Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19891016_regular84 10/16/89 KtNUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE EDINh CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY €?AIL OCTOBER 16, 1989 ROILCALL Answering rollcall were Members Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor Richards. CONSEETT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Member Kelly to approve and adopt the consent agenda items as presented. Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER 2 AND SPECIAL MEETINGS OF AUGUST 8 AND AUGUST 10. 1989 APPROVED Member Kel-ly to approve the Council Minutes of the Regular Meeting of October 2, and Special Meetings of August 8 and August 10, 1989. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by ADOPTION OF 1990 BUDGET CONTINUED TO 12/4/89 recommending that the 1990 Budget hearing be continued to December 4, 1989 because the deadlines for certifying proposed levies and final levies have been moved to later dates. proposed 1990 Budget. objecting to an increase in taxes was on file from Mrs. Laurence Weiss, 5918 Wooddale Avenue. Mayor Richards stated that staff is - He asked if there was anyone present who wished to comment on the It was noted that a letter No public comment was heard. Motion was made by Member Rice to continue the hearing on the 1990 Budget to the Council meeting of December 4, 1989. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. .. FIRST READING GRATCHD FOR ORDINANCE NO. 804 (REGUL&TING PLATS AND SUBDIVISIONS) R-1 DISTRICT file. amendments to the subdivision and zoning ordinances. Mayor Richards-stated that in December of 1988 the Council adopted an ordinance imposing a moratorium on subdivisions in the Single Dwelling Unit District. purpose was to allow the staff and legal counsel to research and make recommendations to the Council to determine if any changes should be made to procedures and criteria for approving single family subdivisions. AND ORDINANCE NO. 825-830 (REQUIRMG LARGER MINIMUM LOT AREAS FOR CERTAIN LOTS IN Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on Pursuant to due notice given, a public hearing was conducted on proposed The Planner Craig Larsen advised that notice was published in the Edina Sun-Current, there was a general news story in the Edina Sun-Current last week about the hearing and that notices were sent to neighborhood groups that are on record with the City Clerk as well as to other residents who have expressed an interest in the process. After several months of deliberation the Community Development and Planning Commission has recommended approval of a new Subdivision Ordinance (No. 804) and amendments to the Zoning Ordinance No. 825. began the process by reviewing recent subdivision proposals in the City, by reviewing the requirements of other cities in the area, and by reviewing the existing process and requirements. The Planning Commission and staff Planner Larsen presented the following summary of subdivisions proposals since January 1, 1985: Number of proposals considered: 25 10/16/89 85 Number of proposals approved: 21 Number of new lots: 85 Approximate average lot size approved: Criteria considered by the Planning Commission Range of lot sizes approved: 9,282 - 48,900 s.f. 21,076 s.f. as determined from a review of minutes: - lot area, lot width, concept, frontage on a public street, size and shape, density, character and symmetry of neighborhood, steep slopes, setback from naturally occurring water bodies, spacing and location of homes. After reviewing this history it was determined: 1) That there is a need in this community for a flexible system, one that recognizes the diversity of the neighborhoods; 2) The process has produced good results and recently has sustained court action; and 3) That it is now necessary to reflect those past practices in ordinance form. subdivisions with the flexibility to adapt to the many individual and diverse neighborhoods in the City. Planner Larsen said that the result is a proposed new subdivision ordinance (No. 804) and corresponding amendments to the Zoning Ordinance. for approval by the Planning Commission at its September 27, 1989 meeting. He observed that to staff's knowledge the product of this work is rather unique and is based on a desire not for more uniformity or homogeneity in the community but to be able to make decisions based on existing circumstances in neighborhoods. There are three sections of Ordinance No. 804 which are considered key to the new process : The goal was to create a well-defined, consistent approach to These were recommended Definition of Neighborhood, Section 2 - The present ordinance does not define neighborhood but neighborhood has been defined on a case by case basis. made it difficult when talking to people about a proposed subdivision and in the public hearing process. Ordinance No. 804 would define "neighborhood" as follows: "All property wholly or partially within 350 feet of the perimeter of the proposed plat or subdivision; provided, however, if the proposed plat or subdivision is a replat, the neighborhood shall be (i) all property wholly or partially within 350 feet of the perimeter of the proposed plat or subdivision, and (ii) all property within the original plat, and including any replats of the original plat then of reeord or finally approved by the Council pursuant to this ordinance, and which also is within 1,000 feet of the perimeter of the proposed plat or subdivision. 1f.the neighborhood encompasses only a part of a parcel, tract or lot, then the whole of that parcel, tract or lot shall be deemed to be within the neighborhood." That has , Guidelines for Evaluating Subdivisions. Section 14 - This is the heart of the proposed ordinance and is comprised of three sections for evaluating all plats and subdivisions. The first section addresses character and symmetry, consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, environmental impact, and the adequacy of proposed public improvements. individual lots in the proposed plat. median average lot area, lot width and lot depth of the defined neighborhood. also requires a lot width to perimeter ratio of 0.1 or greater. The ratio is equal to the lot width divided by the total perimeter distance of the lot. ratio is a means of quantifying the shape of proposed lots. rectangular lots score high, unusual shapes, especially neck lots, tend to score low. The third section sets forth reasons which would require the Council to deny a proposed plat. the proposed plat must be denied unless the Council decides that a variance to those requirements is warranted in the process. The second section deals with the size and shape of It requires that all lots meet or exceed the It The Square and If the Council makes any one or more of the defined findings, Subdivision Requirements. Section 12 - Section 12 deals with the information required for the submission of a preliminary plat. The first section sets forth t- 10/16/89 .. 