lot,
?gainst estimated assessment of $946.96 per lot. Analysis of assessment for
Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-373 was given as total construction cost of
$9,644.92 proposed to be assessed against 4 assessable lots at $2,411.23 per
lot, against estimated assessment of $3,453.17 per lot.
for Watermain Improvement No. WM-358 was given as total construction cost of
$10,305.12 proposed to be assessed against 4 assessable lots at $2,576.28 per
lot, against estimated assessment of $3,194.43 per lot.
be spread over 3 years per Developer's Agreement.
no written objections to the proposed assessments were received .prior hereto.
(Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
Manager Rosland presented analysis I
'5 I
Analysis of assessment
All assessments are to
No objections were heard and
.5. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S.-176
Location: McCauley Trail from Timber Ridge to Timber Trail; Timber Trail
from McCauley Train to Arrowhead Lake
Location: McCauley Trail from Timber Ridge to Timber Trail; Timber Trail
from McCauley Trail to cul-de-sac
Location: McCauley Trail from Timber Ridge to Timber Trail; Timber Trail
from McCauley Trail to cul-de-sac
.
6. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-370
J. 7. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-355
Improvements listed under 5, 6 and 7 above affecting the same properties, public
hearing was conducted concurrently.
assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S-176 showing total construction
cost of $65,441.25 proposed to be assessed against 15 assessable lots at $4,362.75
per lot, against estimated assessment of $3,550.85 per lot.
ment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-370 was given as total construction
cost of $70,784.12 proposed to be assessed against 22 assessable lots at
$3,217.46 per lot, against estimated assessment of $3,491.05 per lot. Analysis of
cost of $42,073.46 proposed to be assessed against 22 assessable lots at $1,912.43
per-lot, against estimated assessment of $2,182.94 per lot.
spread over 3 years per Developer's Agreement for Indian Hills 2nd Addition..
were received prior hereto.
8. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-175
Location: Findell Clark Addition
9. SANITARY SEFJER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-369
Location: Findell Clark Addition
10. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-354 '
Location: Findell Clark Addition
Improvements listed under 8, 9 and 10 above affecting the same properties, public
hearing was conducted concurrently. Manager Rosland presented analysis of t
assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S-175 showing total construction
cost of $6,202.46 proposed to be assessed against 11 assessable lots at $563.86
per lot, against estimated assessment of $543.64 per lot. Analysis of assess-
ment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-369 was given as total construction
cost of $15,191.88 proposed to be assessed against 11 assessable lots at $1,381.08
per lot, against estimated assessment of $838.10 per lot.
for Watermain Improvement No. Wf-354 was given as total construction cost of
$13,694.23 proposed to be assessed against 11 assessable lots at $1,244.93 per
Manager Rosland presented analysis of
I
. Analysis of assess-
I
I I assessment for Watermain Improvement No. WM-355 was given as total construction
Assessments to be
L
No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessments 1 (Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
~ I'
Analysis of assessment
9/15/86
72 m a
247
lot, against estimated assessment of $1,103.82 per lot.
be spread over 3 years per Developer's Agreement.
and no written objections to the proposed assessments were received prior
hereto.
Assessments are to
No objections were heard
(Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
11. GRADING AND G'RAVELING IMFROVEMENT NO. C-144
Location: Dearborn Court in Dearborn Addition and Blake Woods Addition
12. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S.-180
Location: Dearborn Court in Dearborn Addition and Blake Woods Addition
13. SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-375
Location: Dearborn Court in Dearborn Addition and Blake Woods Addition
14. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-360
Location: Dearborn Court in Dearborn Addition and Blake Woods Addition
Improvements listed under 11, 12, 13 and 14 above affecting the same properties,
public hearing was conducted concurrently.
of assessment fur Grading and Graveling Improvement No. .C-144 showing total
construction cost of $12,771.70 proposed to be assessed against 10 assessable
lots at $1,277.17 per lot, against estimated assessment of $1,034.18 per lot.
Analysis of assessment for Storm Sewer Improvement No. St.S.-180 was given as
total construction cost of $15,869.30 proposed to be assessed against 10 assess-
able lots at $1,586.93 per lot, against estimated assessment of $1,867.01 per
lot.
given as total construction cost of $18,933.20 proposed to be assessed against
10 assessable lots at $1,893.32 per lot, against estimated assessment of
$2,100.91 per lot.
was given as total costruction cost of $12,511.72 proposed to be assessed
against 9 assessable lots at $1,411.97 per lot, against estimated assessment
of $1,411.67 per lot.
Agreement.
assessments were received prior hereto.
later in Minutes.)
Manager Rosland presented analysis
Analysis of assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-375 was
Analysis of assessment for Watermain Improvement No. WM-360
Assessments are to be spread over 3 years per Developer's
No objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed
(Assessments levied by Resolution
15. MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M-86
Manager Rosland presented analysis of assessment for Maintenance Improvement
No. M-86 showing total construction cost of $44,944.18 proposed to be assessed
against 289,030 assessable square feet at $1.15555 per assessable square foot
to be spread over one year.
maintenance cost for.the 50th and France Business District is up this year
due to concrete repair on sidewalks and additional cost for trees and plantings.
NO objections were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment
were received prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
16. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-353
Manager Rosland presented analysis of assessment for Watermain Improvement
No. WM-353 showing total construction cost of $59,240.40 proposed to be assessed
against 12 assessable lots at $4,936.70 per lot, against estimated assessment of
$5,617.95 per lot. Assessment is to be spread over 10 years.
were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were received
prior hereto. (Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
17. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S-33
Location: West 49% Street - Adjacent to Peterson Building (East of ramp)
Manager Rosland presented analysis of assessment for Sidewalk Improvement
No. S-33 showing total construction cost of $9,412.70 proposed to be assessed
against one assessable lot, against estimated assessment of $5,630.58 per lot.
The assessment is to be spread over 10 years. Engineer Hoffman explained that
.when the Peterson building was remodeled the City was petitioned to remove
the parking bay on West 49% Street adjacent to the building and to construct
a sidewalk in that location. Bids were taken and came in higher than the
estimated cost.
1) that more of the cost should be assessed back to the 50th Street and France
Business District as also being a user of the sidewalk rather than one property
owner paying the entire cost, and 2) that the assessment hearing be continued
to October 6, 1986 so that the issue could be discussed with Oswald Peterson.
Motion of Member Bredesen was seconded by Member Turner to continue the hearing
to October 6. Motion carried.
