HomeMy WebLinkAbout19880815_regularMINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HALL
AUGUST 15, 1988
221
(u Ln Ln I
Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner and Mayor Courtney.
UNITED WAY PROCLAMATION PRESENTED.
proclamation:
WHEREAS, the United Way of Minneapolis Area currently provides funding to more
than 360 programs in 116 agencies, many of which are located in and serving
suburban communities. For example, agencies in Edina range from Ebenezer Society,
which offers support and training for family caregivers, to the Bloomington Public
Health Service which provides a family support program, to Storefront/Youth
Action, where victims of physical and sexual abuse can find individual and group
counseling; and
WHEREAS, the efforts of thousands of community volunteers enable the United Way to
maintain fundraising and administrative costs at under ten cents to a dollar; and
WHEREAS, in 1988 funds are being distributed to quality programs that reach more
people in suburban communities. The United Way works with county planning boards
and private planning groups ,to identify gaps in services in a continuing effort to
meet the comprehensive needs of people in the six county service area;
BE IT RESOLVED, that the Mayor and City Council of Edina hereby support the
on September 8, 1988, and encourage local businesses and their employees to
participate in this event.
PROCLAIMED this 15th day of August, 1988.
Mayor Courtney presented the following
PROCLAMATION FOR 1988 EDINA COMMUNITY CAMPAIGN
UNITED WAY'S EDINA COMMUNITY CAMPAIGN
CENTENNIAL FLOWER GARDEN AWARDS PRESENTED. Perry Anderson, sponsor, presented
Centennial Flower Garden Awards to the following contestants:
Church; Multi-Residences - Point of France and Rembrandt Retirement Community;
Residential - Vic/Pat Kreuziger, 6705 Cheyenne Trail; Jackie Hegman, 4913 E.
Sunnyslope Road; Jodi Anderly, 5425 Wooddale Avenue; Myrtle Grette, 5709 York
Avenue; Art/Jackie Nelson, 6628 Brittany Road; Don/Barb Steinkamp, 4912 Payton
Court; and Margaret Mullin, 4417 Claremore Drive; Commercial - Marquette Bank.
Churches - Grace m a
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED.
Member Kelly to approve and adopt the consent agenda items as presented.
Motion vas made by Member Smith and seconded by
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney
PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON STORM DRAINAGE UTILITY: ORDINANCE TO BE DRAFTED.
Affidavits of notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Engineer Fran Hoffman made the presentation advising that 18,000 notices were sent
to property owners in Edina regarding the public hearing on the storm drainage
utility. Staff has expended considerable time during 1987/88 reviewing the City's
storm sewer system, including pipes, ponds, stormwater detention areas and creeks.
Over the years the City has constructed new facilities through the development
process and special assessment to project areas. The maintenance needs of the
system have increased over the years and the two major rainstorms of 1977 and 1987
suggest a policy review to create an additional movement of floodwaters from
private to public areas. Currently, there are four major categories in the Public
Works budget: 1) Engineering, 2) Streets (sub-categories: ramps & parking lots,
street maintenance and storm sewer, lakes & ponds), 3) Equipment Operation, and 4)
Utilities.
under Streets be transferred under Utilities, similar to the water system and
sanitary sewer system which is allowable under State Statute 444.075. The goals
of establishing a storm drainage utility would be: 1) to maintain existing storm
water facilities so they will operate properly for a longer period of time, 2)
provide and improve wetlands to clean storm water and retard flows, and 3) to
replace existing storm facilities which could become unusable over the years due
to natural deterioration. Obviously, to achieve these goals will cost more than
the City is currently expending today on routine maintenance of the system.
Construction of any new storm sewer systems will continue to be paid for by the
developer (i.e. Hedberg and Carl Hanson properties). The Storm Drainage Utility
would be a service similar to the water and sanitary sewer utilities. Fees would
be based on the amount of water discharged into the storm sewer system.
example, a parking lot creates more runoff than a grass area of the same size, so
commercial, industrial and multiple dwelling properties would accrue higher rates
than residential properties.
basic unit for single family properties.
square feet was the average for single family lots and was the basis used in
developing the proposed quarterly fees for various properties as follows:
It is proposed that the sub-category of storm sewer, lakes & ponds
For
Staff looked at the various lot sizes to determine a
It was determined that 16,000-17,000
Single Family Homes and Duplexes
Parks, Cemeteries and Golf Courses $3.36/acre
Schools $15.90/acre
Churches, Institutional and Multiple
Family Dwellings $40.35/acre
Commercial and Industrial $67.25/acre
$5.00/lot
8/15/88
The rate structure was developed around a two inch rainfall with different types
of property having typical percent of impervious surface resulting in a certain
amount of runoff. From this information, runoff factors were developed for types
of property.
equivalency factor for development of other rates.
not reflect any credits on individual properties or reflect any credits for
properties still paying special assessments. Staff believes credit be considered
for individual properties with large ponds for holding storm water and for those
currently paying for previously levied special assessments. It is proposed that
properties still paying special assessments not begin paying the utility fee until
the special assessment period has expired.
were presented as follows:
The single family rate and runoff were then used as a standard
The proposed rate table does
Costs for the proposed utility plan
PROPOSED UTILITY PLAN
Routine Maintenance (General Fund Transfer) $100,000.00
Replacement/Engineering (Includes Equipment Costs) 200,000.00
Policy Updates (Private to Public Areas) 300.000.00
$600,00Q.00
Engineer Hoffman stated that Public Works does not propose any projects that would
cure last year's rainstorms. However, following that unfortunate experience staff
has looked at the areas where storm water stood and also looked at swales, ponding
areas and public parks that currently allows water storage but that could be
upgraded to lower the potential for flooding in private areas.
establishing a Storm Drainage Utility will be: a) Increased protection for people
and property, b) Reduced insurance risks, and c) Improved property values
community-wide.
structure with the cities of Roseville, Richfield and Apple Valley was presented.
Following discussion and questions by the Council, public comment was heard as
follows. Speaking in support of the Storm Drainage Utility were: Don Elwell, 5717
Grove Street; Francis Link, 6415 York Avenue, who presented a petition signed by
74 residents; George Pratt, 6216 South Knoll Drive; Gary Thatcher, 6901 Southdale
Road, who asked how projects would be prioritized; Steve Mundy, 5500 Grove Street;
Nora Davis, 6921 Southdale Road. Speaking against the proposal were: Leroy
Swanson, 6321 Ashcroft Lane; Delois Fechner, 4116 France Avenue; Mark Dahlquist,
5012 Schaefer Road; Walt Sandison, 4612 W. 58th Street, who said schools should be
exempt.
tax deductible: Chris Glen, 5311 Hollywood Road, who also questioned credits for
individual properties; David McDonald, 6929 Southdale Road. The following persons
questioned the fee structure: Tim Keen, 3616 W. Fuller Street; Trygve Holl, 5509
Highwood Drive; Glen Carlson, 5908 Code Avenue; Don Cain, 3505 W. 55th Street;
Doug Jordahl, 5109 Green Farms Road, representing Colonial Church, who also asked
how credit for ponds would be calculated; Bob Shaw, representing Colony Park
Baptist Church, who said churches should be in same category as schools; and
Malcolm Kindy, representing Creek Valley Baptist Church, who said they were for
the proposed utility but questioned why church would pay more than schools.