86 requirements for all subdivisions and are generally the same as present requirements. family subdivision. neighborhood (as defined in Section 2) be submitted with the application for preliminary plat. proposal with the surrounding area. Planner Larsen explained that the remaining sections of Ordinance No. 804 deal with the technical, administrative and legal requirements for processing subdivisions. now be payable when the proponent picks up the signed plat. The second section sets forth additional requirements for a single I It requires that the size and dimensions of all lots in the This provides for a complete and accurate comparison of the One change concerns payment of parkland dedication fees which would Amendments to Ordinance No. 825 - The proposed amendments incorporate the standards of the new Subdivision Ordinance into the single family section of the Zoning Ordinance. Subdivision Ordinance is-increased from 9,000 square feet to the median size determined at the time of subdivision. The same is true for lot width and lot depth . The minimum lot size for lots approved pursuant to the new Following the presentation, Mayor Richards called for public comment. Bolen, 5207 Doncaster Way, said he was concerned because the proposed ordinance does not address protective covenants which were made at the time of the original plat. People who have bought homes have relied upon the fact that the original plat provided for one house per lot and have expected that the area will be maintained according to the original plan. subdivide property in the R-1 District should be required to show evidence that something has changed which justifies granting a change from that original plan. Specifically, he referred to a lot in the Edina Highlands that was proposed for subdivision prior to the moratorium. Commission and Council needs the flexibility to adjust to the changing needs of areas in the City, he was disturbed by the ordinance provisions as to character and symmetry being so general without criteria to determine what was the original character and symmetry of a particular area. Michael He said that anyone proposing to He said that, although he felt the Planning Mayor Richards asked Mr. Bolen if he had some specific proposals for the Council to use to weigh and evaluate the ordinance proposals recommended by the staff and the Planning Commission. required to provide specific information as part of the application process as he had presented at the Planning Commission meeting and as reflected in the minutes. Also, he said there is nothing in the ordinance as to street frontage requirements. Further, he said there is nothing under Sec. 14 (c) relating to character and symmetry or necessity for change. Mr. Bolen concluded by saying that some of the criteria is good and that he liked the definition of neighborhood; however, he said he felt the ordinance was still lacking definite criteria. Mr. Bolen indicated that he felt the proponent should be Conner Schmid, 4711 Meadow Road, commented that he appreciated the work Mr. Bolen had done and that he recognized it is important to neighborhoods who do have some special character and symmetry. Ron Clark, 5716 Long Brake Trail, said that he had studied the proposed ordinance and commended the City Planner and his consultants for the manner in which it is drafted. He said it truly accomplishes what the Council set out to do, e.g. it identifies what is a neighborhood and then determines what is a comparable or median lot within that neighborhood. small lot subdivisions which was the reason for looking at changing the ordinance. Mr. Clark said that to add additional limitations would confuse the issue and would practically prevent further developments within Edina. This would provide a basis for considering lo/ 16/89 , ..- ~ 87 Peter Beck, said he was representing Steven Utne of 5257 Lochloy Drive. recalled that Mr. Utne has a pending application for a lot split which has been held up by the moratorium pending the study of the ordinance. proposed ordinance in general, he said they felt that the amendments as proposed are unreasonable, unfair and unnecessary. an incredible burden on the single family homeowner who seeks'to split his lot. It would require the survey of many surrounding lots to obtain the square footage, the mean average and median lot area, the mean average and median lot width and depth. most single family lot split situations. Also, Mr. Beck said the amendments are unfair because they set up a system by which there will be different lot area, width and depth requirements for similarly situated properties in the same zoning district. Basically, what these amendment would do is create a situation where the median size of existing lots becomes the minimum size for new lots. district. He With respect to the They are unreasonable because they put Mr. Beck said that requirement alone would be prohibitively expensive for Lots sizes should be the same within the single family Further, Mr. Beck said the amendments are unnecessary. He re-ferred to the staff conclusion in the March 29, 1989 memorandum that "The end product of the existing subdivision process has produced results reflecting sound community planning." Mr. Beck said they believed that is true; that the existing subdivision and zoning ordinances have worked well. The problems which staff sees these amendments addressing are that the process has been difficult and that there has been some uncertainty and controversy. With respect to the difficulty, the amendments will be more difficult to apply and enforce. uncertainty because in place of established minimum lot sizes and standards there will in essence be a moving target. The minimum lot size will not be known until the surveying is done and there will be disagreement in terms of accuracy, what lots to include, etc. controversy out the land use process. With respect to the specific application of the amendments to Mr. Utne's situation , Mr; Beck said their preliminary analysis indicated automatic denial. The amendments go quite a bit further than implementing a different process with essentially the same requirements. size would