Location: 50th Street and France Avenue Business District
Engineer Hoffman explained that the annual
Location: Westwood Court
No objections
He stated that two issues have come up during the process:
18. SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S-34
Location: Country Club District, Brown and Fairway Sections
Manager Rosland presented analysis of assessment for Sidewalk Improvement
No. S-33 showing total construction cost of $181,997.30 proposed to be assessed
against 566 assessable lots at $321.55 per lot, against estimated assessment of
$190.00 per lot. Assessment to be spread over 5 years.
explained that the hearing for this improvement was held last year and that
historically the City has replaced sidewalk in need of repair in the Country
Club District every six to eight years.
hearing was $190.00 per assessable lot and the difference between the estimated
Engineer Hoffman
The estimated cost at the project
9/15/86
243
assessment and the proposed assessment of $321.55 per lot is that when the work
was commenced a number of property owners asked that additional sections of
sidewalk be replaced than was initially scheduled for replacement and therefore
the total cost reflects the additional work requested.
has received 7 telephone calls from property owners who received notice of the
.assessment asking why they were being assessed as not much work was done on
their frontage and that he had explained that the policy since 1973 in the Country
Club District has been to replace broken sidewalk and to assess all properties
equally.
the estimated and proposed assessment. Noted were letters from John and Susan
Palombo, 4624 Browndale Avenue, and Douglas H. McPeak, 4627 Drexel Avenue,
objecting to the assessment. No further comments were heard. (Assessment
levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
19. GRADING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-142
Location: Edinborough Addition
20. STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-177
Location: Edinborough Addition
21. SANITARY SEVER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-371
Location: Edinborough Addition
22. WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-356
Location: Edinborough Addition
bIr. Hoffman said that he
Paul Laederach, 4633 Bruce Avenue, questioned the difference between .
Improvements listed under 19, 20, 21 and 22 above affecting the same properties,
public hearing was conducted concurrently.
of assessment for Grading and Graveling Improvement No. C-142 showing total
construction cost of $106,704.81 proposed to be assessed against 1,028,976 square
feet at $0.1037 per square foot. Analysis of assessment for Storm Sewer Improve-
ment No. St.S-177 was given as total cost of construction of $216,084.96 proposed
to be assessed against 1,028,976 square feet at $0.2100 per square foot.
of assessment for Sanitary Sewer Improvement No. SS-371was given as total cost
of construction of $19,556.78 proposed to be assessed against 1,028,976 square
feet at $0.0190 per square foot. Analysis of assessment for Watermain Improve-
ment No. WM-356 was given as total cost of construction of $123,580.02 proposed
to be assessed against 1,028,976 square feet at $0.1201 per square foot.
assessments are to be spread over 10 years per Developer's Agreement.
ions were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessments were
received prior hereto.
Manager Rosland presented analysis
Analysis
All
No object-
(Assessments levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
23. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-262
Location: West 44th Street from Brookside Terrace to Highway 100
Manager Rosland presented analysis of assessment for Street Improvement No.
BA-262 showing total construction cost of $17,310.00 proposed to be assessed
against 865.50 assessable feet at $20.00 per foot, against estimated assessment
of $20.00 per foot. Engineer Hoffman
explained that State Aid funds paid for the majority of the cost of construction
of the project. No objections were heard and no written objections to the
proposed assessment were received prior hereto.
later in Minutes.)
Assessment is to be spread over 10 years.
(Assessment levied by Resolution
24. TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. TT-86
Bounded by Highway 100 on the east, Crosstown
Highway on the south, County Road 18 on the west and City of Edina limits on
the north.
Manager Rosland presented analysis of assessment for Tree Trimming Improvement
No. TT-86 showing total cost of $41,730.00 proposed to be assessed as follows:
95 trees 12" and under at $30 each and 864 trees over 1" at $45 each, against
estimated assessment of $45 per tree to be spread over one year.
Kojetin commented that approximately 50 telephone calls have been received which
have been answered and which pertained to trees which after the trimming
developed Dutch Elm disease and which were then removed.
4811 Bywood West, commented that she felt the trimming was excessive and was
a factor in the subsequent loss of trees. She also questioned the procedure
followed in removing diseased trees and asked if the City will re-forest.
Elizabeth Skelly, 4425 North Avenue, asked who makes the decision regarding
which trees and when to trim them. Byron Armstrong, 4119 West 62nd Street,
complained that there was a lack of communication with the homeowner when the
trees were trimmed in his area and that the trimming destroyed the natural
shape of the trees. Duncan Bums, 4523 Arden Avenue, asked that the City
publish information in the Edina Sun-Current as to which types of trees are
allowed to be planted.
for Dutch Elm disease.
through the city is constantly looking for signs of diseased trees; that this
year the City is losing trees fast and that some large elms especially in the
Country Club District which have been treated for years are suddenly dying.
No further comment was heard.
Location: Area 115 and #6.
Park Director
Jane Stenson,
He also questioned the frequency of inspection of trees
Mr. Kojetin responded that the forester in traveling
(Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
25. TREE REMOVAL IMPROVEMENT NO. TR-86
Location: Various locations of diseased trees within the City of Edina
9/15/86
249
c\.
cy) Lo I:
a m
Manager Rosland presented analysis of assessment for Tree Removal Improvement
No. TR-86 showing total cost of $7,520.00 proposed to be assessed against
13 assessable lots allocated individually per size of tree removed.
ions were heard and no written objections to the proposed assessment were
received prior hereto.
No object-
(Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
26. AQUATIC WEEDS IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ-86
Manager Rosland presented analysis of assessment for Aquatic Weeds Improvement
No. AQ-86 for Indianhead Lake showing total cost of $10,396.00 proposed to be
assessed against 33 homes at $315.00 per home and for the Mill Pond showing
total cost of $7,588.00 proposed to be assessed against 63 homes2 at $120.45
per home.
no written objections to the proposed assessment were received prior hereto.
(Assessment levied by Resolution later in Minutes.)
Following the presentation of analysis of assessments, Member Bredesen introduced
the following resolution and moved its adoption:
Location: Indianhead Lake and Mill Pond
Assessment to be spread over 3 years. No objections were heard and
SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS LEVIED ON ACCOUNT OF
VARIOUS PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
1.
assessment rolls for the improvements hereinafter referred to, and at such
hearings held on September 15, 1986, has considered all oral and written
objections presented against the levy of such assessments.
2. Each of the assessments as set forth in the assessment rolls on file in the
office of the City Clerk for the following improvements:
Street Grading Improvement Nos. C-142, C-143, C-144
Storm Sewer Improvement Nos. St.S-175, St.S-176, St.S-177, St.S-179, St.S-180
Sanitary Sewer Improvement Nos. SS-369, SS-370, SS-371, SS-373, SS-375
Watermain Improvement Nos. WM-353, WM-354, WM-355, WM-356, WM-358, WM-360
Maintenance Improvement No. M-86
Sidewalk Improvement No. S-34.
