Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19900507_regular37 MINUTES OF THE REGUTAR MEETING OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL HELD AT CITY MAY 7, 1990 R0I;LCBI;L Answering rollcall were Members Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly. EDINA BICYCLE SAFETY MONTH proclamation which was unanimously adopted: WHEREAS, safety of children is a major concern of the City of Edina; and WHEREAS, children are especially vulnerable while riding bicycles in conjunction with vehicular traffic; and WHEEUUS, education of children through school presentations can reduce bicycle accidents; and WEEREAS, education enforcement of bicycle rider errors can reduce bicycle accidents; and m, the Edina Citizens' Safety Council has been the leader for twenty years vith programs to reduce bicycle accidents; NOW, TBEREFORE, I, Peggy Kelly, Mayor Pro-Tem of the City of Edina, do hereby proclaim the month of May as EDINA BICYCLE SAFETY MONTH and that the efforts of the community be directed to encourage the safety of children in the month of May and throughout the year while involved in bicycling. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly presented the following PROCLAMATION CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS ADOPTED Member Rice to approve and adopt the consent agenda items as presented with the exception of the removal of items V.A - Ordinance No. 613, V.B - Ordinance No. 803-A4, V.C - Ordinance No. 162-A2, V1I.B - Electric Golf Cars, V1I.C - Ice Resurfacing Machine and VI1.D - Goose Control Contract. Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. I *APPROVAL OF MINUTES Rice to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of April 2, 1990. Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Motion carried on rollcall.vote, four ayes, PUBLIC HEARING CONDUCTED ON SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT NO. S-47 (WEST 42ND STREET FROM FRANCE AVENUE TO WEST CITY LIMITS: PETITION TO CONSTRUCT DENIED: TRAFFIC SAFETY ISSUE REFERRED TO TRAFFIC SAFETY COMMITTEE Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. Presentation bv Engineer - Engineer Hoffman said that the public hearing on Sidewalk Improvement No. S-47 was the result of a petition received from area residents for construction of a sidewalk on West 42nd Street from the west City limits to France Avenue. Reasons for the sidewalk were: 1) access to park, 2) MTC bus stop on France, 3) school bus stops along West 42nd Street, and 4) busier street than others (1,000 vehicles per day versus 500 or less on side streets.) The Comprehensive Plan's policy on sidewalks includes: 1) Provide short link sidewalks that improve and connect the existing system, and 2) Provide sidewalks to transit and recreation areas. In this case, there are existing sidewalks on some of the side streets that dead end at West 42nd Street. Staff felt that the petition submitted for sidewalk is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Notices of the public hearing on the proposed improvement were mailed to property owners within an area generally bounded by the west City limits extended to Morningside Road, on the south by Morningside Road, on the east by Scott Terrace and the north City limits, identified as Area 1 for assessment purposes. Area 1 ' 3 8 5/7/90 is the largest suggested proposed assessment area and includes all petitioners for this project. The second proposed assessment area is bounded on the north by West 41st Street and on the south by Littel Street, identified as Area 2. not include all the petitioners but would be more consistent with the potential assessment district for this project. Petition results following mailing of the public hearing notice: Area 2 (170 lots) Outside of Area 2 (218 lots) For 49 For 15 Against 63 Against 15 5 No response 58 No response 48 I . Area 2 does Within Area 2 more residents are interested in the sidewalk west of Grimes Avenue than east of Grimes. The sidewalk is proposed to be five feetwide and constructed of concrete. aligrimentwill be varied to protect existing property features to the greatest extent possible. The proposed project would be to place sidewalk on the south side of West 42nd Street from the west City limits to Grimes Avenue because existing side street sidewalks would tie-in the proposed walkway. The proposed sidewalk location from Grimes to France on West 42nd would be the north side due to ease of construction on the north versus south side. Street would be considered safe since a 4-way STOP sign exists there. The The proposed project would be constructed in 1990. The cross over point at Grimes and West 42nd The proposed project cost is estimated at $95,278.86 which would result in an estimated assessment of $245.56 for each lot in Area 1 or if Area 2 is used, an estimated assessment of $560.46 per lot. improvements they paid for in 1980. Morningside area were rebuilt which included new storm sewer and watermain where needed, sanitary sewer repair, new curb and gutter and new sidewalks. All the construction costs were included in the project in total. were asked if they wanted more sidewalks. construct additional sidewalks but to replace existing sidewalks. contributed $300,000 from the general fund for the project according to a previous policy for reconstruction. The net effect was that all property owners were assessed at $29.40 per assessable lineal foot, with or without sidewalk. Residents in the area asked what In 1978, 1979 and 1980 all the streets in the At that time, residents The general consensus was not to The City Actions to be considered by the Council include: 1) 2) Approve portion of project (west portion to access Weber Park), or 3) Reject project due to lack of neighborhood support. Approve project as