increase substantially and, in Mr. Utne's situation, to the point where his 19,0OO_square foot lot if split would not meet the minimum although surrounded by 9,000 square foot lots which are grandfathered in. reiterating that they felt the current requirements are working fine. They will also result in increased He said that they felt it is impossible to legislate Under the proposed amendments the minimum lot Mr. Beck concluded by Mayor Richards then called for discussion by the Council Members. the amendments under consideration are a good work product with which to focus in on the issues the Council has to deal with. Mayor Richards said he disagreed with the language in Section 14 (c) which mandates denial if the Council makes any of the findings listed therein. He said the Council should have the full authority to do what is in the best interest of the community. that the ordinance specifies five bases upon which the Council shall deny. The first four are really in operation now, e.g. the Council has always looked upon the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Ordinance, the health, safety and general welfare of the public and also has been bound by state law. subjective quantities in and of themselves. It is really based upon the judgement of the Council as to whether these things apply - at least in many cases it is a judgmental call. Council will have to abide by. Finding (5) is new and does allow variances from the specific requirements (median lot area, width and depth). Attorney Erickson pointed out that the language for variances is in Sec. 5 and is a verbatim statement of state statute. criteria by giving the Council some leeway with the subjectivity of some of the approaches to reach a conclusion. He said that. Attorney Erickson explained He said those are In some cases there will be very specific criteria that the What the amendments do is balance the specific He clarified that if the subdivision does not 101 16 I89 .. 88 meet the requirements it shall be denied unless the Council grants a variance in which case the requirements would be met as varied which would be sufficient to allow the subdivision to be approved. Member Paulus referred to Sec. 10 (b)(2) concerning the preliminary approval process. She suggested that when the sign is erected telling the public that the property is proposed for subdivision that the proponent should send a letter to the neighborhood explaining the proposal. As an alternative, the proponent could be required to hold a neighborhood meeting. would eliminate many of the questions and concerns that are brought up during the public hearings. Further, the onus would be on the proponent to inform the neighborhood rather than the neighborhood having to make the effort to get that information. Member Rice made reference to the requirements for lots in the Single Dwelling Unit District and asked ff there has ever been requirements as to massing or height for houses. Planner Larsen said there have been no requirements in the R-1 District but that those issues have come up in a general way during the process. Member Rice also referred to the comment made that the cost of providing a survey of lots in the neighborhood would be prohibitive for the single lot developer. Planner Larsen said that the cost implication is unknown and may be substantial. course of the public hearings and that this requirement would prevent the information coming in piecemeal. but would be the compiling of information by the proponent's registered land surveyor. She said this initial communication - He explained that a lot of these things have been requested over the This would not be a physical surveying of lots Mayor Richards then summarized the issues raised by the Council as follows: 1) 2) 3) 4) Mandatory language concerning findings. Initial communication by proponent with impacted neighbors. Requirements on massingfieight of building to be constructed. Process for compiling correct data on neighborhood lots. Planner Larsen suggested that it would be more appropriate to address the issue of massingheight in the Zoning Ordinance and that staff would bring back some options for the Council to consider as an issue separate from the subdivision ordinance. discussion thereon. revisions to the ordinances that would address issues #1 and #3 above for Second Reading together with an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that would address the massingfieight issue. Member Smith then introduced Ordinance No. 804 and Ordinance No. 825430 for First Reading as presented and on file in the office of the City Clerk. seconded by Member Paulus. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards First Reading granted. There was brief public comment on the issues followed by Council It was the consensus of the Council that staff bring back Motion was SIGN ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO- 451-86 FOR HIXED DEVELOPJ!@X!C DISTRICT ADOPTED ON SECOND REBDING for the sign ordinance amendment at its October 2, 1989 meeting. granted subject to the condition that the ordinance include a restriction on signage facing residential portions of the development in MDD-5 District (Edinborough) and MDD-6 District (Centennial Lakes). He advised that the amendment language now provides for the restriction. Member Smith made a motion for Second Reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 451-A6 as follows: Planner Larsen observed that the Council had granted first reading Approval was ORDINANCE NO. 451-A6 10/16/89 89 AH ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 451 BY ADDING REGULATIONS FOR MIXED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITP OF ED=, KIXRESOTA, ORDAINS: by adding the following: Section 1. Section 5, paragraph (h)(l) of Ordinance No. 451 is hereby amended One sign per development not to exceed 1000 square For developments with more than one street frontage, (d) HDD-6 District: feet in area. one additional sign per street frontage provided each additional sign does not exceed 70 square feet in area. Sec. 2. Section 5, paragraph (h) is hereby amended by adding the following subparagraphs: (10) Project Identification Signs in M1D-6 District: sign for each project per street frontage. freestanding sign shall not exceed 50 square feet. Retail Signs: building wall shall not exceed 15% of total area of that wall. No signs shall be placed on walls of buildings used for non-residential purposes which walls directly face, abut or adjoin a public park or residential use as such parks or uses are shown on the