Blacktop, Curb & Gutter Street Improvement No. BA-262
Tree Trimming Improvement No. TT-86
Tree Removal Improvement No. TR-86
Aquatic Weeds Improvement No. AQ-86
The City has given notice of hearings as required by law on the proposed
does not exceed the local benefits conferred by said improvements 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 respective
improvements 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 8.9% per annum on the
entire assessment from the date hereof to December 31, 1987, to be payable with
the general taxes for the year 198Z. To each subsequent installment shall be
added interest at the above rate for one year on all then unpaid installments.
The number of such annual installments shall be as follows:
Name of Improvement Number of Installments
GRADING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-143 3 years
6TORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-179. 3 years
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-373 3 years
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-358 3 years
STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-176 3 years
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-370 3 years
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-355 3 years
STORM SEWER IIPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-175 3 years
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-369 3 years
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-354 3 years
GWING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-144 3 years
STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-180 3 years
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-375 3 years
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-360 3 years
MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M-86
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-353 10 years
SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-34 5 years
GRADING AND GRAVELING IMPROVEMENT NO. C-142 10 years
STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. ST.S-177 10 years
SANITARY SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. SS-371 10 years
WATERMAIN IMPROVEMENT NO. WM-356 10 years
STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-262 10 years
TREE TRIMMING IMPROVEMENT NO. TT-86 1 year
TREE REMOVAL IMPROVEMENT NO. TR-86 5 years
AQUATIC WEEDS IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ-86
1 year
(Exception: Levy No. 10353 - 1 year)
1 year
9 115 I86
250
4.
a copy 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.
be payable 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
The City Clerk shall forthwith prepare and transmit to the County Auditor
The City Clerk shall also mail notice of any special assessment which may
in said Section.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
REQUEST FOR ZONING CHANGE FROM R-1 TO PRD-2 (ROBERT HANSON) HEARD; FINDINGS TO
BE PREPARED FOR DECISION.
ordered placed on file.
is generally located north of the Crosstown Highway and east and north of Vernon
Court.
-on May 19, 1986, at which time 16 townhouse units divided amoung four buildings
was proposed for the site.
Development and Planning Commission to look at the number of units and s=tbacks
on the site. The proposal was heard by the Planning Commission several times,
most recently on September 3, 1986, when the Planning Commission recommended
approval of the revised plan illustrating 15 townhouse units and conforming to
the setback requirements of the PRD-2 Planned Residence District, a front setback
of 30 feet and a rear setback of 35 feet. The Planning Commission's approval was
conditioned on: 1) an acceptable overall development plan, 2) final platting and
3) subdivision dedication.
Association, asked questions about the distance from the building to the cul-de-sac,
the height of the retaining wall, the distance between buildings and said they
were concerned about protecting the natural habitat of the hill at the rear of
the proposed development and also about the increased traffic on Vernon Avenue.
Member Richards commented that he supported the PRD-2 zoning concept but that he
felt it should not be developed to the maximum density and that 12 units would
make more sense in light of the commitment everyone has made in that area to
preserve the hill.
regarding density for the proposal.
the various multi-unit developments directly southwesterly and northerly of the
subject site.
as was proposed for subject site.
now meets the requirements of the PRD-2 District and that she would favor approval.
In response to Mayor Courtney's questions as to procedure, Attorney Erickson said
the Council cannot use the neighborhood objections to the proposal as the sole
reason to deny the rezoning request. If denied, the rezoning request cannot be
brought back to the Council for one year unless there is a change in facts. He
pointed out that if a developer meets the criteria set out in the Zoning
Ordinance for development of land then he is entitled to develop the property.
The real question is on what basis can the Council say the density has to be
something less than 15 units. Mr. Erickson pointed out that the procedure has
been to direct staff to prepare findings of fact and reasons for the Council to
consider in making their decision.. Robert Hansan, the proponent, spoke in support
of his revised plan for the site and pointed out the amenities of the units. He
stated that he felt the proposed 15 units would not add noticably to the traffic
on Vernon Avenue. David Darrell, architect for the project, presented a graphic
showing the slope of the hill and pointed out that the retaining wall would be
5 feet at the highest point, sloping lower where the hill contours are lower.
Bill Pearson, Vernon Avenue, spoke in favor of the proposed development. Member
Kelly made a motion to again refer the rezoning request to the Planning Commission
for consideration of the commitment the neighborhood has made to the hill, the
topography of the site, the advisability of reducing the density and the traffic
concerns on Vernon Avenue.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Richards
Nays: Bredesen, Turner, Courtney
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and
Planner Craig Larsen advised that the subject property
The request for a zoning change from R-1 to PRD-2 was heard by the Council
That proposal was referred back to the Community
&ry Murphy, President of Viking Hills Homeowners
Member Kelly said she concurred with Member Richard's comments
Member Turner asked what the density was for
Mr. Larsen responded that they were all in the same density range
Member Turner commented that the revised plan
I Iviotion was seconded by Member Richards.
Member Turner then made a motion to approve the zoning change from R-1 to PRD-2
District, subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion
was seconded by Member Bredesen.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Kelly, Richards
Motion failed because 4/5 favorable vote is required for zoning change.
Erickson opined that only the winning party (nays vote) can bring the matter back.
Mr. Erickson then explained that legally the zoning change was denied and the
Attorney
9 /lS/86
251
courts have ruled that if a proposal is denied the reasons must be stated
for that action. Member Richards then made a motion to retract the first
motion and to direct the staff to prepare findings of fact for a decision
which would include: 1) the transitional zone 2) the proximity to the single
family residential neighborhood, 3) the type of developments immediately to
the east and northeast, 4) the hill in public ownership, encroachment thereof
and preservation of that open space, and 5) the traffic the development would
add. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly.
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
ORDINANCE NO. 825-A12 GRANTED FIRST READING (R-1 TO R-2 DISTRICT FOR ROBERT
KIDD); PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED FOR KIDD ADDITION.
presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen advised that
the subject property is generally located South of West 62nd Street and east
of Valley View Road and is a through lot with frontage on both streets. The
property measures approximately 83 feet in width by 339 feet in depth and contains
28,253 square feet of area.
dwelling unit fronting on West West 62nd Street, the remainder of the property
being undeveloped.
would create a new lot with frontage on Valley View Road and would contain
15,005 square feet, while the lot for the existing dwelling would contain
13,248 square feet.
R-2 Double Dwelling Unit District to allow the construction of a new double
bungalow. The new lot would meet the square footage requirement for an R-2 lot
but would require a variance from the 90 foot lot width requirement.
prehensive Plan illustrates this section of Valley View Road as suitable for low
density attached residential.
between 2 and 5 units.
double bungalow.
variance would be necessary. Mr. Larsen pointed out that the proposal is similar
to one heard by the Council in 1984; the major difference is that the lot on
Valley View Road has been increased to meet the 15,000 square foot requirement.