Robert Sykes, 4524 Casco Avenue, stated he was generally for the utility but felt
the City should do more to encourage storm water management policy related to land
development. For the record, letters in response to the notice of public hearing
were received from: Joseph W. Burke, 5113 West 58th Street; Donald G. McMillan,
President of White Oaks Improvement Association; Mary A. Matthews, 5402 Xerxes
Avenue So.; Robert Fletcher, 4301 W. 42nd Street; David Olson, 7175 Cahill Road;
Donald/Bernice Peterson, 6015 Idylwood Drive; Robert/Mary Wenborg, 5801 Creek
Valley Road; Richard Maxwell, 5104 W. 58th Street; a letter undated signed Edina
Residents; John W. Hedberg, 3725 W. 76th Street; Richard A. Glasgow, 7742 Lochmere
Terrace and Richard A. Lind, 5725 View Lane; letters are on file in Engineering
Department.
approve the storm drainage utility concept as presented and to authorize
development of an ordinance for a storm drainage utility with a start date of
January 1, 1989. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Member Richards commented
that he would support the motion but the Council should be furnished with
additional information on two issues: 1) fee structure for schools vs. churches,
and 2) tax benefits for citizens.
The results of
A graphic showing a comparison of the proposed Edina rate
The following said the cost should remain as an assessment so as to be
No further comment being heard, Member Turner made a motion to
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
Following brief discussion, it was agreed that the draft ordinance and the
additional information requested would be brought back to the Council at its
meeting of September 19, 1988.
PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL SYSTEM NO. P-88-8 S.A.P.
120-166-01 (HAZELTON ROAD AT BYERLY'S/LEISURE LANE DRIVEWAYS): REQUEST WITHDRAWN
BY BYERLY'S.
file.
Edina Traffic Safety Committee requesting consideration on installation of a
driveway signal on Hazelton Road at the Byerly's/Leisure Lane western entrances.
The firm of Barton/Aschman has completed a traffic study which indicated that a
traffic signal would be appropriate and warranted.
generator and due to the large volume of traffic entering and exiting Byerly's in
the one primary driveway, a safety and congestion concern has been raised.
help eliminate this problem Byerly's has attempted various solutions.
Affidavits of notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on
Engineer Hoffman informed the Council that Byerly's has appeared before the
Byerly's is a high traffic
To
In early
i
I i
8/ 15/88
223
1986, Byerly’s submitted a request for no right turn on red signing at France
Avenue and Hazelton Road to try to improve the ease of access and exiting Byerly’s
parking lot.
submitted to Hennepin County to allow a right-turn in only movement to Byerly’s
lot off northbound France Avenue, near 72nd Street. That request was denied by
the county.
existing problems by proposing an access connection to the Dayton‘s store parking
lot near the southwest corner of Byerly’s parking lot.
implemented because of cost and its limited ability to correct the continuing
problem. Engineer Hoffman advised that Hazelton Road is a state aid eligible
street and fifty percent of the signal cost would be eligible subject to state aid
approval of the signal warrants study.
have to be assessed to abutting property owners. The staff recommendation would
be to distribute assessment cost based on traffic generated at the driveways.
Past history on traffic signal funding has been as follows: A) Signals on county
roads and municipal state aid streets have been funded from City state aid funds
with the following exceptions: 1) West 70th Street/Cornelia Drive was 50% state
aid and 50% assessed; 2) Driveway signals at Southdale Office Center and Southdale
Shopping Center on France Avenue were 100% assessed based on driveway volumes.
Engineer Hoffman said that Leisure Lane tenants have called and indicated they do
not want to participate in the assessment.
participate with 50% state aid would there be another place that the City could
have used these funds. Engineer Hoffman said the fund is fairly large so that
this would not sway doing another project elsewhere. Member Turner asked about
the location, the appropriateness of this as the solution to the problem and
whether there would be a problem of car stacking at the intersection.
Rickert, Barton/Aschman, said they were hired by Byerly’s to look at the traffic
situation and the possibility of a traffic signal.
looked at a design for the signal they also looked at a capacity analysis and came
up with approximately 150 feet in each of two lanes and concluded there would be
adequate stacking distance. If needed, there could be some inter-connect with the
signal on France Avenue to continue the movement on Hazelton Road. Member Smith
commented that the subject entrance/exit to Byerly’s is bad but said he felt there
are other solutions to the problem. Verle Poffenberger, of Byerly’s, stated that
over the years they have tried to do something with the entrance and have added an
extra right turn lane in.
getting a right turn only off of northbound France Avenue to relieve the
congestion. He said they do not know of any other solution.
with Dayton’s Home Store about coming through their parking but that really is not
an answer. They feel the answer is the traffic signal which could be programmed
according to the traffic volume and that Byerly’s would be willing to pay 70% of
the 50% cost to be assessed which corresponds to the traffic generated by them.
Member Smith commented that he would like to see further study done on what could
be accomplished with the site with regard to the problem that is not in the nature
of a signal.
participation in the traffic signal and that if they wanted to pursue the signal
it should be assessed 100% to benefitted properties.
the comments of the Council, Mr. Poffenberger stated that Byerly’s would withdraw
the proposal for installation of the traffic signal.
study done by Barton/Aschman, they felt this was the only solution to the problem
but that they could not stand 100% of the expense.
Avenue South/Leisure Lane, said he objected to the proposed signal because no one
has looked at the situation at Leisure Lane.
room for stacking lanes at busy times and with a signal it would be even more
difficult. No formal action was taken.
Dual outbound lanes were also provided. A request was also
They have also considered and followed up on a proposal to reduce
The change has not been
The other fifty percent of the cost would
Member Kelly asked if the City were to
Charles
As to stacking, when they
They have also talked with Hennepin County about
They have talked
Member Richards indicated that he would not support public
In response, and based on
He said that, based on the
Albert Kempf, 7101 France
They are a small place and have no
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL FOR OAK PONDS OF INTERLACHEN 2ND ADDITION. Affidavits
of notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Larsen presented the request for preliminary plat approval for Oak Ponds of
Interlachen 2nd Addition, generally located west of Blake Road and Fox Meadow Lane
extended. The subject property comprises two large lots which front on Schaefer
Road; each lot is about 2.5 acres in size and there is a developed single family
home on each of the lots.
and Planning Commission on two different occasions.
27, 1988, the Commission recommended preliminary plat approval for creation of
three new single family lots (Lots 2, 3 and 4) from the rear portions of the
Schaefer Road houses.
and are approximately 100 feet wide at the building line.
generally larger and wider than the lots in either Oak Ponds of Interlachen 1st
Addition or the lots in Taft Addition off Scriver Road.
discussion centered upon Lot 4, its shape and ultimate placement of a house on
that lot.
allow the house to be elevated at or above the elevation of 942’ that has been
recommended by the engineers for the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District. The
Commission recommended that the new house on Lot 4 should have a front street
setback similar to the existing homes on Fox Meadow Lane.
east of Lot 4, (Bob Ulrich, 6221 Fox Meadow Lane) is set back 36 feet. This would
be the minimum requirement for the new house on Lot 4.
suggested a setback of between 50 and 60 feet for the house.
Planner Craig
The proposal has been before the Community Development
At the latest meeting on July
The lots range in size from one-half to three-quarters acre
The proposed lots are
Planning Commission
The revised plat under consideration allows a wider lot area and would
The house immediately
The developer has
Planner Larsen said
8/15/88
224
he would suggest a front street setback for Lot 4 of between 36 feet and 50 feet.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the preliminary plat, subject to:
1) final plat approval, 2) subdivision dedication, 3) developer's agreement and 4)
Nine Mile Creek Watershed approval and the further recommendation that the house
placement on Lot 4 should be the average front yard setback of the houses along
Fox Meadow Lane. He noted that Michael Halley, Michael Halley Homes, Inc., was
present to answer questions. Member Richards asked that the issue of the front
yard setback for Lot 4 be resolved with Mr. Ulrich, owner of the property directly
east of Lot 4. Bob Ulrich, 6221 Fox Meadow Lane, pointed out that there is an
existing cul-de-sac in front of his property which the developer has agreed to
remove, and when the street is straightened out his house will be further from the
street. He said he preferred that the setback for the house on Lot 4 be
approximately 50 feet.
setback Mr. Halley was referring to the street line and that he was referring to
the property line which is somewhat set back from the street.
asked that when this is brought back for final plat approval that Council be
advised of the footprint of the proposed house.
said he was concerned about storm water drainage from the proposed development and
also where the road would go for future further development in the area.
that some time ago there was a real concern about getting in and out of the area
when the property to the east was developed.
overall development plan for the entire area which he felt was not being followed
now. Planner Larsen explained that the proposed development does allow for future
development to the north by continuing the dedicated right of way to the northerly
property line.
area. A cul-de-sac would provide adequate turnaround for emergency vehicles.