finally approved Overall Development Plan. Suites Hotels: One freestanding The total area of a The total area of all wall signs affixed to a Wall Signs: building shall not exceed 15% of the total area of that wall. for non-residential purposes which walls directly face, abut or adjoin a public park or residential use as such parks or uses are shown on the finally approved Overall Development Plan. Free-standing Signs: building per street frontage. free-standing sign for a building having one street frontage shall not exceed 100 square feet. Where a building has two or more street frontages, additional permitted free-standing signs shall not exceed 50 square feet in area. The maximum height of free-standing signs shall be 25 feet. The total area of all wall signs affixed to a No signs shall be placed on walls of buildings used One free standing sign for each The total area of a Sec. 3, Section 2 of Ordinance No. 451.i~ hereby amended by adding the following definition: . (bb) "Project" in the Mixed'Development District means a multi-family residential complex containing 10 or more units, a shopping center or area, theatre complex containing five or more screens, an office building complex containing three or more buildings, or a public institutional or recreational use. . Sec. 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage and publication. ATTEST : L A . P Mayor . "/n&A% LLL YW City Clerk Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Kelly. Warren Beck, representing Centennial Lakes Plaza (retail development) , stated that he agreed with the concern about signage that would front park and residential areas and would support the ordinance restriction as proposed. record, they envision for some areas in Centennial Lakes Plaza in the future the. opportunity to use signage which would fit and enhance that area. would be difficult today to describe what that signage might be or the circumstances. restaurants and where a bookstore currently is placed. He said, for the However, it He referred to the area around the pavilion where they anticipate There may be the 90 10/16/89 opportunity for signage that may enhance that area and also enhance the utilization of the retail development from the park area. that they may be back at some point.in the future asking for consideration of such signage. He concluded by saying Member Rice asked for confirmation that there would be no signage on the north side of the Hawthorn Suites Hotel and also what size sign would be on the south side. hotel. area. Planner Larsen stated that no signage is proposed for the north side of the Mayor Richards then called for rollcall vote on the motion. Proposed signage for the south side would be less than 6% of the wall Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Ordinance adopted. FIRST REBDING GRBNTED FOR ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDHENT NO. 8254-32 (TO AILOW -ATE CLUBS IN PC-1 DISTRICT) non-profit clubs are allowed in the PC-2 and PC-3 Commercial Districts. The proposed amendment would allow private clubs in the PC-1 Commercial District but would restrict the size to not exceed 2,500 square feet of gross floor area. In the PC-2 and PC-3 District the size of clubs is not limited. The limitation proposed in the PC-1 District would be consistent with the limitation placed on other uses such as bakeries and clothing stores. Planner Larsen explained that currently private The proposed amendment would allow the Edina American Legion to relocate from the Grandview area to the Cahill-Amundson shopping area. lease in the Biltmore Building. potentially impact two other PC-1 Districts in the City, e.g. Valley Viewflooddale and 44th/France. The Legion has lost its Planner Larsen said the amendment would Mayor Richards asked if this would carry with it the ability for a liquor or beer license at those locations. Planner Larsen observed that the Legion currently has an on-sale beer license. protect against the possibility in the future that they would grow to be a typical American Legion Club with a bar, restaurant, and catered parties. Member Paulus introduced Ordinance No. 825432 for First Reading as presented and on file in the office of the City Clerk. Member- Kelly. -, The restriction for gross floor area was included to , - Motion for First Reading was seconded by Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards First Reading granted. *BID AWARDED FOR STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. STS-196 (GROVE STREETI Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for Storm Sever Improvement No. STS-196 (Grove Street) to recommended low bidder, 0 & P Contracting, Inc., at $30,278.50, and to reject all bids for Storm Sewer Improvement Nos. STS-195, STS-199 and STS-200. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR CONCRETE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NOS. S-43. S-44. S-46 Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for Sidewalk Improvement No. S-43 (Gleason Rd-Dewey Hill to Schey); Sidewalk Improvement No. S-44 (Gleason Rd-Schey to Loch Moor) and Sidewalk Improvement No. S-46 (Xerxes Av-W. 60th to W. 62nd) to recommended low bidder, Victor Carlson & Sons, Inc., at $91,253.50. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *AWARD OF BID FOR (1) DRY ELECTROSTATIC TRANSFER COPIER CONTINUED TO 11/6/89 Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to continue award of bid for (1) dry electrostatic transfer copier to November 6, 1989. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. +. -r 10/ 16/89 91 *BID AWARDED FOR REPLACEMENT ROOF FOR BRAEMAR CLUB HOUSE Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for replacement roof for Braemar Club House to recommended low bidder, Curran V. Nielsen Company, Inc., at $21,900.00. Motion was made by I Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR HYDRAlKtC JUMMELt AmACRMENT Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for a hydzaulic hammer attachment to recommended low bidder, Hayden Murphy Equipment Company, at $12,950.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR TREE REPLACEMENT - BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for tree replacement at Braemar Golf Course t'o recommended low bidder, Landscape & Turf, at $9,500.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 10. 