Unlike the previous proposal which was to have both lots zoned R-1 District the
new lot is proposed to be rezoned to the R-2 District. In 1984 staff suggested
that the subject property be combined with two similar parcels adjacent to and
east of the property. The proponent and other local developers have attempted
to acquire all three properties for a larger development.
apparently failed. Staff has become convinced that the favored combined deve-
lopment will not occur in the foreseeable future.
request as a reasonable alternative that would be compatible with surrounding
properties. The subject proposal was heard by the Community Development and
Planning Commission at its meeting of September 3, 1986, and recommended pre-
liminary rezoning and plat approval, subject to final plat approval and sub-
'division dedication. Reasons stated in support of the variance from the 90 foot
lot width requirement were: 1) City and staff support of the R-2 District zoning
in the past, and 2) 82 and 83 foot lots are standard widths for R-2 lots on
Valley View Road. Robert Kidd, proponent, commented that two years ago staff
recommended that the subject property be tied together with other adjacent lots.
However, this did not happen and therefore he is requesting that the new lot be
rezoned R-2 District. Dr. Byron Armstrong, 4119 West 62nd Street, stated his
objection to the proposed development and that of the neighborhood. No further
comment being heard, Member Bredesen introduced Ordinance No. 825-A12 for First
Reading as follows, subject to final plat approval and subdivision dedication:
Affidavits of Notice were
It is presently developed with a single family
The proponent is requesting approval of a subdivision which
The propone& is also requesting that the new lot be rezoned
The Com-
Existing buildings in the vicinity contain
The preliminary plat illustrates a location for the new
Due to the alignment of Valley View Road a front setback
All efforts have
Consequently, staff sees this
ORDINANCE NO. 825-A12
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE (NO. 825)
BY ADDING TO THE DOUBLE DWELLING UNIT DISTRICT (R-2)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS:
the following thereto:
Section 1. Section 6 of Ordinance No. 825 of the City is amended by adding
"The extent of the Double Dwelling Unit District (Sub-District R-2) is
enlarged by the addition of the following property:
The south 180 feet of the following described parcel:
Lot 3, except the East 95 feet, front and rear thereof, and Lot 20,
except the West 75 feet thereof, all in Block 2, Peacedale Acres."
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage
and publication.
Motion for First Reading of the Ordinance was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
First Reading granted.
Member Bredesen then introduced the following resolution and moved its
adoption :
9/15/86
252
RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELWNARY PLAT APPROVAL
FOR KIDD ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "Kidd Addition", platted by Robert J. Kidd, and presented
at the regular meeting of the City Council of September 15, 1986, be and is
hereby granted preliminary plat approval.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
I PID PLANNED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT TO PRD-4 PLANNED RESIDENCE DISTRICT ZONING
REQUEST REFERRED TO STAFF FOR REFINEMENT OF PROJECT PROPOSED BY KNUTSON VENTURES.
Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner
Larsen advised that the subject property is located south of Eden Avenue and west
of the So0 Line Railroad track and is located within the Grandview Area Tax
Increment District. The properties involved include the Lewis Engineering site,
the Kunz Oil warehouse, and the So0 Line Railroad property which is currently
vacant. The Grandview
Area Tax Increment Plan identifies the subject area as blighted and recommends
that the current uses be removed and that the area be redeveloped. The Plan did
not, however, suggest the most appropriate land use for redevelopment.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) commissioned BRW to conduct a land use
study and make recommendations for the entire district.
subject parcel, the study recommended high density residential as the most appro-
priate use and suggested a redevelopment with between 140 and 210 dwelling units.
Mr. Larsen stated that Knutson Ventures has submitted a request to rezone the
property PRD-4 to allow construction of a 4-storyY 210 unit apartment complex.
The complex would include 263 underbuilding parking spaces and 157 surface spaces.
The proposed parking is in conformance with Ordinance requirements. The formal or
guest entrance to the project is located off of Eden Avenue with tenant entrances
to underbuilding parking proposed off of Eden Circle. A substantial effort will
be made to screen the perimeter of the site, especially along the east and north
sides.
it available to them for redevelopment. Due to the high cost of acquisition and
clearance a request for some form of assistance or write-down is anticipated.
Staff believes that the proposed redevelopment concent complies with BRW's recom-
mendations on land use. The proposal would also remove the blighting influences
referenced in the Grandview Area Redevelopment Plan. Mr. Larsen pointed out that
the key to the redevelopment is the willingness of the HRA to participate in the
acquisition and redevelopment. The proposal was heard by the Community Develop-
ment and Planning Commission at its meeting of September 3, 1986. The Commission
members agreed that the property should be redeveloped, that redevelopment for
housing was appropriate and recommended concept approval. The Commission members
did not express an opinion with respect to the proposed financing of this project
and HRA participation. William Schatzlein, Knutson Development Company, stated
that the project would be developed for Knutson Company to own and operate and
that he had met with Peter Jarvis of BRW to discuss the site. They had agreed
that housing would be the best use for the property and that this would be an
excellent multi-family housing site with access to a major.highway. They felt
there is a need for additional rental housing in Edina for Lhose residents who
want to say in the City but do not want home ownership.
graphics of the proposed development, pointing out the proposed siting of the
building which would create its own neighborhood and the amenities of each level
of the four story building.
Mr. Schatzlein said Knutson Development would then'work with staff to see how
the HRA could participate to make the project work. Sara Laird, Eden Avenue,
expressed a concern about the additional traffic that would be generated by the
project.
€IRA should be involved; that he would urge the developer to meet with the neighbors
to'the south and west to explain the project and get their viewpoints on it; that
he would hope the project would not be done on a piecemeal basis and that he had
a positive reaction to what is proposed.
about the density of the entire area involving development in proximity to Vernon
- Avenue;'that the character of the neighborhood will be changed and that the impact
of each project should.be seen before commiting to another.
that she agreed with the land use and the multi-family housing concept but was
reluctant about financial participation 'by the City and did not see the rationale
or goals for City participation. . Mayor Courtney stated he also was hesitant about
City participation in the project and that the Council would need to have more
details. Member Bredesen made a motion to send the matter to back to.staff for
further work with the Knutson Company on details of the proposed project.
was seconded by Member Kelly.
The total area of the site is approximately 6.8 acres.
The Edina
With respect to the
.
The proponents have proposed that.the HRA acquire the property and make
I
Mr. Schatzlein presented
If the Council gives concept approval of the project,
Member Richards commented that it would be premature to.judge if the
I Member Kelly said she was concerned
Member Tumer commented
Motion
Ayes:
Motion carried.
Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
,< . 9/15/86
253
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL NOT GRANTED FOR DAHLE REPLAT OF WARDEN ACRES. Affi-
davits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered -- placed on file. Planner
Larsen stated that the subject-property is generally located south of Grove
Street and west of Garden Avenue. He recalled that a similar subdivision pro-
posal was considered by the Community Development and Planning Commission and
the Council recently. The proposal, to create one new buildable lot and one
outlot, failed to gain Council approval at their May 19, 1986 meeting. That
proposal called for retaining and remodeling the existing dwelling.
the proponent, has now re-applied for preliminary plat approval.
proposal suggests that the existing dwelling be razed and that two new dwell-
ings be constructed fronting on Grove Street. The southerly one-half of the
property would be designated as a single outlot, and the right of way for Oak
Lane would be dedicated. As in the previous request the two lots fronting on
Grove Street would be 72.8 feet wide. The only change from the previous pro-
posal is the suggested removal of the existing dwelling. This would eliminate
the need for the driveway encroachment and the detached, rear yard garage.
Mr. Larsen recalled that at the last hearing before the Council there was some
discussion not only of the typical size lots in the neighborhood but also how
large the potential lots on the new street of Oak Lane would or could be. If
the entire south frontage of the extension of Oak Lane is replatted at one time
it would be possible to plat eight conforming 75 foot lots. On the north street
frontage, with a combination of properties, it would be possible to create three
75 foot lots and one 80 foot lot. With regard to the subject property, there
is no possibility of gaining more width, consequently, the proposal is for two
lots each 72.8 feet wide.
its meeting of September 3, 1986 and recommended denial on a 5 to 4 vote.
Dahle, proponent, spoke in support of the proposal stating that though the new
lots did not meet the required 75 foot width they did meet the square footage
required by ordinance.
with the neighborhood and that he now proposed to raze the existing home because
he felt the neighbors objected to it being remodeled and retained. Speaking
in opposition to the proposed plat were Dan Hergot, 5804 Garden Avenue; Greg
Tripp, 5809 Garden Avenue; Richard Andron, 5808 Garden Avenue; Jim Breitenbucher,
5424 Grove Street; Robert Ryder, 5509 Grove Street; Steve Nundy, 5500 Grove Street
and Brian Kise, 5504 Grove Street. Speaking in support of the proposed 'plat
were Robert Buroker, 5516 Benton Avenue; Ernie Hallgren, 5809 Johnson Drive;
Corky Weber, 4303 Country Club Road and an unidentified woman living at 5500
Benton Avenue.
had heard no reason to not support the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
Member Bredesen then made a motion to uphold the recommendation and to deny
preliminary plat approval. Motion was seconded by Member Richards.
Tory Dahle,
This new
The Planning Commission heard the new proposal at
Tory
He said he felt the new lots would not be out of nature
There being no further public comment, Member Bredesen said he
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (RETAIL USES) APPROVED FOR EDINBOROUGH. Affidavits of
Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
advised that the subject property is generally located southof West 76th Street
and west of York Avenue.
Development District.
uses, but only by Conditional Use Permit. The Ordinance specifies that most
of the uses permitted in the PC-1 and PC-2 Districts shall be allowed following
issuance of a Conditional Use Permit. The intent of the Permit is to define
and control the areas within the development where retail uses will be permitted
and to insure that retail uses are accessory to the principal uses in the deve-
lopment. Mr. Larsen pointed out that the Zoning Ordinance established special
standards for conditional uses in the MDD and those uses must: a) be contained
in a principal building, except for drive-through facilities; b) provide goods
and services beneficial to the needs of the occupants and residents of the
principal uses and surrounding properties, and c) have enclosed pedestrian access
to the principal use. The proposed retail uses are to be located on the first
floor of the office building. The first floor area devoted to retail use would
be approximately 14,700 square feet, will be completely contained within prin-
cipal use buildings and will have direct access to the indoor park. Mr. Larsen
explained that staff had recommended to the Planning Commission that certain
uses permitted in the PC-1 and PC-2 District be excluded from the MDD for Edin-
borough to insure that retail uses would be accessory only and not become prin-
cipal uses.
the market should control the individual retail uses and not the staff.
Planning Commission recommended approval of the Conditional Use Permit as pro-
vided in the Zoning Ordinance with retail uses limited to the first floor of the
office building. Member Richards asked for the.opinion of the developers with
regard to the staff's recommended excluded uses.
Winfield Development, said they were comfortable with staff's recommendation.
Member Kelly made a motion to approve the Conditional Use Permit for Edinbor-
ough with staff approval of individual uses.
Planner Larsen
The Edinborough development is zoned MD-5 Mixed
The Mixed Development District permits accessory retail
Upon discussion, the Planning Commission was of the opinion that
The
Bob Deesen, representing
Motion failed for lack of second.
9/15/86
254
Member Richards then made a motion for approval of the Conditional Use Permit
and introduced the following resolution, moving its adoption:
WHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Ordinance No. 825 (The Zoning Ordinance)
have been met; and
IJREREAS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by Ordinance
No. 825 have been satisfied;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council hereby grants a
Conditional Use Permit for retail uses in Edinborough.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED FOR AMCON CORPORATION. fifidavits a€ Notice
were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Planner Larsen advised
that the subject property is generally located west of Parklawn Avenue and
north of West 77th Street extended, is zoned PID Planned Industrial District
and is developed with an office-warehouse building containing approximately
20,000 square feet. The proponents are requesting approval of a plan to add
approximately 6,000 square feet to the rear of the existing building. There
are'currently 41 parking spaces on the site and based upon the parking require-
ment of the individual uses, the building would need 22 parking spaces
following the addition. The Zoning Ordinance would require 65 spaces,'based
on one space per 400 square feet of gross floor area.
submitted by the proponent illustrates 70 spaces, however, since the parking
demand is extremely low for the existing planned uses, the proponents have
suggested the additional parking be added only if needed in the future.
could be accomplished by a proof-of-parking agreement.
that as part of the settlement of the Homart lawsuit, Edina has agreed to
.construct the link road from France Avenue to West 77th Street. This road
should be constructed within the next two years. The new intersection will
be extremely close to the existing southerly curb cut on the subject property.
The continued existence of this curb cut will pose a traffic hazard. Staff
has suggested that the southerly curb cut be removed prior to completion of
the new roadway and if the owners of the property do so desire they be
allowed to have a new curb cut for access onto the new link road. A land-
scaping plan has been submitted for approval.
addition will match the existing building and there will be some upgrading
of the exterior of the entire building. The Community Development and Planning
Commission considered the request at their meeting of September 3, 1986 and
recommended approval of the Final Development Plan, subject to the following
conditions: 1) a proof of parking agreement, 2) staff approval of the land-
scaping plan and schedule and 3) removal of the southerly curb cut prior to
completion of the new roadway.
issues to be considered before making a decision on the construction of the
link road. Mr. Larsen said the link road was not critical to the owners of
the subject property. Engineer Fran Hoffman clarified that the reason for
the staff recommendation regarding removal of the southerly curb cut was that
if the link road was constructed the owners of the subject property should
know now that the curb cut should be relocated. No further comments being
heard, Member Turner offered the following resolution and moved adoption,
subject to the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission:
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the
Final Development Plan for Amcon Corporation, 7725 Parklawn Avenue, presented
at the regular meeting of the City Council of September 15, 1986, be and is
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly.