Further, the developer has been asked to provide a storm water plan for the
proposed development and the engineers from Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
have reviewed the plan and have determined that the area can adequately handle the
storm water drainage.
Lot 4. He said that there is an existing small pond southwest of Lots 3 and 4 and
there is also a pond on the lot immediately north of the subject property. During
last year's July storm, these pond areas flooded a large area and had to be pumped
down since they have no outlet.
asking for easements to provide outlets for those ponds as further development
occurs in the area.
impact is not negative on adjacent properties and also that the homes that are
built on the new development will not suffer because of storm water drainage.
Michael Halley, developer, stated that a storm water management study was
delivered to the Planning Commission and that the City Engineer has approved it.
Member Smith commented that he was not sure how much subdivision of these large
lots should occur. In response to Mr. Kyllo's concern, Member Richards recalled
that there was a plan for development of the area that would allow for the roadway
to continue northerly up to Scriver Road and that he assumed that the Planning
Commission's recommendation for approval of the proposed subject development
adhered to that general plan. Planner Larsen clarified that when talking with any
one who is interested in development of the area staff has talked about those
overall development options of some years ago and have asked that they demonstrate
that they will not cut off those options for development in the future.
Mr. Halley has shown staff a plan that would allow connecting the road through to
Scriver Road which would be one of those options.
like to see more detail on how the roadway would be handled.
Interlachen, that Fox Meadow Road would eventually head north and tie in with
Scriver Road.
number of plat drawings in that area.
wish to develop their property have to make a conscious decision to allow the
roadway to continue.
flexibility that the road can continue if the next adjacent property owner wishes
to see that happen. He explained that the area is densely wooded and is prime in
the sense that it is all high ground and that the proposed houses will be
consistently slightly higher than adjacent homes. Also, his goal is to retain as
many trees as possible.
the flooding of the ponds in the area. Member Richards said that although a
number of legitimate questions have been raised, he was prepared to move
preliminary plat approval. However, prior to final plat approval Mr. Halley
should 1) indicate where the footprint of the house on Lot 4 would be sited, 2)
how the existing cul-de-sac would be straightened out and how the roadway would be
handled for the proposed development, and 3) that staff make available to anyone
interested the storm water drainage plan submitted by Mr. Halley and also
determine whether or not a pond would be required on Lots 4 and 5.
Richards then introduced the following resolution and moved adoption, subject to
1) final plat approval, 2) subdivision dedication, 3) developer's agreement and 4)
Bine Mile Creek Watershed District approval, 5) siting of the house on Lot 4, 6)
detailed plan for the straightening of the existing cul-de-sac and roadway to the
proposed development, and 7) that the storm water drainage plan be available to
the public and that a determination be made as to a storm water retention pond for
Lots 4 and 5:
I Planner Larsen clarified that with regard to the front
Member Richards
John Kyllo, 5201 Schaefer Road,
He said
Also, there had been a general
This has been a requirement placed on other developments in the
Their concern was the relative elevation of the house on
Planner Larsen said the City would ultimately be
The developer's responsibility is to make sure that the
I
I
He said
Member Kelly said she would
In response,
. Mr. Halley said that his understanding was, when he developed Oak Ponds of
Topographically that would work and seems to be consistent with a
Each one of the property owners who may
He said his understanding of staff's concern is to allow
Mr. Kyllo reiterated his concern for water drainage and I
Member
8/15/88
225
RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR OAK PONDS OF INTERLACHEN 2ND ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "OAK PONDS OF INTERLACHEN 2ND ADDITION, platted by Michael
Halley Homes, Inc. and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of
August 15, 1988 be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Smith
Resolution adopted.
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVED FOR HED ADDITION.
approved and ordered placed on file.
preliminary plat approval for the Hed Addition, located at 6625 West Trail, Lot 1,
Block 10, Indian Hills.
with an area of 79,207 square feet.
plat which would create one new buildable lot.
it is today. The new lot would contain 34,277 square feet, and the lot for the
existing house would contain 44,930 square feet. The new house is proposed to
front on Iroquois Trail.
requirements for single family lots. A graphic of the proposed plat was shown
indicating the existing house and driveway and proposed house to be constructed on
the new lot.
analysis and survey of 40 lots in the western portion of Indians to determine lot
size. The existing lot (Lot 1, Block 10, Indian Hills) is the largest in the area
and following the subdivision the resulting lots would remain among the largest
lots in this area of Indian Hills. Planner Larsen explained that, normally, staff
would want to see the property split more evenly than is proposed. However, in
this case a more even division of the property would require removing the existing
house. The present proposal maximizes the size of Lot 2 while saving the existing
house. The entire property is heavily wooded and the existing house is barely
visible from the street. A division which would require removing the existing
house may distu%b the site more than the present proposal.
meeting of July 27, 1988, the Community Development and Planning Commission
reviewed the proposal and recommended preliminary approval subject to: 1) final
plat approval, 2) subdivision dedication, and 3) utility connection charges. He
stated that Virgil Hed, proponent, was present to answer questions. Member Smith
asked questions about the retaining wall adjacent to Iroquois Trail.
Larsen said that it was an existing private retaining wall on the property.
Member Smith commented that the lots in the proposed plat are consistent in size
with the neighborhood with the exception of the large lots to the east.
comment being heard, Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved
adoption, subject to: 1) final plat approval, 2) subdivision dedication, and 3)
utility connection changes:
Affidavits of notice were presented
Planner Larsen presented the request for
The subject property is a developed single family lot
The proponent has submitted a preliminary
The existing house would remain as
Both lots comply or exceed all Zoning Ordinance
In support of their application, the proponents have submitted an
He advised that at its
Planner
No other
RESOLUTION APPROVING PRELIMINARY PLAT
FOR HED ADDITION
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that that
certain plat entitled "HED ADDITION", platted by Virgil and Sharon Hed, husband
and wife, and presented at the regular meeting of the City Council of August 15,
1988 be and is hereby granted preliminary plat approval.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR EDINA COMMUNITY LUTHERAN CHURCH EXPANSION CONTINUED.
Affidavits of notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file.
Larsen presented the request of Edina Community Lutheran Church, 4113 West 54th
Street, for a conditional use permit. Edina Community Lutheran Church, generally
located south of West 54th Street and west of Halifax Avenue, has applied for a
conditional use permit to build a new sanctuary and convert the existing sanctuary
into a fellowship hall.
increase of 23 seats over the present sanctuary.
the interior of the existing building.
finished with cedar shakes and stone trim to match the stone on the existing
church. The existing building will be re-sided with cedar shakes to match the new
addition. Discussion at the Community Development and Planning Commission meeting
centered upon where additional parking would be located on the church site.
church property measures 4.73 acres in size.
the flood plain of Minnehaha Creek.
placed in the flood plain.
northeasterly portion of the site.
flood plain elevation. Under certain circumstances, parking could be developed
within the flood plain area.
desirable alternative. In looking at other alternatives, it was determined to
develop as much parking as possible on the upper area of the church ground and if
parking overflowed the capacity of that lot it could locate on West 54th Street
where there is adequate street width for parking on both sides and very few homes.