proposed, Public Comments Speaking in opposition to the proposed Sidewalk Improvement No. S-47 were: Mr./Mrs. Peter Johnson, 4309 West 42nd Street; Sherry and Bruce Douglas, 3915 West 42nd Street; Susan Bidwell, 3912 West 42nd Street; Tim Damberger, 4004 Grimes Avenue; Jim Robertson, 4224 West 42nd Street; Phillip Nelson, 3908 West 42nd Street; John Peterson, 4239 Grimes Avenue; Robert Fletcher, 4301 West 42nd Street, Clara Kiel, 4236 West 42nd Street; Helen Stafford, 4226 Grimes Avenue; Leroy Wesley, 4211 Oakdale Avenue; Ronald Hale, 4228 Scott Terrace; Steve Goodwell, 3912 West 42nd Street; Alice Rose, 4011 Kipling Avenue; Nancy Keith, 4109 West 42nd Street; Don Notvig, 4200 West 42nd Street; James Stones, 4000 West 42nd Street; and Joe Chisler, 4219 Grimes Avenue. Reasons stated for objection included loss of open space, cost of assessment, increased taxes, burden of snow shoveling and maintenance, added liability insurance costs, would draw children to front yards, previous assessment for Morningside project in 1980, alternatives to address safety issues, loss of trees, and would change character of area. 5/7/90 39 Speaking in support of the Sidewalk Improvement No. S-47 were: Ellen Guerin, 4406 West 42nd Street; Robert Lunieski, 4109 Monterey Avenue; William Obert, 4223 Lynn Avenue; Fred Green, 4404 West 42nd Street; Mary Rogers, 4215 West 42nd Street; Pat Corchran, 4109 Monterey Avenue; Brad Venius, 4407 West 42nd Street; A1 Carufel, 4324 West 42nd Street; Mary Morrison, 4408 West 42nd Street; and Dave Lynch, 4504 West 42nd Street. The major reasons cited in support was traffic safety for the children living and playing in the area, and their ability to access Weber Park. Other reasons given were access for adults to France Avenue bus stop, would increase feeling of neighborhood, would increase property values, and increased traffic volumes on West 42nd Street. In response to a question from the audience as to who would be liable for any accidents on the sidewalk, Attorney Erickson stated that City ordinances impose the obligation on the property owner to keep the sidewalk free of debris and know/ice. in particular if the property owner made the condition worse than it was in the first place. If they fail to do so they could be liable for any resulting injuries, Council Comments Mayor Pro-Tern Kelly mentioned that the Council packet included copies of all . petitions and correspondence that had been received prior to the public hearing concerning the proposed improvement. Receipt was acknowledged of additional correspondence in opposition: Peter Johnson, 4309 West 42nd Street, and Lynette Anderson, 4305 West 42nd Street. Member Rice - The original petition failed to clearly state who would pay for the the cost of constructing the sidewalk. there likely would have been a different result. sidewalks, it is questionable how those residents not living on West 42nd Street would benefit, especially those on streets without existing sidewalks. As to the issue of safety, good points have been made on both sides. If there was a contiguous sidewalk system in the Morningside area it would contribute to safety. Sidewalks do not resolve safety issues such as cars which do not stop for STOP signs. The traffic safety issues could reviewed by the Traffic Safety Committee. If the sidewalk is to be constructed the people who directly benefit should pay for the cost, but there does not appear to be a strong majority in favor of that. As presented, Member Rice said he would not be in favor of the project. If that information had been included . Although supportive of Member Paulus - The general welfare of all of Edina must be considered, not only homeowners of long standing in the community but those of the future. Life styles and the speed at which we live has changed greatly over the last 40 years. amount of time when parents are home to supervise children has changed markedly. Whether that is the responsibility of the individual parent or the community can be debated. draws from residents outside that area. Member Paulus said of particular concern was the division that this proposal has brought to the neighborhood and the "how it will affect me' orientation rather than the community as a whole. factor seems to be the underlying theme, but with an aging community costs will come around again. Property values will not be detracted by adding sidewalk to the neighborhood. To feel that any part of Edina is still a rural suburb is a misconception - Edina is an inner city suburb to the urban area of Minneapolis. Past history relating to children who have grown up in the neighborhood without the benefit of sidewalk does not make the judgement call for today. reasons, Member Paulus said that for the welfare of Edina she would support the sidewalk project. The Weber Park cannot be designated just as a Morningside park as it The cost For those 40 5/7/90 Member Paulus made a motion to approve Sidewalk Improvement No. S-47 on West 42nd Street from France Avenue to the west City Limits and that the costs of the improvement be assessed against those property owners within Area 2 (the smaller proposed assessment area.) . Motion failed for lack of a second. Member Smith made a motion to deny the petition for Sidewalk Improvement No. S-47 on West 42nd Street from France Avenue to the west City Limits and to refer the issues of traffic safety that have been raised by the residents to the Traffic Safety Committee for study. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Member Smith commented that he had not heard enough arguments in support of the sidewalk project to support the project. However, he said he, too, was disappointed by the divisive attitude of the audience on this sidewalk issue. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly said she could support the project if there was a continuous sidewalk system in the area. to such a system and would not satisfy the safety concerns as she saw them. Pro-Tem Kelly then called for vote on the motion. In this case, the proposed project would not connect Mayor Rollcall : Ayes: Rice, Smith, Kelly Nays: Paulus Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARING ON BITUMINOUS STREET SURFACING, CONCRETE CDRB/GUTTER. STORM SEWlB AND S!J!REET LIGHTING IHPROVEHENT NO. BA-291 CONTI"J3D TO 5/21/90 Member Rice made a motion to continue the public hearing on Bituminous Street Surfacing, Concrete Curb and Gutter, Storm Sewer and Street Lighting Improvement No. BA-281 to May 21, 1990. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. *PREL3XINARY REZONING APPROVAL TO PCD-2 PUNNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT (WALGREEN'S BY SEMPER HOLDINGS) FOR 4916 FRANCE AVENUE CONTINUED TO 5/21/90 Member Smith and vas seconded by Member Rice to continue the public hearing on Preliminary Rezoning Approval to PCD-2 Planned Commercial District for 4916 France Avenue So., requested by Semper Holdings for Walgreen's, to the meeting of Hay 21, 1990. Motion was made by Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. DRAJ?T ORDINANCE FOR COMMERCIAL PARKING LOTS DISCUSSED first draft of a parking lot licensing ordinance for discussion as requested by the Council. for whatever reason. parking lot which by mechanical or other means (charging fees) controls access to a privately owned parking lot. street system and therefore licensing and reviewing plans for a restricted access parking lot would be a legitimate function of the City. prohibit pay parking lots but would require them to be licensed and to meet the standards as set out in the ordinance. Planner Larsen presented a The ordinance would require a license for lots which restrict access As defined "Restricted Access Parking Lot" would mean a Those two means may have an impact on the public The ordinance would not Planner Larsen reviewed the key requirements of the ordinance as follows: 1) Formal application process including application fee. 2) Yearly operating fee for a restricted access lot. 3) Review of application by Director of Public Works. 4) Requirement for liability insurance. 5) Inspections authorized and revocation of license if ordinance violations are found. 6) Signage, landscaping and other performance requirements. 5/7/90 41 The ordinance closely follows the City of Minneapolis licensing ordinance. Council wishes to proceed to adoption of a licensing ordinance, staff would suggest that it be referred to staff and the City Attorney for further review and refinement. If the Member Smith asked how many lots the proposed ordinance would affect and also how the license fee was determined. Planner Larsen replied that to his knowledge two parking lots would fall under the ordinance provisions. license fee of $500.00, that is staff's best estimate of the cost of reviewing a parking lot plan. ordinance that there be a clear, safe unrestricted access available for dropping off/picking up of people. As to the original Member Smith said he would like to make it a requirement of the Following discussion on some of the terminology in the draft ordinance, it was generally agreed that staff was on the right track as to the key components of the draft ordinance and that it be customized to the City of Edina. Member Paulus made a motion that the draft ordinance for licensing of restricted access parking lots be referred to the City Attorney and staff for review and refinement and that it be brought back for consideration by the Council at the June 6, 1990 meeting. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Don Sederhold, President of AARP Richfield, spoke in opposition to the paid parking lot at the Southdale Medical Building and Fairview Southdale Hospital and suggested that the license fee be greater. Mayor Pro-Tem then called the vote on the motion. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. LOT DIVISION APPROVED WIW CONDITIONS FOR LOTS 11. 12 AND 13. BLOCK 14. COUNTRY CLUB FAIRWAY ADDITION Planner Larsen presented the request for division of lots 11, 12 and 13, Block 14, Country Club Fairway Addition. The subject property is currently comprised of three 50' x 135' platted lots located on Country Club Road just west of Bruce Avenue. is built on the most westerly lot (Lot 13) and a portion of the middle lot (Lot 12). garage. The easterly lot (Lot 11) is occupied by an old tennis court. The single family home known as 4209 Country Club Road The remaining portion of Lot 12 is occupied by the driveway to a tuck-under On March 15, 1990, the proponent sought lot width and lot area variances from the Board of Appeals and Adjustments in order to build a new home in place of the tennis court on Lot 11. neighbors who objected to the 50 foot lot. The Board felt that a home on a 50-foot lot was not desirable and suggested that the proponent seek ways of increasing the width and area of the lot and solve some of the problems with the existing house. The proponent has now returned and proposes that the easterly 20 feet of Lot 12 be combined with Lot 11. 