The landscaping plan
This
Mr. Larsen explained
The exterior materials of the
Member Richards said that there were several
. hereby approved.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING ON EASEEiENT VACATION FOR GRANDVIEW PLATEAU CONTINUED TO 10/6/86.
As recommended by staff, Member Bredesen's motion was seconded by Member Turner
to continue the public hearing on the vacation of utility easements on Lots 1,
2, 3 and 12, Block 1, Grandview Plateau to the meeting of October 6, 1986.
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
BID AIURDED FOR STUMP REMOVAL.
for stump removal at various locations in the City (approximately 6,487 inches)
showing Todd's Tree & Landscape at $0.95 per inch, Gary Arp at $1.04 per inch
and Steve Gorecki at $1.20 per inch. Motion of Member Turner was seconded by
Member Bredesen for award of bid for stump removal to Todd's Tree & Landscape
Manager Rosland presented tabluation of bids
9/15/86
255
at $0.95 per inch.
Ayes:
Motion carried.
Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 9, 1986 APPROVED. Motion of Member
Bredesen was seconded by Member Richards to approve the following recommended
action as listed in Section A of the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of Sept-
ember 9, 1986:
1) Installation of a "STOP" sign on Lochmere Terrace where it intersects with
West 78th Street,
and to acknowledge Section C of the Minutes.
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
ON SALE BEER LICENSE APPROVED FOR CORRELLI'S PIZZA AND PASTA. Manager Rosland
advised that an application for an On Sale Beer License for Correlli's Pizza &
Pasta, 4505% Valley View Road (formerly Rigotta's), has been investigated by the
Police and Health Departments and that issuance of an On Sale Beer License is
recommended. Residential property owners within 500 feet have been notified
and no comment or objection has been received. No objections being heard, Member
Turner's motion was seconded by Nember Richards to approve issuance of an On Sale
Beer License to Correlli's Pizza & Pasta, subject to final approval of the food
establishrrxat license for Correlli's by the Health Department.
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
REPORT GIVEN ON TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT BUSH LAKE ROAD/WEST 78TH STREET.
recalled that in its meeting of April 14, 1985, the Council has passed a resolution
asking Hennepin County to install a traffic signal at East Bush Lake Road and West
78th Street. The County is now ready to proceed and want to purchase some right of
way for the signal from Western National Mutual Insurance Company, 5350 W. 78th
Street. If Western National agrees to this they will be in non-conformance as to
building setbacks for any future development.
County to be sure this was taken into consideration when negotiating with Western
National. No action was taken.
Engineer Hoffman
Mr. Hoffman said he had advised the
LETTER DISCUSSED REGARDING PARKING RESTRICTIONS AT 50TH/FRANCE MUNICIPAL RAMP.
Member Richards questioned if a response had been drafted to Judith Favia,
3400 Fremont Avenue North, Minneapolis, regarding being ticketed for exceeding
the one hour parking limit and her suggestion that the ramp be a pay ramp to
provide for longer shopping time.
cussed with the 50th and France Merchants Association and that they have no
desire for pay parking and are very supportive of the one hour restriction.
Mr. Rosland said a letter would be sent to Ms. Favia in response to her concern.
Mr. Hoffman said pay parking has been dis-
METROPOLITAN COUNCIL REGIONAL BREAKFAST MEETING NOTED.
the Council's attention to a Metropolitan Council Regional Breakfast Meeting on
October 8, at 7:30 a.m. at the Hopkins House for the purpose of hearing about the
issues the Council is dealing with as well as providing a forum for local govern-
ment input.
Manager Rosland called
Reservations will be made for those Council Members desiring to attend.
ELECTION JUDGES APPOINTED FOR GENERAL/CITY ELECTION.
Clerk,'Member Bredesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
As recommended by the City
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that the following Election Judges be
appointed to serve on the Election Boards for the General/City Election to be held
on November 4, 1986, and that the City Clerk be and is hereby authorized to make
any substitutions or additions as may be deemed necessary: Precinct No. 1 -
Eugenia Williams, Chair, Lois Hallquist, Dorie Capetz, Barbara Anderson, Arleen
Friday, Celia Nightingale, Shirley De Leo, Doris O'Neill, Marguerite Sester, Mary
Fritner, Phyllis Kilgore, Carol Olson; Precinct No. 2 - Marjorie Ruedy, Chair,
Pauline Carroll, Joan Flumerfelt, Sara Kirkman, Ruth Mueller, Elizabeth Anfinson,
Dale Jaspers, Betty Jenson, Eva Johnson, Carol McGlone, Laurie McKay, Kathleen
Saterbak; Precinct No. 3 - Linda Smith, Chair, Carol Bucklin, Deidre Hedrick,
Patricia Dill, Sherrill Estensen, Patricia Gries, Margaret Hagerty, Mary Kluesner,
Marie Koblisch, Kem Kuenzli, Christine Morgan, Marie Vorlicky, Judith Wehr;
Precinct No. 4 - Shirley Dibble, Chair, Helen Stafford, Rachel Schoening, Virginia
Courtney, Marian Cracraft, Marge Brothers, JoAnne Chayer, Sharon Hegstrom,
Marge Jamieson, Jeanette Lushine, Nina Potter, Anne-Marie Reynolds, Joanne Downey;
Precinct No. 5 - Linnea Erickson, Chair, Carol McPheeters, Phyllis Cooper, Mildred
Karr, Betty Benjamin, Mailand Card, Sheila Cron, Marjorie Grinnell, Helen Groth,
Hazel Hegeson, Carol Ledder, Barbara Martin; Precinct No. 6 - Jane Bains, Chair,
Catherine Swanson, Sue Zwakman, Barbara Herbers, Mary Cleaveland, Jean Tlaaten,
Sherrill Borkon, Mary Manning, Ellie Reid, Gertrude Rocheford, Joyce Sutherland,
Eleanor Westerberg, Donna White; Precinct No. 7 - Bess Brudelie, Chair, Helen
Peterson, Naomi Ward, Kathy Engquist, Gertrude Snoeybos, Grace Andrews, Elaine
9/15/86
256
Carlson, Clara Fo ret Kel ey, DeLores Paul, Mary Rolland, Jane
Skelly, Evelyn Coffey; Precinct No. 8 - Jane Moran, Chair, Myra Hykes,
Florence Freudenthal, Kathy Bradford, Monna Reding, Jane Goetz, Barbara
Hultman, Jeanne Mueller, Joanne Ryan, Kathy Shea,.Lee Strang, Patricia
Tattersall, Mary TJebber; Precinct No. 9 - Aileen Konhauser, Chair, Jacqueline
Lindskoog, Patricia Monson, Judy Lund, Jean Field, Avona Carroll, Joyce Ervin,