Planner
The new sanctuary will seat 210 people which is an
The project includes remodeling
The exterior of the new sanctuary will be
The
However, much of the area is within
No building or other obstructions may be
Consequently, the only buildable area is the
All of the proposed construction is above the
However, from staff's point of view it is not a
8/15/88
226
The church's proposal calls for rebuilding the existing parking area to the south
and west of the church to accommodate 41 cars.
unstriped and accommodates 25-35 cars.
Ordinance requires 70 parking spaces.
the church would need to locate the additional parking within the flood plain
area. The church has elected to request a parking variance of 29 spaces to avoid
disturbing the natural conditions existing adjacent to the creek. According to
church officials the intent of the addition and renovation project is to better
accommodate existing needs and not to prepare for any significant increase in
congregation size.
building would benefit from the proposed renovation.
soft, natural materials seem appropriate for the site. The Planning Commission
members discussed at length whether to recommend the parking variance and the
conditional use permit or to require a proof of parking agreement.
arose if there is a proof of parking agreement in place and additional parking is
required in the future, where would those 29 spaces be located. The answer would
be in the flood plain which both the church and staff have been trying to avoid.
At its meeting of July 27, 1988, the Planning Commission recommended approval of
the conditional use permit, with a 29 space parking variance as recommended by
staff, and that the City and church enter into a proof of parking agreement.
Planner Larsen stated that the Planning Commission, staff, the church, and
neighbors all supported the proposed parking variance to avoid disturbing the
flood plain areas on the church property. He explained that staff did not
recommend the proof of parking agreement for these reasons: 1) The increase in
seating capacity is small, only 23 seats. 2) The flood plain area is the only
place to develop more parking.
existing parking lot make it undesirable parking.
of West 54th Street without disrupting traffic flow.
have not caused problems for the neighborhood.
representatives of the church were present, as well as John Cunningham, project
architect.
considered.
future if the existing parsonage were removed.
possibility of a parking bay adjacent to West 54th Street.
traffic and the existing width of the street did not seem to warrant that
alternative.
Street and west of Minnehaha Creek as off-site parking; however, that is rather
remote to the church.
be handled. Planner Larsen said the standard procedure with regard to a proof of
parking agreement is that the City would hope it would not need to be enforced.
The problem with an agreement is if additional parking is proved to be needed the
City would require that parking be provided somehow on the site. Here the only
place would be down on the flood plain. Planner Larsen added that the City and
church could enter into a general agreement, similar to that with Colonial Church,
whereby the church would work with the City to solve parking problems should they
occur in the future. Ann Bishop, 5324 Halifax Avenue, asked about the impact of
traffic in the neighborhood if both sanctuaries are used to capacity.
Larsen explained that the Zoning Ordinance says you calculate the demand on
traffic and parking based on the largest use assembly which in this case would be
so modest that there would be no noticeable increase in traffic. If in the
future, both structures were used concurrently, it could have some impact. When
the City reviews requests for conditional use permits from schools and churches,
staff relies on those institutions telling staff how they operate. Mark Brethein,
5429 Woodcrest Drive, said he was supportive of the church's plan and in favor of
the parking variance. He said he was concerned about any option to build parking
in the flood plain as that would be across the creek from his property.
Member Smith commented that he would like to see some kind of agreement with'the
church regarding future parking needs. Member Turner said she would not support
putting parking in the flood plain.
with churches in recent years regarding their parking requirements; that we should
not make an exception here and that there should be some type of agreement.
Member Richards made a motion that approval of the Conditional Use Permit for
Edina Community Lutheran Church be continued to September 19, 1988 and that staff
be directed to bring back an agreement regarding future parking needs for approval
before the Conditional Use Permit is granted.
Smith.
The existing parking area is
With seating for 210 persons, the Zoning
In order to provide the required parking
The seating capacity increase is very modest and the existing
The building design and the I The question
This area is approximately 16 feet lower than the
3) Cars can park on both sides 4) Present church activities
Planner Larsen said that
Member Turner asked if all alternatives for parking have been
Planner Larsen said there may be room for additional parking in the
Staff also looked at the
However, the level of
Staff also looked at public park land on the south side of West 54th
I Member Smith asked how a proof of parking agreement would
Planner
She added that the Council has been tough
I Motion was seconded by Member
Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney
Motion carried.
TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF AUGUST 9. 1988 APPROVED. Because of the
number of persons present regarding Agenda Item VII1.A (Approval of Traffic Safety
Committee Minutes), Mayor Courtney declared this the next item to be heard.
Engineer Hoffman reviewed the discussion held at the Traffic Safety Committee
meeting of August 9, 1988 regarding the traffic issues on Halifax Avenue, West
51st through West 54th Streets and the temporary traffic barricade that had been
installed at Halifax and West 51st Street. He recalled that at the July meeting
the Committee had recommended that the Council conduct a public hearing on this
matter to get input from the residents of Halifax Avenue and the affected
surrounding neighborhoods. At its meeting of August 9, 1988, the members
Lo I m 5
8/15/88
. 221'
considered whether other testing should be done between now and the public
hearing.
traffic issues: 1) engineering, 2) enforcement, and 3) education. A motion was
made to leave the barricade in place which motion was defeated.
to recommend the barricade remain and that the Committee cannot determine
neighborhood issues or which roadways might be considered neighborhood roadways or
neighborhood collector roadways which motion was also defeated.
was passed was to remove the barricade and place large "LOCAL TRAFFIC ONLY" signs
on Halifax Avenue, that new traffic counts and statistics be compiled and
re-education be assessed before the public hearing on September 19, 1988.
summary, he said the Committee was divided on this issue. Member Smith said that
he had observed the area of the barricade, that several cars had driven around it
and had entered Halifax and that he questioned the "re-education" of the drivers
not to use Halifax. Secondly, he said the barricade does affect the residents of
The Lanterns and that they should be contacted.
residents of The Lanterns have been attending the meetings.
about other alternatives alluded to by Chief Swanson. Chief Swanson said that
when this was originally discussed in April there were a number of alternatives
suggested including diverters at West 52nd Street, or a barricade at West 54th
Street. Of those, only the temporary barricade at West 51st Street was tested
with a very predictable result - tremendous reduction of southbound Halifax
traffic. The sense of the motion passed by the Committee was to remove the
barricade and see what the counts then are. He said he felt the data that could
be collected by September 19th would not be adequate because of the short
interval.
in order to preserve the Halifax Avenue neighborhood. Speaking in support of the
barricade remaining and keeping Halifax Avenue as a residential street were John
Crist, 5324 Halifax Avenue, who said he was speaking for 22 other people present,
and DeVere Brekke, 5221 Halifax Avenue. For the record letters in support of the
barricade were received from: Bennett/Mary Jo Porter, 5120 Halifax; Teresa
Forliti, 5335 Halifax; Kathy O'Deo, 5325 Halifax; Donna/Jerome Bahn, 5241 Halifax;
Lynda Carlson, 5105 Halifax; Ralph/Cloise Oir, 5220 Halifax; DeVere Brekke, 5221
Halifax; Marilyn/Harland Halvorson, 5217 Halifax; Mary/David Thatcher; Karen/Ted
Allen, 5216 Halifax; Karen Wylie, 1111 W. 107th Street, Bloomington; Pamela Lien,
4400 W. 58th Street; Sybil Adelson, 146 Marguerite Av., Santa Monica, CA; Mary
Karinen, 5032 Halifax; Gail Bolger; Joyce Leach, 4550 Laurel Av., Grants Pass, OR;
Daniel/Lori Smiley, 5308 Halifax; Pam Aagaard, 5313 Halifax; Suzie Kuntz, 5125
Halifax; Don Bublitz, 5236 Halifax. Letters in opposition were received from:
Thomas M. LeGeros, 5128 Indianola; Marge Kosmos, 5121 Juanita; Frank Bennett, 5436
Brookview Avenue; Nancy Joas, 5129 Indianola. Following more Council discussion,
Member Turner moved approval of the following recommended action listed in Section
A of the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of August 9, 1988:
1) That the barricade be removed and large "LOCAL TRAPPIC'ONLY" signs be placed on
Halifax Avenue at West 51st Street, that new traffic counts and statistics be
compiled and re-education assessed before the City Council's public hearing
regarding this issue:
2) Installation of "NO PARKING OR STOPPING" signs along the 5100 block of Uest
50th Street;
3) That a center line be painted in the curve area of Timber Ridge Road and also
that "CURVE" signs be posted;
and to acknowledge Sections B and C of the Minutes.