9,400 square feet for the construction of the new dwelling. on which the existing home would remain would include the westerly 30' of Lot 12 and all of Lot 13. square feet. Planner Larsen pointed out that along Country Club Road between Wooddale and Bruce five other homes face Country Club Road besides the parcels in question. widths of these lots are as follows: loo', 70', 80', 100' and 97'. The lots north of the subject property on Drexel and Casco are 50' and 60' wide lots. The Board reviewed the request and heard testimony from The result would be a 70' x 136' parcel with an area of The remaining parcel The parcel will measure 80' x 135' with an area of 10,800 The 5/7/90 The Community Development and Planning Commission heard the proposal at its meeting of May 2, 1990 and recommended approval subject to the conditions: 1) That the existing two-car, tuck-under garage and driveway for the existing dwelling be eliminated and that a new detached two-car garage be constructed in the rear of the lot with a separate driveway, and 2) That a 5-foot lot width variance be granted for the new lot and that it be developed with a separate two-car garage and separate driveway. proposed lot division it would be referring it back to the Board of Appeals for action on the variance request. Member Paulus asked, if the Council were to grant the lot division as proposed, how would the City be assured that the tuck-under garage and driveway for the existing dwelling would be filled in. would still have to go before the Board of Appeals and the Board, presumably, would make that a condition to granting of the variance. advi-sed that the City could impose a condition to the variance and if they failed to comply with that condition the City could revoke the variance or proceed to enforce it by court order. i I . Planner Larsen emphasized that if the Council approved the Planner Larsen explained that the proposal Attorney Erickson Member Rice asked, if the existing house were to burn down, could three houses be built on the three platted lots. lots are owned together, the lots must meet the ordinance requirements for lot width. In this case the lot widths are 50' each and would not meet ordinance standards. built to the rear of the existing house. two-car in the single family district. the easterly lot would make the existing tuck-under garage unusable because of the turn radius required. Member Smith said he was bothered by the fact that the new lot would not meet the minimum lot width requirement and for that reason could not support the proposal. Planner Larsen responded that, even though the Member Rice also asked why the City would require a new garage to be Planner Larsen said the City requires a Presumably, the lot division to develop Bruce Aamoth, 4203 Country Club Road, said he was pleased with the process since the original proposal was heard by the Board of Appeals and would be in favor of the lot division provided that there is good drainage from the new lot. Paul Curran, proponent, explained that the reason why the fill-in of the existing garage and driveway is important is that the driveway radius would swing so wide into the proposed new 70' lot that the garage would be inaccessible. filling in the existing garage beforehand, Mr. Curran said two things would take place: 1) In the purchase agreement they would agree to erect the detached garage and driveway as part of the condition for purchase of the property, and 2) The earth from the construction of the new home would be needed to fill in the existing garage and driveway so that it could not be done ahead of time. Member Paulus commented that if the Council approved the lot division, she wanted it known that the tuck-under garage and driveway for the existing dwelling would be filled in so that the City would not have to spend taxpayers' dollars to make it happen. As far as Jack Curtis, 4400 West 50th Street, spoke to the proposal he had made to the Board of Appeals. The design of the existing Vennum home with its under-the-house garage and driveway access is an eyesore and problem for anyone attempting to use it. as in the past it became a "public course". The issue could be resolved if the underground garage were walled in and the driveway filled with the construction fill from the new homesite. the new home placed on the Vennum side adjacent to the new garage on the Vennum lot. House. He said he would like to see a house constructed on the existing tennis court Mr. Curtis said he would like to see the garage for This would improve the view from his home which is the historical Baird 5/7/90 43 Art the and Bartels, architect for the proponent, responded to Member Smith's concern that proposed lot division which would result in lots of 80' for the existing home 70' for the new lot versus two 75' lots as legally required. Following the Board of Appeals meeting, they looked at trying to get near the 75'/75' split but that raised some concerns as to the positioning of the existing house. As pointed out by staff, the proposed 70' new lot would have to go back for review to the Board of Appeals concerning the variance and also the Heritage Preservation Board which was seen as a positive action. Mr. Bartels displayed boards showing the elevations of the existing and proposed new home on Country Club Road and how the new home would be sited in relation to existing homes. and other materials fitting the neighborhood. Member Paulus said she was somewhat concerned that, by apprcving the lot division and granting the lot width variance, the City would be creating a precedent in the Country Club Area and also other areas in Edina. approaches variances on a case by case basis and does not consider that a single Gariance in a micro-area will set a precedent for a larger area. because of the variance staff will recommend to the Board of Appeals that the proposal be reviewed by the Heritage Preservation Board which would not be the case if both lots met the 75' lot width requirement. Materials would be brick Planner Larsen said staff In this case, Member Smith asked whether it would be possible to create two 75' lots. Larsen said that may be possible but this approach offers the City better control over what will be built, ultimately will give a better product and will not create a negative precedent. Planner Larsen explained