Juditg Frank, Annette Horton, Gertrude Nulsen , Janis Rife , Lavonne Stoakes ,
Margaret Wodrich; Precinct No. 10 - Barbara Erlandson, Chair, Mary Shoquist, Jo Ann
Lonergan, Ruth Haggerty , Kathy Rivers, Jenny McBride, Molly Baranauckas , Joan
Buie, Marilyn Devereaux, Phyllis Jensen, Janet Kjome, Carol Olsen, Nancy Sour;
Precinct No. 11 - Geneva Smith, Chair, Jackie Prince, Alice Burnell, Gina
Sherman, Sharon Lee Smith, Joy Perunovich, Juanita Betz, Susan Hagan, Kathleen
McCarthy, Carol Melichar, Nancy Phillips, Betty Pollitt, Lois Steinback;
Precinct No. 12 - Ardis Wexler, Chair, Carol Hite, Shirley Bjerken, Mary Scholz,
Monica Nilles, Marge Erstad, Lucetta Klos, Phyllis MacLennan, Jan Burnett,
Virginia McCollister, Beth Montgomery, Pam Moody, Jan TJindhorst; Precinct No. 13 -
Edna Thomsen, Chair, Patricia Harmon, Ilona Kerin, Mollie Sherry, Margaret Polta,
Helen Brown, Mary Goodrich, Mary Ann Groven, Margaret Handy, Hattie Jackson, Ann
Matula, Pauline Mertes, Elaine Tollefsrud; Precinct No. 14 - Mary Jane Platt,
Chair, Joyce Hanson, Karen Knutsen, Esther Olson, Louise Carlson, Donna Brastad,
Audrey Anderson, Amanda Bauman, Eva Bryan, Myrtle Grette, Phyllis Gulde, Marie
Windhorst, Doris Peterson; Precinct No. 15 - Kay Luikens, Chair, Jean Teasley,
Sharon Soderlund, Barbara Courtney, Karen Vickman, Alice Rice, Carolyn Klus,
Merry Krueger, Beth Rosenbloom, Jennifer Schoenzeit, Judith Traub, Sharon Zweig-
baum; Precinct No. 16 - Mary McDonald, Chair, Patricia Halvorson, Donna Montgomery,
Caroline Scott, Katherine Larson, Lois Awes, Madeleine Dobbelmann, Kathryn
Harrington, Rosemary Kostick, Florence Schnepp, Mary Zotalis, Bonnie Bjerken,
Mary Ann Hans, Bernadine Chapman; Precinct No. 17 -Lorna Livingston, Chair,
Joyce Koets, Fay Clark, Margaret Delaney, Marie Bachman, Barbara Boyd, Joyce
Kahn, Jean McDermid, Joanne Merta, Mary Ryan, Ann Singer, Jerry Wright; Precinct
No. 18 - Jean Erdall, Chair, Selma Shelton, Patricia McCornack, Betty Lou
Petersen, Doris Blake, Janet Christenson, Phyllis Fuller, Elizabeth Genovese,
Nancy Huey, Mildred Pearson, Jo Anne Streed, Betty Doolitrle; Precinct No. 19 -
Charlotte Scanlon, Chair, Audrey Nankiville, Jean atman, Luverne Graham, Anne
LaBovsky , Linda Smith, Connie Sing , Margaret Bognanno , Alyse Sue Frishberg ,
Nancy Grobovsky, Alyce Hamilton, Cathee Hare, Jane Hess; Precinct No. 20 -
Patricia Olander, Chair, Anita Delegrad, Evelyn Herkal, Harriet Koch, Barbara
Raap, Diane Ebert, Judith Larson, Bettye McClain, Mary Vanek, Amy Woods.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly.
. .
~
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
CANVASSERS APPOINTED FOR GENERAL/CITY ELECTION.
Member Bredesen introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION
BE IT RES-ULVED that the Edina City Council hereby appoints-the following as
Canvassers for the General/City Election to be conducted on November 4, 1986:
Ernest Buffington, Harold Habighorst, Glenn Harmon, Richard Herkal, Virgil
Johnson, Rolland Lundberg, Harry Melin, Sam Mobley, Howard Norback, Chet Ornat,
Willard Ott, Ralph Peters and Al Woods;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Clerk be and is hereby auzhorized to make any
substitutions or additions as may be necessary.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Kelly.
As recommended by the City Clerk,
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
.. QUIT CLAIM.DEED AUTHORIZED CONVEYING PARCEL ON TJEST 50TH STREET FROM CITY TO
HENNEPIN COUNTY LIBRARY. Engineer Hoffman explained that kn connection with
the 'Oest 50th Street Improvement five small parcels were involved adjacent to
the Hennepin County Library property located east of City Hall. Four of those
parcels were conveyed to the City and one parcel is to be conveyed to Hennepin
County.
of the following resolution:
Motion of Member Richards was seconded by Member Kelly for adoption
RESOLUTION
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of Edina, Minnesota, that it hereby
authorizes and directs ;he Mayor-and Clerk to execute on behalf of the City a
Quit Claim Deed conveying the following described property to Hennepin County:
That part of West 50th Street being in the Northwest Quarter of the Southwest
Quarter of Section 18, Township 28, Range 24, descr2bed i?c folloys:
Commencing at the point of intersection of the easterly line of Tract D,
REGISTERED LAND SURVEY NO. 212, Files of the Registrar of Titles, County
of Hennepin and the northerly right-of-way line of Eden Avenue; thence on
an assumed bearing of South 68 degrees 14 minutes 51 seconds West along
'
i
I:
i i
I
I
,
I
1
!
1 i
i
I
I
9/15/86
257
Ln I m a
said northerly right-of-way line, a distance of 87.30 feet; thence North
1 degree 01 minutes 08 seconds East, a distance of 255.05 feet to a point in
the Southerly right-of-way line of West 50th Street, said point being the point
of beginning of the tract of land to be described; thence continuing North
1 degree 01 minutes 08 seconds East a distance of 3.73 feet; thence Easterly,
a distance of 159.56 feet along a non-tangential curve concave to the north,
having a radius of 1957.50 feet, a chord of 159.52 feet and a chord bearing of
South 79 degrees 40 minutes 38,seconds East to the southerly right-of-way line
of West 50th Street; thence Westerly, a distance of 159.00 feet along said
right-of-way line to the point of beginning.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
1987 BUDGET HEARINGS CONCLUDED; 1987 CITY BUDGET OF $11,201,791 ADOPTED.
hearings on the proposed 1987 Budget were continued from the Special Meeting of
September 12, 1986. Manager Rosland advised that 5-6% increase in license fees
for restaurants, vending machines and pools is recommended.
the transfer of one fulltime person from the Assessing department to Inspections,
noting that a retirement is anticipated in Inspections.
then individually presented their viewpoints on the proposed 1987 Budget, indi-
cating support or non-support for specific programs and line items. Collective
support or non-support for each item was then decided by motion and majority
vote.
of $67,951 and it was agreed that it should be cut by one-half and that the
Park Board should be advised of this action by the Council to which they could
then respond.
one-half or user fees for the fields could be increased to make up that amount.