Motion was seconded by Member Kelly.
He explained that the Committee looks at three aspects when considering
A second motion
The motion that
In
Engineer Hoffman said that
Member Turner asked
Member Smith said Ee was in favor of the barricade being made permanent
Ayes: Kelly, Richards, Turner, Courtney
Nays: Smith
Motion carried.
Member Kelly stated that there is a perceived conflict of interest regarding the
next Agenda Item V.C. Final Development Plan - Southdale Center Expansion, and
excused herself from the meeting.
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED FOR SOUTHDALE CENTER EXPANSION: SUBJECT TO
CONDITIONS.
file.
for Southdale Center. He advised that The Center Companies, representing
Southdale Center have submitted plans for an expansion and renovation of the
Center. Since the expansion is greater than 10% of the existing floor area,
Final Development Plan approval is required.
proposed project has been provided by the Center Companies.
presented illustrating the proposed expansion.
construction of a new Dayton's department store containing approximately 340,000
square feet of gross floor area.
northwest of the present store.
mall space and new tenant space.
117,000 square feet of new leasable area in the Center.
common areas and mall areas would be renovated.
decks would be added-to serve the expanded Center.
Garden Centers would be removed.
square feet or approximately 81 acres.
1,353,263 square feet resulting in a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.38.
Affidavits of notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on
Planner Larsen presented the request for Final Development Plan approval
A detailed description of the
Graphics were
The project would include the
The store would be constructed immediately
This conversion would provide approximately
The existing Dayton's store would be converted to
In addition, all existing
Three new single level parking
The J.C. Penney and Dayton's
The Southdale Center site contains 3,541,820
The expanded Center would contain
The PC-3
8/15/88
Commercial District allows a FAR of 0.5. The net addition to the Center is
191,694 square feet of gross floor area.
parking spaces.
loss of 437 spaces.
containing a total of 882 spaces.
6,974 spaces at completion.
each 1,000 square feet of gross floor area.
spaces per 1,000 square feet.
perimeter of the site would be continued with some modifications to improve flow.
The proposed expansion will require the relocation of the bus-transit activities
from the north to the south side of the Center.
working with MTC staff to assure a smooth transition of service.
Companies has agreed in principle to allow the Southeast Edina Transit System to
circulate through the Center and easements will be obtained to ensure this.
Planner Larsen pointed out that three of the four perimeter streets around _the
Center are not constructed to urban standards. Staff has suggested that these
streets should be upgraded in connection with the Center's expansion.
these streets, York and West 66th Streets are county roads, West 69th Street is a
City street. Barton-Aschman, traffic consultant for Southdale, has prepared a
plan illustrating upgraded streets and modified access to the Center.
presented may require additional rights of way.
include a substantial upgrading of the existing landscaping and would exceed that
some parking areas along the east and south property lines. The Center Companies
have also submitted, through their traffic consultant, Barton-Aschman, a traffic
impact analysis of the proposed expansion.
report and concurs with its findings and conclusions.
that Southdale is now 32 years old and the proposed expansion is intended to
preserve Southdale's competitive position in a changing retail climate.
feels it is important to the community for Southdale to remain strong and healthy.
The proposed renovation of the Center will insure that Southdale will continue to
be an asset to the community. Final Development Plan approval is recommended with
the following conditions: 1) Staff approval of a landscaping plan and schedule to
include additional screening of parking and drive aisles, 2) An access-egress plan
for West 66th Street, York Avenue and West 69th Street, including any additional
rights of way, acceptable to the City and to Hennepin County for West 66th Street
and York Avenue. Specifically, the plan for West 69th Street should be agreed to
jointly by The Center Companies and the owners of the adjacent property to the
south prior to issuance of a building permit.
the Southeast Edina Transit authority the right to pass through the Center
property.
which were informally presented to the Council at a special meeting on July 18,
1988.
present to respond to questions. Michael Kelly said he had nothing to add to the
presentation made by Mr. Larsen. With regard to the upgrading of the surrounding
streets, he said they are willing to work with the owners of The Galleria
regarding West 69th Street but would not wish to have Southdale's project held up
while The Galleria is deciding what to do with their site.
enough flexibility on the access-egress plan for Southdale to match their's when
they decide what they want.
some mutually acceptable plan is worked out.
France Association, Inc. said their objections to the plan centers around the
pedestrian and traffic problems that they are feeling more and more. The 144
families of Point of France find it impossible to cross France Avenue now and the
problems they see with additional traffic has been outlined in a letter dated
August 12, 1988 to the City.
affected adversely by increased traffic is access to adult education.
Point of France is relegated to the Richfield School District, those residents who
wish to participate in adult educational activities must drive several miles in
heavy traffic to reach the Richfield facility; a condition that will be made worse
by expansion of Southdale. Mr. Brandt said that, although the Edina Council is
not involved in the school district boundaries, they would hope if the Southdale .
improvement proceeds that they could reach an understanding with the Richfield
School District as a result of the increased tax base for the Richfield District
that Richfield would release Point of France from their school district. Also,
Point of France residents now must cross a six-lane highway (France Avenue) for
pedestrian access to public transportation or the Medical Arts building across the
street.
the opposite side.
to make the crossing safely. More traffic to an expanded Southdale will place
residents at greater risk. Gary Thatcher, 6901 Southdale Road, said he was
concerned about the traffic coming off the Crosstown Highway using Valley View
Road as a feeder into Southdale either by using West 66th or West 69th Streets.
The property owners along Southdale Road never had a buffer between their
residential district and the commercial district.
Southdale will increase the traffic and they would like to see some type of
buffer.
counts will not be of such nature that it would warrant a sound or visual barrier.
He said that issue needs to be addressed.
Southdale currently provides 6,527
The construction of the new Dayton's store would result in the
The project proposed three new single level parking decks
Total parking on site would be increased to
Southdale would be providing 5.15
Shopping centers are required to provide 5 spaces for
The existing one-way circulation system at the
The Center Companies has been I, Also, the Center
Two of
The plan as
The proposed expansion would
.. required by the Zoning Ordinance. However, additional screening is needed for
Engineer Fran Hoffman has reviewed the
Planner Larsen concluded
Staff
I 3) An easement to allow vehicles of
Planner Larsen stated that the plans now presented are the same plans
He noted that Michael Kelly, President and Manager of Southdale Center, was
He said there is
Planner Larsen said the intent was to ensure that
Don Brandt, representing Point of
One facet of life at Point of France that will be
Because
I
There are traffic lights at the comer of 66th/France but no sidewalk on
Furthermore, the lights change too rapidly for elderly people
Now additional expansion of
Mr. Thatcher said that in talking with Engineer Hoffman the traffic
Mr. Kelly said that the traffic
8/15/88
229
analysis showed that the Valley View extension has additional capacity for traffic
which may be diverted into the Hedberg project as it is developed as an
alternative way of moving traffic from the Crosstown Highway and dodging
Southdale. The Southdale expansion of less than 200,000 square feet will not make
that much difference with respect to additional traffic on Valley View.