1989 APPROVED Member Smith moved approval of the following recommended action listed in Section A of the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes of October 10, 1989: 1) east side of the middle aisle of the lower level in Jerry's Parking Ramp, 2) on speed and volume warrants, and to acknovledge Sections B and C of the Minutes. Motion for approval was seconded by Member Kelly. To remove the restriction of three-hour parking from the southern Val1 and Installation of a 3-way "STOP" sign at West 70th Street and Tracy Avenue based Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. ACTION ON PARK BOARD RECOMMENDATION CONCERNING GOLF LEAGUES CONTINUED TO 11/20/89 Park/Recreation Director Bob Kojetin advised that the Park Board at their meeting of October 10, 1989, revisited the Braemar golf league policies which had been recommended by the Board and approved by the Council on November 2, 1987. Specifically, the policies reviewed were: 1) All golf league members must be residents; present non-residents may continue through 1989, and 2) Beginning with 1990, all league members are limited to only one league or division. The Park Board voted to: 1) Reconfirm that at the end of this year individuals can belong to only one league, plus participating in the couple's league, and 2) That the 1987 policy concerning residency be revised to grandfather in non-residents that are currently in league play.with no limitation as to number of years. Director Kojetin stated that numerous letters had been received from league members and residents which were included in the packets sent to the Board prior to their meeting and were included in the Council packets. Since the Park Board meeting many additional letters have been received in response to the Board's action which have also been included in the Council packets. Eleanore Compton, 7520 Cahill Road, reiterated the comments made in her letter dated October 12, 198,9 asking that non-residents be allowed to stay in leagues and that members in dual leagues be permitted to maintain the present status. She said that there are only 48 women who are in two leagues which equates to 12 tee off times out of 2,240 tee off times per week. Attrition would take care of any future needs. Sylvia Eisler, 5905 Chowen Avenue, said the Braemar Women's Golf Leagues disagree with the recommendations of the Park Board and are asking that those who currently have dual membership and non-resident status be permitted to continue "as is". She said they would rather not be placed in two divisions, e.g. non-residents who can stay and those residents with dual memberships who must give up one league. She said this would create strong feelings and would split the leagues down the lo/ 16 / 89 92 middle. provide room for all and that future attrition will bring the memberships down to the requested levels. Mrs. Eisler mentioned that since 1987 they have decreased the 9-hole women's groups from 60 to 48. up the Braemar Golf Course from 6:OO to 6:54 a.m. to give residents the chance to go out and play 18 holes of golf before they went to work in the morning. She concluded by saying that, as indicated in some of the letters, they are asking that non-residents and those with dual membership not be asked to leave now. John Vallerie, Braemar Manager, explained how this all started. He said he had an extremely long waiting list for the Braemar Men's Club, approximately 185 in 1986. Some men were approaching him to say they had to wait 3 to 5 years to get into the two men's leagues. In order to address this it was suggested that they could only be in one league. the rule must be applicable to both genders. They firmly believe that the future addition of the 9-hole course will They did this willingly in order to open The ensuing issue of the women's leagues came up and they said Member Kelly asked Mr. Vallerie if the new 9-hole course will alleviate the problem. set aside for league play. 9-hole course, then obviously not as much open time would be gained to meet the growing demands from the residents. growing by 100/150 per year; as that public resident use grows it creates a situation where they cannot get on the course. balance time for league play versus open play. Member Paulus asked if the one league restriction applied to the men's leagues; how many people are denied tee times and how many cannot get into leagues. Mr. Vallerie said the one league restriction would apply equally to men's and women's leagues. be accommodated for open play. .Approximately 185 men are waiting to get into the men's leagues. Member Paulus asked if those waiting to get into leagues were in the 55+ age group.. Mr. Vallerie said that was correct. be making Braemar Golf Course a recreation facility for a certain age group that would prohibit a younger age group from growing up to take the place of those now in leagues when they will no longer be participating. Mr. Vallerie said that one step to address that concern was that he had approached the Park Board and they had approved the intent that new members in the men's leagues would under the age of 40. holders from electing to play during open tee times. Ruth Wherry, 6105 Beard Avenue South, said that as she understood it there are only 50 women who belong to two leagues. plus in the couple's league that would leave out those women like herself who is widowed. Mr. Vallerie said it will help but the question will be how much time to If the league play percentage is expanded for the new He said the number of patron card holders is ' It becomes an issue of trying to On an average day in summer 225/250 individuals per day cannot Some of the women's leagues have waiting lists and some do not. Member Paulus asked if the City would - He added that in no way would the policies deny residents who are patron If they were allowed to play in a league Member Rice commented that the impact of allowing non-residents to remain is very small and the impact of participation in two leagues is even less and will be smaller in 1991 when the new nine hole course is opened. would be to grandfather in those, both men and women, who are in two leagues today but not allow anyone else to join two leagues. Mayor Richards asked that if the Council decides to maintain the status quo would it not in effect keep the waiting list for the Braemar Men's Club at approximately 150/165 people for the 1990 golf season. Mr. Vallerie said the men's waiting list would change very slightly if left at the status quo but will improve greatly if the Council approves the one league policy as it will mean the immediate reduction of approximately 40 golfers. He said his position 101 16/89 93 Member Paulus.commented that there were no representatives from the Braemar Men's Club present and asked if they are in favor of the one league