Following considerable discussion of a number of line items in the proposed
budget, Member Kelly, introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
The
He also explained
The Council Members
A discusion was held on the Park & Recreation Field Maintenance budget
The intent is that either field maintenance will be reduced by
RESOLUTION ADOPTING BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF EDINA
FOR THE YEAR 1987, AND ESTABLISHING TAX LEVY FOR
THE YEAR 1987 PAYABLE IN 1987
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
therefore:
The Budget for the City of Edina for the calendar year 1987 is
.hereby adopted as hereinafter set forth, and funds are hereby appropriated
GENERAL FUND
GENERAL GOVERNMENT
Mayor and Council
Planning
Administration
Finance
Election
Ass e s sing
Legal and Court Services
TOTAL GENERAL GOVERNMENT
$ 56,420
400 , 110
235 , 699
24 , 864
. 254,154
280,000
158,655 .
$1,409,902
PUBLIC WORKS
Administration $ 95,267
Engineering 359 , 961
Highways 2,430,923
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS 2 , 886 , 151
PROTECTION. OF PERSONS AND PROPERTY
Police
Fire
Civilian Defense
. Animal Control
Public Health
Inspection
TOTAL PROTECTION OF
PERSONS AND PROPERTY
PARK DEPARTMENT
Administration
Recreation
Maintenance
TOTAL PARK DEPARTMENT
$2,797,568 ,
1,684 , 034
22 , 902
52,799
239 , 898
219,437
5,016 , 638
490,158
103 , 175
812.040
1,405,373
9 115 186
255
NON- - Cont
EPARWNTAL EXPENDITURES
ngencies 80 , 000
75,000
105,000
'223 , 727
Special Assessments on City Property
Cap i t a1 Plan Appropriation
Commissions and Special Projects
TOTAL NON-DEPARTPENTAL
EXPENDITURES 483 ;727
TOTAL GENERAL FUND $11,201,791
Section 2.
established as hereinafter set forth:
Estimated receipts other than General Tax Levy are hereby
GENERAL FUND
Transfer - Revenue Sharing Fund
Municipal Court Fines
Department Service Charges
0 ther
Transfer from Liquor Fund
State Apportidnments - Sales Tax
. Income on Investments
Aids - Other Agencies
Police Aid
' Licenses and Pedts
$ 225,000 -
457,000
4.20,OOO
619,209
136,400
.400,000
550 , 416
65,000
173,800
110 , 000
TOTAL ESTIMATED RECEIPTS . $3,156,825
Section 3.
personal property in the City of Edina a tax rate sufficient to produce
the amounts hereinafter set forth:
That there be and hereby is levied upon all taxable real and
FOR GENERAL FUND $8,044.966
Motion for adoption of the budget resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Bredesen, Richards
Resolution adopted.
Member Kelly then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption:
RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING COMPENSATION RATES
BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council does hereby establish the following
salary schedule for fulltime personnel for 1987:
Managerial 6.45
Seasonal
Level 1 3.50
3.75
3.90
Level 2 3.65
3.95
4.15
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
Management I11 $44 , 772 $48,698 $52 , 624 $55 , 978
Management I1 34 , 488 36 , 400 39,312 41,808
Management I 28,184 30 , 654 33,124 35 , 230
32 , 136 Technical Management 25 , 714 27 , 950
Technical IV 22,698 24 , 726 26 , 676 28,418
Technical I11 . 20,592 22 , 386 24,180 25,740
Technical I1 20 , 202 . 21,944 23,712 25,220
Technical I 18,044 19,656 21,242 22 , 568
General I11 16,900 18,382 19,838 21,138
General I1 15 , 704 17,030 18,434 19 , 604
General I 13,962 15,158 16,380 17 , 446 I
Public Safety :
PS Management I11 * 37,986 41,288 44,616 47 , 450
PS Management I1 35 , 516 38,636 41,730 44,408
PS Management I 32 , 292 35 , 100 37 , 986 40,378
PS General I1 19,734 21,476 23,192 24 , 700
PS General I 15 , 704 17 , 030 18,434 19 , 604
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Edina does hereby establish the following
compensation schedule for part-time personnel:
30,212
t
I I
I' Year Round
Step 1 $4.20 $4.60
Step 2 4.55 5 .lo
Step 3 4.75 5.45
Step 4 5.05 5.60
Step 5 5.40 5.70
Level A Level B
9/15/86
259
I: m 5
Level 3 4.10
4.40
4.55
Level 4 4.40
4.65
4.80
Level 5 4.55 - 5.80
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Bredesen, Richards
CLAIMS PAID.
of the following claims as per pre-list of 9/15/86 : General Fund $693,469.47,
Art Center $833.93, Swimming Pool Fund $182.00, Golf Course Fund $3,741.37,
Recreation Center Fund $5,607.08, Edinborough Park $17.72, Utility Fund $368.28,
Liquor Dispensary Fund $81,516.98, Construction Fund $546,592.64, Total $1,332,329.47;
and for confirmation of payment of the following claims dated 8.31/86: General Fund
$772,687.47, Art Center $245.53, Swimming Pool Fund $1,279.90, Golf Course Fund
$10,206.09, Recreation Center Fund $410.01, Gun Range Fund $112.12, Utility Fund
$769.65, Liquor Dispensary Fund $281,526.24, Total $1,067,237.01.
Motion of Member Kelly was seconded by Member Turner for payment
There being no further business on the agenda, ,Mayor Courtney declared the meeting
adjourned at 11:45 p.m.
%4%U
City Clerk
MINUTES
OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
. OCTOBER 6, 1986
6:30 P.M.
The Edina City Council held a closed meeting on October 6, 1986, at 6:30 p.m.
regarding potential litigation.
Present were Members Bredesen, Kelly, Richards, Turner and Mayor Courtney.
Also present was Manager Rosland, Craig Larsen, Attorney Erickson and Marcella
Daehn, City Clerk.
Manager Iiosland said the me'eting was called to: 1) advise the Council of an
inquiry regarding an adult bookstore, and 2) discuss potential litigation
regarding the Hansen rezoning request. Attorney Erickson explained the City's
legal position with regard to the two matters.
by the Council.
The meeting was adjourned at 6:58 p.m.
No other business was discussed
.
-7akidA-U
City Clerk