Koski, Barton-Aschman, explained that some traffic would come from Valley View but
that the amount of traffic the Southdale expansion would add is less than 5% of
the traffic that is on the streets now. He also said he doubted that any type of
barrier would be effective. Jim Jenewein, 6905 Southdale Road, and Rick Hauritz,
6613 Southdale Road, also spoke in support of a visual barrier for the 22 homes
along Valley View Road to separate the residential area from the commercial.
Engineer Hoffman suggested that through redesign and reconstruction of Valley View
Road some berming could be done and that there will be a staff review of that
particular area for Council consideration shortly. Member Smith suggested that
some additional landscaping might alleviate the visual concerns. Further, that
the recent improvement of West 66th Street in Richfield be continued westerly to
address some of the pedestrian concerns.
pedestrian overpass spaning France Avenue.
the visibility of Southdale and that he is in favor of what is proposed.
Hoffman said a pedestrian overpass is an old issue going back to 1980 when it was
proposed over France Avenue south of West 66th Street to service both the office
site and pedestrians. The question has always been would the facility really be
used. Member Turner asked about the timing of looking at the redesign of Valley
View Road.
prior to final approval for the Southdale expansion.
the traffic study mentioned some York Avenue intersections that would have poor
capacity following full build-out of the area and suggested some mitigation
measures.
said he would expect that West 66th Streetpork would be a county project with
partial assessment back to benefitted properties and some potential state aid
funding.
funds. As to improvements on West 69th Street, funding would be from state aid
funds and assessment. Member Turner said.she thought those improvements are
important to maintain good traffic movement around the site and that the second
condition to the approval was an important one.
put into the access-egress plan or a separate condition is some kind of sidewalk
plan. Southdale itself is not pedestrian friendly and the intersection of West
66th and France is very difficult for pedestrians. She said she frequently sees
employees from the office building on the west side of France, using the
intersection in the middle of the parking lot to go to and from Southdale for
lunch. That is a dangerous situation because there is not a sidewalk to stand on
while waiting for the signal.
at ways to improve pedestrian access throughout. Mr. Kelly said there is not an
easy solution because the way Southdale and the surrounding streets are laid out
* they are not made for pedestrian crossings. Also, there is a relative low density
of pedestrians and therefore it is difficult to provide overpasses or underpasses
for the kind of density that exists around Southdale in comparison to downtown
Minneapolis for example. Anything that would be built would be under used and
would not justify the cost. If there is a real demand for movement through this
area, The Galleria, the Hedberg project, the hospital and Point of France should
connect with the proposed City transit system as a viable alternative. Member
Smith asked for a clarification regarding the access-egress plan for West 69th
Street being coordinated with the owners of The Galleria prior to issuance of a
building permit.
than that of The Galleria, Southdale did not want to be held up while they decide
what they want to do with their site.
Galleria owners have not indicated how long it will take them to make a decision.
Member Richards commented that it is incumbent upon The Galleria owners, who have
received notice of the hearing to approve the plan for West 69th Street, to speak
out on that issue or if the staff does not feel the plan is responding to the
City's needs then the staff will need to state that.
staff could sit down with The Center Companies staff and The Galleria owners
within the next 30 days and resolve this issue.
not be resolved, the matter could be brought back to the Council.
further comment, Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved
adoption, subject to the following conditions: 1) Submission by the developer of
a landscaping and screening plan acceptable to City staff. 2) Approval by City
Council and by Hennepin County to the extent required, of an access-egress plan
for West 66th Street, West 69th Street and York Avenue, including necessary rights
of way dedication and sidewalk development.
Street should be coordinated with the owners of The Galleria block if possible and
approved by City staff.
easement to allov vehicles of the City's transit system the right to pass through
and collect/drop off passengers at designated locations in the Southdale Center
property and otherwise to be on terms and conditions acceptable to the City staff:
RESOLUTION APPROVING FINAL DEVEMPIENT PLAN
FOR SOUTHDALE C~J!I"ER
Dave
He also asked about the possibility of a
He said he felt it important to retain
Engineer
I
Engineer Hoffman said it would be within the next two months, but not
Member Turner observed that
Cu
UI)
I: She asked how those would be proposed to be funded. Engineer Hoffman m a West 69th/York would probably be partially assessed and part state aid
One issue brought up that may be
She said this is an appropriate time to take a look
I
Mr. Kelly indicated that if Southdale's timing proceeds faster
He said they have met several times but The
Manager Rosland said he felt
If there was a problem that could
There being no
The access-egress plan for West 69th
I
3) Execution and delivery of a recordable, permanent
81 15/88
230
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that the Final
Development Plan for Southdale Center presented at the regular meeting of the City
Council of August 15, 1988 be and is hereby approved.
Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Turner.
Further discussion was held regarding sidewalks and whether staff could determine
what the Council's direction was on the issue. Manager Rosland recommended Final
Development Plan Approval for Southdale Center and said that he felt within the
next 30 days staff could meet with representatives of Southdale Center and The
Galleria to discuss West 69th Street and the sidewalks so more defined information
could be brought back for the Council's review.
Rollcall :
Ayes: Richards, Smith, Turner, Courtney
Resolution adopted.
(Member Kelly returned to the meeting at this point on the agenda.)
SPECIAL CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS HEARD REGARDING HALIFAX AVENUE TRAFFIC. Harland
Halvorson, 5217 Halifax Avenue, stated that he appreciated the diagonal diverter
that was placed at Halifax and West 51st Street to reduce the traffic and keep
Halifax and the adjacent streets as a residential area. He urged the Council to
take affirmative action to reduce the traffic on Halifax. An unidentified
gentleman who said he was a doctor stated that there is a distinct safety issue
and a high volume of traffic problem on Halifax and that the solution of the
diverter was shown to be effective. He urged the Council to reconsider their
action of approving removal of the barricade.
said he could not understand why the Council was opposed to the barricade and
added that no one who was opposed to it has ever shown at the Traffic Safety
Committee meetings.
barricade was effective in reducing the volume of traffic on Halifax. Mayor
Courtney reiterated that this issue would again be considered at a public hearing
on September 19, 1988.
Randy Hosler, 5133 Halifax Avenue,
He added that the traffic counts had clearly shown that the
*BID AWARDED FOR STREET SURFACING WITH CURB & GUTTER (IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-282) FOR
APACHE ROAD AND INDIAN WAY WEST IN INDIAN HILLS WEST ADDITION.
Member Smith and seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for street surfacing
with concrete curb and gutter on Apache Road and Indian Way West in Indian Hills
West Addition to recommended low bidder, Hardrives, Inc., at $27,365.38.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
Motionvas made by
I *AWARD OF BID FOR USED MOTOR GRADER CONTINUED TO 9/12/88. Motion vas made by
Member Smith and seconded by Member Kelly to continue award of bid for a used
motor grader to the meeting of September 12, 1988.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
GENE DAVIS NOMINATED TO NINE MILE CREEK WATERSHED DISTRICT BOARD. Manager Rosland
advised that the term of Dr. Eugene Davis on the Nine Mile Creek Watershed
District Board will expire as of September 29, 1988 and staff would recommend that
his named be submitted to the Board of County Commissioners for re-appointment.
Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved adoption:
WHEREAS, the term of Dr. Eugene Davis on the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District
Board vi11 end on September 29, 1988;
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that it hereby
recommends and nominates Dr. Eugene Davis to the Hennepin County Board of
Commissioners for re-appointment to the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Board
and urges the Commissioners to approve the re-appointment.
RESOLUTION
Rollcall :
Ayes: Kelly, Smith, Turner, Courtney
Abstained: Richards
Resolution adopted .