policy. Mr. Vallerie said the comments he has heard are that many are in favor of the one league policy and think that is a fair way to approach it but there are also those that are contrary. Mayor Richards observed that there is an argument that can be made that those who supported the golf course facility are those who should be given consideration. He said he recognized that the City of Edina has to stand behind the payment of the bonds on the golf course. there has not been any moneys taken out of the City's coffers to support that facility. that he would be concerned that the Council adopt a view that in effect would work as a dissidence to t&ose individuals who have supported that facility all those years. non-residents to useathe facility just as residents use other golfing facilities in the larger community. we look at what would happen if we preserve the status quo for one more year or in effect rescind the action that was taken in 1987 and then revisit the issue after the nine hole course is open. However, since the construction of the facility Those who have truly supported it financially have been the users and Mayor Richards said there may well come a day when we would want He said that, if it is the consensus of the Council, Member Rice said he concurred with Mayor Richards' position with the understanding that the National Car Rental and Hennepin County leagues will not be playing at Braemar in 1990. Member Smith suggested that we leave the status quo by rescinding the 1987 action and see what happens when the new nine hole course is opened in 1991 and revisit the issue at that time. After lengthy discussion by the Council Members, Mayor Richards suggested that this matter be continued to November 20 so that everyone could be heard and with the understanding that staff would bring back a specific proposal in response to the discussion by the Council for action at that time. Motion was made by Member Rice to continue the matter concerning golf league policies to the meeting of November 20. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. REPORT GIVEN ON PURCHASE OF' WHITE OAKS LOTS reported that the City closed on the purchase of Lot 9, White Oaks Second Addition and Lot 1, White Oaks Third Addition on October 10, 1989. The closing occurred after the City received half of the required purchase price from residents in the White Oaks area. Assistant Manager Gordon Hughes Mayor Richards said that he had talked during the recess with several members of the White Oaks Improvement Association who would like the Council to adopt a statement of intent or declaration, as requested in their letter of September 19, 1989, that would recognize the permanancy of the natural condition of the White Oaks lots. back at the next meeting to discuss their request. to understand their appreciation for action in acquiring the lots. Member Smith made a motion to direct 'staff to draft a resolution that vould be recordable restricting the property to its present condition. by Member Paulus. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. They said if there was any problem with that they would like to come They also wanted the Council Motion was seconded 94 10/16/89 WATER AND SEWER RAm INCREASES APPROVED had discussed proposed fees and charges for 1990 at the October 2, 1989 meeting. Staff had recommended that the water and sewer rates be increased due to higher sewage treatment costs with the increase weighted towards the water rate side for several reasons. Following discussion the majority of the Council Members were not in favor of the recommendation and asked that a modified proposal be.brought back that would reflect proportionally the increased costs to the City for sewer and water. Manager Ro land recalled that the Council I Following further research, Finance Director Wallin would propose the following: Current Rates Proposed .Rates 8 Increase Water . $ .40 per 100 cu ft $ .42 per 100 cu ft 5% Charge 27.10 for 1st 1800 27.10 for 1st 1600 0% Storm Sewer 5.00 per quarter 5.00 per quarter 0% Sewer 1.15 per 100 cu ft 1.30 per 100 cu ft 13% Minimuin cu ft cu ft Finance Director Wallin said the increases would be as of January 1, 1990 and would take effect with the billings for the winter quarter (February). Member Kelly questioned why the water/sewer rates for comparative cities are higher that those charged by Edina. Bloomington, Eden Prairie and Richfield have additional costs for softening their water while Edina does not. Engineer Hoffman explained that the cities of Member Smith questioned the 5% increase in proposed water rates following the increase approved by the Council last fall. Engineer Hoffman explained that we are starting to pay on the new water tower and well. Director Wallin said that last year's increases were basically just to pay off the bond proceeds used for the construction of the new water tower and well. The 5% increase in water currently being proposed is for inflated NSP charges as well as inflation of costs for repairs on the water system. approximately $60,000 more revenue and is needed to break even on the water portion of the utility fund. Member-Kelly moved approval of the proposed increases in water and sewer rates as presented, effective January 1, 1990. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Walter-Sandison, 4612 W. 58th Street, stated his objection to the proposed increases for water and sewer. The water rate increase would equate to Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Richards Nays: Smith Motion carried. APPOINTHEKC MADE TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PUNNING COMMISSION stated that he would recommend Charles S. Ingwalson, 4612 Arden Avenue, for appointment to the Community Development and Planning Commission. Member Smith made a motion for consent of the Mayor's appointment of Charles S. Ingwalson to the Community Development and Planning Commission to fill an unexpired term to February 1, 1990. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Mayor Richards Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. WFF-SALE BEXR LICENSE APPROVED FOR THE COUNTRY STORE AT 6775 YORK AVENUE SOUTH Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to approve issuance of an off-sale 3.2 beer license to the Country Store located at 6775 Pork Avenue' South. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. 