that for variances property owners within 200 feet are notified. would be considering the lot division at this meeting. Council, the same property owners will be notified for the variance hearing by the Board of Appeals. could support the proposal. Planner Member Smith asked who was notified about the variance. As a courtesy, the same property owners were notified that the Council If approved by the Member Smith said that after listening to the discussion he Member Smith then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject to: 1) Granting of the lot width variance by the Board of Appeals and if appealed, by the City Council, and 2) The recommendation that the Board of Appeals impose as a condition to the granting of the lot width variance that the existing driveway be removed and a new two car garage be constructed to the rear of the house at 4209 Country Club Road before a building permit is issued for the new house on the easterly lot: WHEXEAS, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: WHEREAS, the owner has requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels") described as follows: RESOLUTION Lots 11, 12 and 13, Block 14, COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT FAIRWAY SECTION, and Tract A: Lot 13, and that part of Lot 12 lying westerly of the east 20.00 feet of said Lot 12, all in Block 14, COUNTRY CLUB FAIRWAY SECTION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota and Tract B: Lot 11, and that part of Lot 12 lying easterly of the east 20.00 feet of said Lot 12, all in Block 14, COUNTRY CLUB DISTRICT FAIRWAY SECTION, according to the recorded plat thereof, Hennepin County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, it has been determined that compliance with the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations of the City of Edina will create an unnecessary hardship and said Parcels as separate tracts of land do not interfere with the purposes of the Subdivision and Zoning Regulations as contained in the City of Edina Ordinance Nos. 804 and 825; NOW, "HEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Edina that the conveyance and ownership of said Parcels as separate tracts of land is hereby approved and the requirements and provisions of Ordinance No. 804 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby waived to allow said division and conveyance thereof 44 5/7/90 as separate tracts of land but are not vaived for any other purpose or as to any other provision thereof, and subject, however, to the provision that no further subdivision be made of said Parcels unless made in compliance with the pertinent ordinances of the City of Edina or vith the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. Member Rice said he would second the motion because there are enough positives in the proposal from the standpoint of character and symmetry of the neighborhood and the materials for the new house as opposed to what might happen there but that he did not want the conditions for approval to be onerous. Member Paulus asked if the City could issue a two-stage building permit, %.e. to allow fill in of the tuck-under garage and driveway before the construction on the new house begins. done before the building permit is issued. The variance statute talks in terms of imposing conditions to insure compliance.. to encompass any reasonable condition the City may wish to impose to end up with the plan that has been proposed before the Council. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly then called for vote on the motion for adoption of the resolution. Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Resolution adopted. I Attorney Erickson said grading and site preparation could be That language seems to be broad enough REPORT GIVEN ON MASSING ISSUE "massing" has been reviewed and discussed by the Council previously in connection with the following two issues: Planner Larsen recalled that the subject of I 1) Proposed revision of setback regulations in the Fall of 1989. The focus of the discussion was on new construction. and local contractors provided comment on the proposal and its effects. was taken. 2) the Country Club District sought review of the addition's compliance with regulations. policy. The Minneapolis Builders Association No action In January of 1990, residents in the vicinity of a particular addition in The addition was found to be in compliance with City regulations and Since that time, the staff was directed to review and monitor the massing issue. Planner Larsen reviewed the following components as set out in his report dated May 7, 1990: 1) Massing definition, 2) Existing method of regulation, 3) Massing related resident concerns, 4) Country Club District construction activity 1980-1988, and 5) Massing related action options. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly commented that the historical data presented in the report specifically applied to the Country Club area. City might consider adopting should apply to the City overall. Further, that the report would not help her to form policy without more information from a planning viewpoint. She said her interpretation of massing is covering up of green space, specifically, where multi-family units are constructed adjacent to single family areas. Any restrictive regulations the Manager Rosland said that the intent of the report was to provide background information to promote discussion by the Council on the massing subject. looking for direction from the Council as to whether it wishes to maintain the existing regulations/policies or wants a lesser amount of building on lots. Member Smith said that, in the case of the particular addition in the Country Club District debated earlier this year, he felt there was some artificial