1988 NLC CONGRESS OF GITIES NOTED.
attention to a recent mailing regarding the 1988 NLC Congress of Cities to be held
December 3-7 at Boston, MA.
said it would be back on the Council Agenda in September for further discussion.
*PUBLIC HEARING DATE SET FOR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS.
and seconded by Member Kelly for adoption of the following resolution:
Manager Rosland directed the Council's
He suggested the Council give this consideration and I -
Motion vas made by Member Smith
RESOLUTION PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL ASSESSrZENT HEBRINGS FOR
lWXENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M-88
TReE REMOVAL IMPROWMEN!l! NO. TR-88
AQUATIC UEEDS IHPROWMEN!l! NO. AQ-88
STREET IMPROVEMENT NOS. BA-272, BA-273, BA-275, BA-276
BLLey IHPROWMEN!l! NO. A-178
STREET LIGHTING TKPROVEMENT NOS. L-29. L-30. L-31
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, as follows:
1.
the improvements set forth in the Notice of Hearing forms hereinafter recorded,
and the amounts proposed to be assessed against the respective lots, places and
The Clerk and Engineer having calculated the proper amounts to be assessed for
8/15/88
231
UI) I: m a
parcels of land within the districts affected by said improvements, and said
proposed assessments having been filed with the Clerk, the same are hereby
approved and the Clerk shall keep the same on file in her office and open to
public inspection pending hearings thereon as herein provided.
2. This Council shall meet at the time and place specified in the Notice of
Hearing form hereinafter contained, to pass upon said proposed assessments and the
Clerk's action in publishing notices of said hearings in the official newspaper in
accordance with law is hereby approved. Notices being as follows:
(Official Publication)
CITY OF EDINA
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMENT FOR:
MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M-88
TREE REKOVAL IMPROVEMENT NO. TR-88
AQUATIC WEEDS IMPROVEMENT NO. AQ-88
STREET IMPROVEMENT NOS. BA-272, BA-273, BA-275, BA-276
Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at
4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on September 19, 1988, at 7:OO P.M. to
hear, consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to proposed
special assessments for the following improvements:
50th Street and France Avenue Business District
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: All
parcels contained within the 50th Street and France Avenue Business District.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT IS:
1. MAINTENANCE IMPROVEMENT NO. M-88
$42,157.67
2. TREE REKOVAL ASSESSMENT NO. TR-89
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lot 10,
excipt highway, AUDITOR'S SUBDIVISION NO. 176; Lot 6, BRUM'S SUBDIVISION; That
part of Lot 1 lying West of East 120 feet thereof except street, Block 4, CODES
HIGWIEW PARK ADDITION; Lot 5, Block 1, DUBLIN HILL ADDITION; Lot 10, Block 22,
FAIRFAX ADDITION; That part of Lot 83 lying South of North 174 feet thereof
including adjacent 8 feet of Main Street vacated, MORNINGSIDE ADDITION; Easterly
50 feet of Lot 24 including adjacent 8 feet of Main Street vacated, RILEY'S
SUBDIVISION OF LOTS 3,4,5,6,7,30 and 31, GRIMES HOMESTEAD; West 100 feet of East
244 feet of South 150 feet and West 19 feet of South 50 feet of East 144 feet of
Lot 18, Block 1, SOUTH HARRIET PARK 2ND ADDITION; Commending at a point in West
line of Section 07, Township 028, Range 24, thence North 60 feet, thence West 150
feet, thence South 60 feet, thence East 150 feet to beginning, Block 20, WAVELAND
PARK ADDITION.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT IS:
3. AQUATIC WEEDS IMPROWDE" NO. AQ-88
Mill Pond and Indianhead Lake
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows:
$2,413.50
All lots
reparian to Indianhead Lake and Mill Pond.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSHENT IS: $14,757.00
4. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-272
Dearborn Court in Dearborn Addition and Blake Woods Addition
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1
through 4, Block 1, BLAKE WOODS ADDITION; Lots 3 through 8, Block 1, DEARBORN
ADDITION.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT IS: $14,230.70
5. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-273
Antrim Terrace in Edina Oaks
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1
through 5, Block 1, EDINA OAKS ADDITION.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT IS: $10,523.33
6. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-275
Green Farms Road and Apple Lane in Parkwood Knolls 22nd Addition
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1
through 3, Block 1; Lots 1 through 5, Block 2; Lots 1 through 8, Block 3, PARKWOOD
KNOLIS 22ND ADDITION.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSENT IS: $30,992.53
Green Farms Road; Green Farms Court; Interlachen Court and Interlachen Road in
7. STREET IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-276
Interlachen Heights, and Interlachen Road from Ridge Road Easterly 125 Feet plus
or minus.
through 5, Block 1; Lots 1 through 5, Block 2; Lots 1 through 11, Block 3;
INTERLACfFeN HEIGHTS; Lot 1, Block 1, C.R. STROTZ FIRST ADDITION; Lot 4, Block 1,
SCHWANTES ADDITION.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS IS: $68,666.30
These proposed assessment rolls are not on file in the office of the City Clerk
and are open to public inspection.
APPEAL
Any owner may appeal the assessment to the District Court pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the
City of Edina within thirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment by the City
Council, and by filing such notice with the District Court within ten (10) days
after service upon the Mayor or Clerk.
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvements is as follows: Lots 1
However, no appeal may be taken as to an
8/15/88
232
assessment unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is
filed with the Clerk of the City of Edina prior to the hearing or presented to the
presiding officer at the hearing.
DEFERRAL ON HOMESTEADS OWNED BY PERSONS 65 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER.
Pursuant to Hjnnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and
guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead property owned by
persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain
deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close
of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in
the first paragraph of this notice.
forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office.
BY ORTIER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL.
Marcella M. Daehn, City Clerk
For further information and application
I (Official Publication)
CITY OF EDINA
HENNEPIN COUNTP, "NESOTA
PROPOSED SPECIAL ASSESSMFJZT FOR:
BIw;Ey IMPROVEMENT NO. A-178
STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NOS. L-29, L-30, L-31
Notice is hereby given that the Edina City Council will meet at the City Hall at
4801West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota on October 3, 1988, at 7:OO P.M. to hear,
consider and pass upon all objections, both oral and written, to proposed special
assessments for the following lmprovements:
1. BI;GEp IWRO- NO. A-178
West 48th Street between 3913 West 48th Street and 4001 West 48th Street
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: West 65
feet of Lot 18 and Easterly 10 feet of Lot 19, WHITE OAKS FOURTH ADDITION; West 25
feet of Lot 19 and East 40 feet of Lot 20, WHITE OAKS FOURTH ADDITION.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED BSSESSMFJZT IS:
.
$2,891.18
2. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-29
York Avenue from West 74th Street to West 78th Street
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows:
A; Lot 1, Block 1, EBENEZER SOCIETY 1ST ADDITION; Lots 3 and 4, EDINBOROUGH
ADDITION; Phases 1,3 and 7, VILLAGE OF EDINBOROUGH CONDOMINIUM; Lot 1, Block 1, BL
JOHNSON ADDITION; Commencing at a point on East line of Lot 1 distance 177.36 feet
South from Northeast corner thereof, thence North 89 deg. 52 min. 23 sec., West
Outlot
193.87 feet to East line of Al Johnson Addition, thence-South to Southeast comer
of said Addition, thence West to Southwest comer thereof, thence Southerly and
Southeasterly along Westerly line of Lot 1, Block 1, Paul Klodt 1st Addition to
most Southerly comer of said Lot 1, thence North along East line thereof to
beginning, Block 1, PAUL KUlDT FIRST ADDITION; Lot 1, Block 1, YORKDALE TOWNHOMES
OF EDINA.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT IS:
I
$33,724.60
3. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENT NO. L-30
West 76th Street from Xerxes Avenue to Edinborough Way
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows:
Block 1. EBENEZER SOCIETY 1ST ADDITION; Phases 6 and 7, VII;LBGE HOMES OF
Lot 1,
EDINBOROUGH CONDOMINIUM; Lot 1, Block 1, BL JOHNSON ADDITION; That part of Lot 1
lying Northerly of the following described line:
corner of said Lot 1, thence South along the East line thereof a distance of
177.36 feet to a point of beginning of line to be described, thence North 89
degrees, 52 minutes, 23 seconds, West 193.87 feet to East line of Al Johnson
Addition and there terminating, Block 1, PAUL KLODT FIRST ADDITION; Lot 1, Block
1, YORKDAIE TOUNEOMES OF EDINA.