10/16/89 95 *1990 LABORATORY SERVICE AGREEMJBIT WITH HENPJEPRJ COm3Tp APPROVED Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for adoption of the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota. that it hereby authorizes and directs the Mayor and Manager to execute, on behalf of the City, the Environmental Health Services Agreement between the County of Hennepin and the City of Edina, for the period of January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1990, to enable Hennepin County to purchase laboratory support services through the Edina Tri-City Laboratory. Motion adopted on rollcall vote, five ayes. RESOLUTION . WEMPORARY ON-SALE LIOUOR LICENSE APPROVED FOR TBE EDIHA FOUNDATION (EDINAWITE) Motion vas made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly to approve issuance of a temporary on-sale liquor license to The Edina Foundation for EDINBMTE (Dynamite Jazz '89) to be held on November 18, 1989. Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. *JEARING DATE OF 11/06/89 SET FOR BEER LICEElSE FEES Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly setting November 6, 1989 as hearing date to consider an increase in beer license fees. Motion was made by Member Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. CENTENNIAL LAKES PHASE IV DISCUSSED Mayor Richards made reference to a letter from L.A. Laukka Development Company dated October 11, 1989 advising that they have been unable to achieve enough Centennial Lakes Phase IV presales in the semi-luxury condominium building to proceed. would like to initiate construction of the fourth building yet this year and propose that it be an elevator building - same as Phase 111. Executive Director Hughes said that resolutions for conveyance of Phase IV would be brought to the HRA on November 6, 1989. He said no formal action is required at this time. AIM POLICIES AND LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAIS FOR 1990 NOTED the AMM Policies and Legislative Proposals for 1990, noting that the Board of Directors will be meeting in about ten days to review and consider these. General Membership meeting to consider and approve these policies will be held on Thursday evening, November 2, 1989. Mr. Laukka had stated that they - Manager Rosland referred to The Manager Rosland stated that, generally speaking, there is nothing in the proposed policies with which the Council would have a strong disagreement and that a number of the policies have been carried over from last year. SAFETY OF PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER CROSSTOWN HIGEWAY QUESTIONED if anyone is responsible for checking the safety of the pedestrian Bridge over the Crosstown Highway. ending of the Fourth of July Fireworks when that bridge is packed with people. He asked that this be checked out. Member Rice asked He said a resident had raised this question in regard to the ROBBINSDALE CODE REGARDING PROPERTY -CE NOTED Member Rice referred to a newspaper article concerning the City of Robbinsd&&sproposed code regarding property maintenance. He said this subject has been of concern to him. POSSIBILITY OF CURBSIDE LEAF PICKUP DISCUSSED Member Rice said a resident had written him a note asking why Edina does not have curbside leaf pickup, e.g. have residents rake leaves to curb, have them swept up and avoid all the plastic bags, etc. Manager Rosland said the City had tried this many years ago and found it to be a very expensive process. of that procedure because of the cost. The City of Roseville has done it but has gotten out 10116 189 96 SAFETY ISSUE RAISED CONDG T.H. 100 EXIT AT BENTON Member Rice said that he felt the something was lacking at the T.H. 100 exit onto Benton Avenue. He mentioned that the sight lines are poor and that traffic coming down Benton is traveling fast and do not stop. He suggested that the Traffic Safety Committee review and comment on that situation. PEES QUESTIONED FOR IABORATORY SERVICES PROVIDED TO HE"EPIN COUHTP Member Kelly asked if the fees the City is charging for providing laboratory services to Hennepin County are adequate or if they should be increased. EFFECT OF BLOOKCNGTON'S !XYIZNE ORDINANCE ON ED= OUESTIONED reference to the newspaper article concerning Bloomington's proposed skyline ordinance that would limit the height of buildings that would be constructed adjacent to residential property and asked if that would have any effect on Edina. Manager Rosland said he did not have an answer but would have staff look at this. Member Kelly made WSCC MINUTES TO BE DISTRIBUTZLD TO COUNCIL Member Smith commented that he is the Council representative to the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission and that he would like to have the Council Members receive copies of the Commission's minutes on an ongoing basis. He said the Commission is sponsoring a member news program that will cost approximately $115,000 over the next year and that cities' staffs are enthused about it. He said he would feel more comfortable if the Council had those minutes so that they would be aware of what is going on. TRAFFIC SAFETY COlMJYTIE MINUTES DISCUSSED to see more background information included in the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes to better understand the requests brought to the Committee and the * Member Smith said that he would like . recommendations made in response. BOARD OF EDUCATION STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION RESCHEDULED Member Paulus informed the Council that the Board of Education Strategic Planning Session has been rescheduled for November 5, 6, 7 and 8. REPORTGIVW ON GRANDVIEW GmTERYmTIl?G Mayor Richards reported that the City Manager and he had met with Harry Lindberry to discuss the concerns that had been raised by the neighbors at the August 7, 1989 Council Meeting with regard to the Grandview Cemetery property. Mayor Richards 'said that Mr. Lindberry had stated that he was relocating his trucking business to the Chaska/Chanhassen area but that he was not specific as to when he would get final approval from the municipality involved. owns approximately 70 acres, 35 of which are cemetery now. needed he sells it to the cemetery association. The long range intent is that all 70 acres will be fully developed as a cemetery some day. would continue to communicate with the City and in turn he mentioned two issues in which he felt the City was less than a good citizen: 1) Dumping on the southwest corner of the Lindberry property, and 2) Erosion as a result of storm water runoff. Mayor Richards indicated that Manager Rosland will write a short memorandum on the meeting with Mr. Lindberry and will send that to the neighbors so that they will know what is being done ea address their concerns. - - Mr. Lindberry