interpretation of the ordinance with which he did not agree. Staff is When huge houses go 5/7/90 45 up that are out of character with the neighborhood, that becomes an issue. said he has heard comments that the community does seem to be getting denser and the development proposals that have been coming in are dense looking. Member Paulus commented that density and massiveness are the problem. example, the Clark development at 70th and Cahill under the density law is low, but under the massing law is high. counsel and the Planning Department whether we can legally adopt an ordinance to control massiveness. happening with the future of Edina is totally different than the past. He As an She said she would need help from legal To rely on past history will not help because what is Member Rice said there used to be several things in the community that served to control massing, e.g. concern for neighbors, taste, monetary restraints. All of those seem to be lacking now. for variances to build more. He said he would like staff to research whether any dity has a cubic foot ordinance whereby there would be some ratio as to cubic footage allowed on a lot. Residents are building to the limit and then asking Nancy Horn, 4511 Browndale Avenue, stated that in the Country Club District it started about two years ago and now one house after the other on small lots is doubling in size. She mentioned that Lake Forest, Illinois had a similar issue come before their Council and offered to find out how they handled the problem. Jack Burbidge, 4518 Casco Lane, said he was concerned about the number of large additions being added to the already large homes on small lots in the Country Club District that change the appearance and character of the neighborhood. Another concern is the renovators who come in and buy a house, build a huge addition on it with no stake in the neighborhood themselves, and then sell it for a quick profit. He said some additional controls are needed. He suggested the Council immediately direct the Planning Department to be conservative in interpreting the existing ordinances. If there is a questionable case then the variance procedure should be applied. the people for whose protection the setback, size and footprint requirements are designed will be safeguarded. In. that way the concerns of the neighbors can be discussed openly and Manager Rosland mentioned that some cities have architectural review boards, however, past Councils have not wanted to get into that. staff can be more conservative in interpreting the ordinances. cubic foot restrictions, review the Forest Lake ordinance and bring back additional information to address the massing issue. of the Council’s comments was that they wish to be more restrictive. If the Council wishes Staff will look at He said his interpretation Member Paulus said that some of the other things to consider in looking at the issue are solid walls constructed towards homes, roof lines, how it overlooks private areas, etc. Another concern is the lack of control over what is constructed in a historic neighborhood such as the Country Club District as well as quality of materials that are used. Member Rice added that after what has been discussed staff should have a better idea of direction and he would like to see them come back with what are possible tools the Council could use if they wish to address these concerns. Member Kelly observed that she felt it important to get comment from various neighborhood groups at some point in the process. such input be obtained in a workshop setting. Member Paulus suggested that Member Smith said creation of an architectural Feview board should be far down on the list of proposals of what the City could consider as it would create other problems. 46 5/7/90 Following the discussion it was the consensus of the Council to direct staff to tighten the interpretation of existing ordinance requirements and to keep the Council advised on the progress of a draft ordinance relating to massing. *EEARING DATE OF 5/21/90 SET FOR PLANNING MA- and was seconded by Member Rice setting May 21, 1990 as hearing date for the following Planning matters: 1) 2) Road and West 70th Street. I Motion was made by Member Smith Preliminary Plat Approval - Subdivision of Lot 5, Block 1, Muir Woods Final Rezoning Approval - Highcroft Townhomes, Ron Clark Construction - Cahill Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. ORDINANCE NO. 613 (UPDATING FIRE CODE) ADOPTED: SECOND WING WAIVED Member Rice said he asked that Ordinance No. 613 be removed from the consent agenda because he questioned if the City's Fire Code must meet the provisions of the State Fire Code. - Chief Paulfranz responded that Minnesota Statute requires that local fire codes must meet the minimum provisions of the State Uniform Fire Code (UFC). By adopting the proposed Ordinance No. 613 the City would be adopting the 1988 UFC; currently the City is enforcing the 1982 UFC. Member Rice also asked how this would affect the City's ordinance on barbecues. Chief Paulfranz said we would be adopting the state requirements regarding barbecues, that we can be more restrictive than the UFC but not less restrictive. The City's current ordinance on barbecues prohibits the use of barbecues on balconies in multiple dwellings except those of all masonry construction. the new ordinance use of open flame barbecues on balconies would be prohibited in multiple dwellings of three units or more regardless of type of construction. Member Rice made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 613 as follows, with waiver of Second Beading: Under ORDINANCE NO. 613 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE MINNESOTA UNIFORH FIRE CODE AND THE NATIONAL FIRE CODE BY REFERENCE, ESTABLISHING AUT'HORIZING