TOTAL AMOUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSMENT IS:
Commencing at the Northeast
$11,984.15
4. STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEXENT NO. L-31
Edinborough Way from York Avenue to West 76th Street
The area proposed to be assessed for said improvement is as follows: Lots 1
through 4, Block 1, EDINBOROUGH ADDITION; Phases 1 through 7, VILLAGE HOMES OF
EDINBOROUGH CONDOMINIUMS.
TOTALAT3OUNT OF PROPOSED ASSESSMFJZTS IS: $51,917.86.
These proposed assessment rolls are now on file in the office of the City Clerk
and are open to public inspection.
APPEAL
Any owner may appeal the assessment to the District Court pursuant to Minnesota
Statutes 429.081, by serving notice of the appeal upon the Mayor or Clerk of the
City of Edina within thirty (30) days after adoption of the assessment by the City
Council, and by filing such notice with the District Court within ten (10) days
after service upon the Hayor or Clerk.
assessment unless a written objection signed by the affected property owner is
filed with the Clerk of the City of Edina prior to the hearing or presented to the
presiding officer at the hearing.
DEFERRAL ON H0MESTELIl)S OWNED BY PERSONS 65 PEBRS OF AGE OR OLDER.
Pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, the City of Edina has adopted standards and
guidelines for deferring special assessments against homestead property owned by
persons 65 years of age or older for whom payment would be a hardship. To obtain
deferment, application must be filed with the City Assessor's office by the close
of business on the last business day before the City Council meeting set out in
However, no appeal may be taken as to an
681 15/88 I
233
cu
Lc)
Lc) I a 5
the first paragraph of this notice.
forms, please call or visit the City Assessor's office.
BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL.
Marcella M. Daehn, City Clerk
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
For further information and application
*SEWER/WATER RATES CONTINUED TO 9/12/99.
seconded by Member Kelly to continue the agenda item of sewer/water rates to the
Council Meeting of September 12, 1988.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
Motion was made by Member Smith and
*HEARING DATE OF 9/12/88 SET FOR VACATION OF WILLSON DRIVE (EDENMOOR). Motion vas
made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Kelly for adoption of the following
resolution:
RESOLUTION CALLING PUBLIC HEARING ON
VACATION OF EASEMENT FOR STREET PURPOSES
BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin County,
Minnesota, as follows:
1.
street purposes should be considered for vacation, in accordance with the
provisions of Minnesota Statutes, Sections 412.851 and 160.29:
It is hereby found and determined that the following described easement for
That part of Edenmoor Street (dedicated as Willson Drive on the plat of
"EDENMOOR, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA") lying west of the southerly extension
of the east line of Lot 3, Block 3, "EDENMOOR, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MNNESOTA",
according to the recorded plat thereof.
This Council shall meet at the time and place specified in the form of notice 2.
included in paragraph 3 hereof for the purpose of holding a public hearing on
whether such vacation shall be made in the interest of the public.
3. The Clerk is authorized and directed to cause notice of the time, place and
purpose of said hearing to be published once a week for two weeks, in the Edina
Sun, being the official newspaper of the City, the first publication at least 14
days prior to the date of such hearing and to post such notice, at least 14 days
prior to the date of such hearing, in at least three (3) public and conspicuous
places within the City, as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Section 412.851. Such
notice shall be in substantially the following form:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC IFEARING
ON VACATION OF EASEMENT FOR STREET PURPOSES
IN THE CITY OF EDINA
HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Edina, Hennepin
County, Minnesota, will meet at the Edina City Hall, 4801 W. 50th Street on
September 12, 1988, at 7:OO p.m., for the purpose of holding a public hearing on
the proposed vacation of the following street right of way:
That part of Edenmoor Street (dedicated as Willson Drive on the plat of
"EDENMOOR, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA") lying vest of the southerly extension
of the east line of Lot 3, Block 3, "EDENMOOR, HENNEPIN COUNTY, KCNNJ3SOTA".
according to the recorded plat thereof.
All persons who desire to be heard with respect to the question of whether or not
the above proposed street right of way vacation is in the public interest and
should be made shall be heard at said time and place. The Council shall consider
the extent to which such proposed street right of way vacation affects existing
easements within the area of the proposed vacation and the extent to which the
vacation affects the authority of any person, corporation, or municipality owning
or controlling electric, telephone, or cable television poles and lines, gas and
sever lines, or water pipes, mains, and hydrants on or under the area of the
proposed vacation, to continue maintaining the same or to enter upon such easement
area or portion thereof vacated to maintain, repair, replace, remove, or otherwise
attend thereto, for the purpose of specifying, in any such vacation resolution,
the extent to which any or all of any such easements, and such authority to
maintain, and to enter upon the area of the proposed vacation, shall continue.
BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL
Marcella M. Daehn, City Clerk
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
MEMBER TURNER WILL NOT SEEK RE-ELECTION. Member Turner announced that she will
not seek re-election to the Council. She said the last eight years have been a
good experience and that the Council, including past members, the Manager and City
staff are the best team in the state.
1989 BUDGET ASSUMPTIONS TO BE CONSIDERED IN SPECIAL MEETING ON 8/18/88. Because
of the late hour, it was informally agreed to meet on Thursday, August 18, 1988 at
8:OO a.m. to consider the 1989 Budget assumptions.
*CLAIMS PAID. Motion vas made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Kelly to
approve payment of the following claims as per pre-list dated 8/15/88: General
Fund $71,891.78, Art Center $1,240.62, Capital Fund $1,281.05, Swimming Pool Fund
$3,354.28, Golf Course Fund $9,811.01, Recreation Center Fund $27.20, Gun Range
Fund $377.22, Edinborough Park $5,485.93, Utility Fund $16,708.30, Liquor
Dispensary Fund $929.24, IMP Bond Redemption #2 $491.75, Total $111,598.38; and
8/15/88
234
for payment of Claims as per pre-list dated 8/15/88: General Fund $136,224.12, Art
Center $8,125.71, Capital Fund $19,015.00, Swimming Pool Fund $1,545.80, Golf
Course Fund $10,779.97, Recreation Center Fund $111,699.18, Edinborough Park
$4,117.37, Utility $29,774.61, Liquor Dispensary Fund $93,752.80, Construction
Fund $31,202.83, IMP Bond Redemption #2 $1,800.00, Total $448,037.39; and for
confirmation of payment of Claims dated 7/31/88: General Fund $408.953.26, Art
Center $1,219.87, Swimming Pool Fund $5,363.16, Golf Course Fund $12,884.63,
Recreathn Center Fund $4,538.87, Gun Range Fund $293.93, Edinborough Park
$10,373.98, Utility Fund $48,380.41, Liquor Dispensary Fund $144,021.00, IMP Bond
Redemption #2 $315,125.00, Total $951,154.11.
Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes.
The meeting was adjourned at 11:25 p.m. by motion of Member Smith and seconded by
Member Kelly. Motion carried.
City Clerk