When more land is Mr. Lindberry said he Manager Rosland will be working with staff to respond to those concerns. COUNCIL REQUESTED TO SPONSOR FUNCTION TO BE AUCTIONED AT EDINAKCTE ON 11/18/89 Mayor Richards stated that the request had been made that the Council consider sponsoring a function that could be auctioned at the EDINAMITE benefit on November 18, 1989 as has been done in the past. Following discussion, it was agreed to'respond by saying that the Council wants to do something and they are looking for a new activity. Further, that any 10/ 16/89 97 suggestions will be welcomed and that something specific will be decided on November 6. SALE AND DEVELOPMENT OF FORMER CAHII;L SCHOOL PROPERTY DISCUSSED commented that apparently there is a proposal for sale and development of the former Cahill School property owned by Marsh Everson. As part of that, there is an issue as to what can or should be done with regard to the area at W. 70th and Cahill Road that is zoned Heritage Preservation Overlay District (HPD) and on which sits the historic St. Patrick's church building. Mayor Richards I Mayor Richards said that he had met with Ron Clark, the developer, at his request concerning that issue. Following that discussion, Mayor Richards said he thought that, before this proposal for development is brought to the Council, they should schedule a sp'ecial meeting with the Heritage Preservation Board to focus on the historical and other facts and to hear what the alternatives might be in dealing with 'that site. After brief discussion, it was informally agreed that Manager Rosland should contact Foster Dunwiddie and the Heritage Preservation Board as to possible dates for a special meeting with the Council, and that the date would be determined at the meeting of November 6. BEST WISHES EXTENDED TO WIC HEDBMM ON NEW POSITION that this would be the last Council meeting covered by Eric Hedblom, Edina Sun-Current reporter, who had accepted a new position. covering the Council meetings Eric has been diligent, honest and has reported the facts as he saw them. On behalf of the Council, Mayor Richards thanked him for his fair reporting and wished him the best of luck in his new career in environmental consulting. Mayor Richards announced He commented that in SEMI[-AUTOHATIC 9BM PISTOL TO BE DIDIONSTRATED BY POLICE DEPARTMENT recalled that this year the Police Department has converted from the six-shot . revolver to the semi-automatic 9mm pistol. invitation of the Police Department to a demonstration of the new issued sidearm to be held on Monday, October 23 at 4 p.m. at the Braemar Gun Range. Manager Rosland He 'extended to the Council the PARK h RECREATION DIRECTOR KOJETIN TO BE ENSHRINED IN MINNESOTA SOFTBAIL HALL OF FAME Manager Rosland announced that Robert Kojetin, Park & Recreation Director, will be enshrined in the Minnesota Softball Hall of Fame on Saturday night, October 28. *RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED CANCELLING LEVY FOR 1990 ON $5.400.000 G.O. IMPROVIBEXT BONDS, SERIES 1984 AND ON $2.200.000 G.O. REDEVEU)PMENT BONDS Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Kelly for adoption for the following resolutions: RESOLUTION CANCELLING AD VUW TAXES COLLECTIBLE WITB 1990 GENERAL PROPERTY TAXES LEVIED FOR $5.400.000 GENERAL OBLIGATION IHPROVF2ENT BONDS. SERIES 1984 m, the City Council of the City of Edina has, by resolution adopted September 10, 1984, levied a special ad valorem tax for the payment of principal and interest of its General Obligation Improvement Bonds, Series 1984; said ad valorem tax in the amount of $422,000 being collectible with and as a part of other general taxes for the year 1990; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, permits the cancellation of said levies providing moneys are on hand for payment of principal and interest for said bond issue; and it has been determined by this Council that the required moneys are on hand for the payment of said principal and interest; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that those ad valorem tax levies made by resolution of this Council adopted September 10, 10/16/89 98 .. 1984, and collectible with and as a part of other general property taxes in said City for the year 1990, be and hereby are cancelled; and BE IT F"R!I!HER RESOLVED that the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Minnesota, be authorized and directed to cancel the above described ad valorem tax levies and to delete said levies from taxes to be spread for the year 1990. ,' RESOUPTION CANCEIJJXG AD VALOREM TAXES COLTXCTIBLE FTITB 1990 GENERAL PROPEBTP TAXES LEVIED FOR $2.200.000 GENERAL OBLIGATION REDEVELOPHE" BONDS WHEREAS, the City Council of the Ciw of Edina has, by resolution adopted November 3, 1975, levied a special ad valorem tax for the payment of principal and interest of its $2,200,000 General Obligation Redevelopment Bonds, said ad valorem tax in the am-t of $270,800 being collectible with and as a part of other general taxes for the year 1990; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statutes, Section 475.61, permits the cancellation of said levies providing moneys are on hand for payment of principal and interest for said bond issue; and it has been determined by this Council that the required moneys are on hand for the payment of said principal and interest; NOW, TBEBEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that those ad valorem tax levies made by resolution of this Council adopted November 3, 1975, and collectible with and as a pe of other general property taxes in said City for the year 1990, be and hereby are cancelled; and BE 33 FuaTHEaRESOLVED that the County Auditor of Hennepin County, Wnnesota, be authorized and directed to cancel the above described ad valorem tax levies and to delete said levies fromtaxes to be spread for the year 1990. ' Resolutions adopted on rollcall vote; five ayes. *CLAIMS PAID Motion was made by Member Smith and vas seconded by Member Kelly to approve payment of the folloving claims as per pre-list dated 10/16/89: General Fund $240,253.94, C.D.B.G. $6,211.00, Art Center $11,232.03, Capital Fund $153.40, Swimming Pool Fund $102.76, Golf Course Fund $20,132.95, Recreation Center Fund $7,005.49, Gun Range Fund $300.62, Edinborough Park $9,464.48, Utility Fuad $20,304.17, Storm Sever Utility $2,084.62, Liquor Dispensary Fund $113,424.97, Construction Fund $809,593.06, Total $1,240,263.49. I Motion carried on rollcall vote, five ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared the meeting adjourned at 11:27 p.m.