ESTABLISHMENT OF FIRE LANES, IMPOSING A A BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION, REQUIRING PERMTS, PENALTY AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 612, 621AND 631 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: incorporated herein by reference as an ordinance of the City: Section 1. Adoption of Codes and Standards. (a) There is adopted and The Minnesota Uniform Fire Code promulgated by the Department of Public Safety of the State of Minnesota, published in the State Register on Hay 22, 1989, and adopted as published in the State Register on September 25, 1989, (which Code is hereinafter referred to as the "MlJFC") with the changes and omissions hereinafter set forth; The 1988 Edition of the Uniform Fire Code, as published by the International Conference of Building Officials and the Western Fire Chiefs Association (hereinafter referred to as "UFC"), with the changes and omissions hereinafter set forth. (b) Section 2. Codes and Ordinance on File. One copy of each of the following codes, with the changes and omissions hereinafter set forth, each marked "Official Copy", shall be filed in the office of the Clerk prior to publication of this ordinance and shall remain on file and available for use and examination by the public : (a) mc; (b) UFC. The Clerk shall furnish copies of said codes or standards at cost to any person upon request. office of the fire department for distribution to the public. Also, additional copies of this ordinance shall be kept in the Section 3. Definitions. I 5/7/90 47 (a) (b) Wherever the term "chief" is used in the HUFC, it shall mean the Chief Section 4. Establishment of the Bureau of Fire Prevention. (a) Wherever the term "jurisdiction" is used in the HUFC, it shall mean the City of Edina. of the Edina Fire Department or his authorized representative. The Bureau of Fire Prevention is hereby established in the Fire Department of the City. the Chief of the Fire Department. Prevention shall be the Chief of the Fire Department, an Assistant Chief of the Fire Department and all Inspectors of the Fire Department. Chief of the Fire Department from time to time may appoint Inspectors of the Fire Department. A report of the Bureau of Fire Prevention shall be made annually and transmitted to the Manager. ordinance with such statistics as the Chief of the Fire Department may wish to include therein; the Chief of the Fire Department shall also recommend any amendments to this ordinance which in his judgment shall be desirable. It shall be operated under the supervision of The members of the Bureau of Fire The (b) It shall contain all proceedings under this Section 5. Enforcement: ADpeals. The provisions of this ordinance shall be enforced by the Building Official and the Bureau of Fire Prevention in accordance with Section 3 through 10, inclusive, of Ordinance No. 471. Appeals from any order made by the Building Official or the Bureau of Fire Prevention shall be made in accordance with Sections 3 through 10, inclusive, of Ordinance No. 471. and for each annual renewal thereof shall be established by Ordinance No. 171. All permits unless otherwise noted shall expire one year from the date of issuance. Section 6. Permit Fee. The fee for each permit required by this ordinance Section 7. Orders Establishinp Fire Lanes. The Bureau of Fire Prevention is hereby authorized to order the establishment of fire lanes on public or private property as may be necessary to comply with the MUFC and in order that the travel of fire equipment may not be interfered with and that access to fire hydrants or buildings may not be obstructed. Fire lanes in existence prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be permitted to remain using their present signs so long as such signs are maintained in good repair and condition. The first and last sign shall mark the limits of the fire lane. Prevention determines that such signs are not maintained as herein required, it may require signing as provided in paragraph c) of this Section. Fire lanes established or existing fire lanes changed following the effective date of this ordinance shall be marked by signs, not more than 50 feet apart, bearing the words, "NO PARKING, FIRE LANE, BY ORDER OF FIRE CHIEF", with the first and last sign marking the limits of the fire lane. background, shall be 12 inches by 18 inches in size, and shall othervise comply with the standards from time to time established by the Chief for such signs. If the Bureau of Fire The signs shall have red letters and a red border on a white - d) When the fire lane is on public property or public right-of-way, the sign or signs shall be erected and maintained by the City, and vhen on private property, they shall be erected by the owner at his expense within 30 days after he has been notified of the order and thereafter shall be maintained by the owner at his expense. erected, no person shall park a vehicle on or otherwise occupy or obstruct the fire lane. Whenever any member of the Bureau of Fire Prevention of a Police Officer finds a vehicle unattended and obstructing a fire lane, such member of the Bureau of Fire Prevention or Police Officer is hereby authorized to provide for removal of such vehicle to the nearest convenient garage or other place of safety outside the limits of the fire lane, at the After such signs are (e) 48 5/7/90 expense of the owner. Violations of this section are exempted from the provisions of Section 8 of this ordinance and instead shall be governed and enforced by Ordinance No. 175. I (f) Section 8. Violation. No person shall be convicted of violating this ordinance unless he or she shall have been given notice of the violation in writing and a reasonable time to comply. of any order made pursuant hereto shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to penalties pursuant to Ordinance No. 175. Section 9. Penal-. Any person violating any provision of this ordinance or Section 10. Amendments to the WUFC and UFC. (a) Article 4 "Permits", of UFC is included in its entirety with the following changes: (1) Section 4.108,l.l of UPC is amended to read as follows: "Qhere a single contain,er or the aggregate of interconnected containers is 500 or more gallons water. capacity, the installer shall obtain a permit and plan approval from the Chief." Article 10, "Fire Protection" of UFC as adopted by H[TpC is amended as follows : (1) (b) Section 10.301 of UFC as adopted by MTPC is amended by adding thereto a new subsection (g), reading as follows: "(g) Permits for installation of fire protection systems shall be secured as provided for in City Ordinance No. 645, and fees established as provided for in City Ordinance No. 171." Article 11, "General Precautions Against Fire" of UJ?C as adopted by MUFC is amended as follows: (1) Section 11.117(a) of UPC as adopted by HDFC is amended by deleting (c) the phrase "when required by the Chief". provisions of the HUFC, UPC, and the Minnesota State Building Code, as adopted by the ordinances of the City of Edina, the provisions of this ordinance, the most stringent provision shall apply. entirety . upon its passage and publication. I Section 11. Interpretation. In the event of a conflict between the Section 12. Repealer. Ordinances 612, 621 and 631 are repealed in their Section 13. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately - ATTEST : P Mayor City Clerk Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Smith. Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Ordinance adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 803-A4 (DELETING LIMITATION OF SERVICE BY PLANNING COMMISSION MEKEEEW ADOPTED: SECOND READING WAIVED Member Rice said he had asked this ordinance to be removed from the consent agenda because he felt the prior action taken by the Council concerning boards and commissions dealt with the issue. Attorney Erickson explained that this is a "housekeeping" amendment to delete the limitation on service of Commission members to be consistent with the prior action of the Council on this subject. Also, the "automatic termination provisions" could present difficulties, e.g. a member who may have been "automatically" terminated by virtue of the ordinance language may yet appear at a Commission meeting andvote on a controversial matter. then take the position that the vote of that member was improperly cast and the Commission action was void. Parties opposing the action could 5/7/90 49 Member Rice moved adoption of 0rdinance.No. 803-A4 as follows, with waiver of Second Reading: ORDINANCE NO. 803-A4 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 803 TO DELETE LIMITATION ON SERVICE BY COMMISSION MEMBERS, TO CORRECT ORDINANCE REFERENCES, AM) TO ALLOW COUNCIL TO REPLACE ANY COMMISSION MEMBER NOT HAVING A LEG& RESIDENCE IN THE CITY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: therefrom the following sentence: Section 1. Section 2 of Ordinance No. 803 is hereby amended to delete "However, no Commission members shall be reappointed to the Commission if he or she has served on the Community Development and Planning Commission for a cumulative period of twelve or more years (whether or not consecutive)." Sec. 2. References in Ordinance No. 803 to other ordinances of the City are hereby amended and corrected as follows: a. References to "Platting Ordinance (No. 801)" are changed to "Platting Ordinance (No. 804)"; b. References to "Zoning Ordinance (No. 811)" are changed to "Zoning Ordinance (No. 825)"; c. Reference in the heading of Ordinance No. 803 to Ordinance 3s- $01. Is corrected to No. 802; and d. Reference to the "Flood Plain Management Ordinance (No. 815)" is changed to the "Flood Plain Overlay District (Sect. 21 of Ordinance No. 825)". Sec. 3. The next to the last sentence of Section 2 of Ordinance No. 803 is "commission members who discontinue legal residence in the City may be removed from office by the Mayor vith the consent of a majority of members of the Council." Sec. 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage hereby amended to read as follows: and publication. ATTEST : Mayor *&3= City Clerk Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Paulus. Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Ordinance adopted. ORDINANCE NO. 1620A2 (REMOVAL OF BOARD AND COMKISSION MEMBERS) ADOPTED: SECOND READING WAIVED Attorney Erickson explained that he had proposed the ordinance amendment to change an automatic removal from office to a permissive removal of board and commission members who fail to attend three consecutive meetings or four meetings in 12 months. The concern is that an automatic removal may result in someone being removed from office "automatically" but who thereafter may continue to attend and vote which would then give rise to questions about the propriety of the meeting and validity of the vote. Member Rice made a motion to adopt Ordinance No. 162-82 as follows, with waiver of Second Reading: ORDINANCE NO. 162-82 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 162 TO PROVIDE THAT FAILURE TO ATTEND REGULAR OR SPECIAL MEETINGS OF BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MAY RESULT IN REMOVfi FROM OFFICE 50 5/7/90 THE CITP COUNCIL OF THE GITP OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: f ollovs : Section 1. "Sec. 2. Removal. Any public member of either the Edina Park Board, Edina Tiuman Relations Commission, Edina Environmental Quality Commission, Teen Recreation Board, Building Construction Appeals Board, Board of Appeals and Adjustment, the Planning Commission, or any other board or commission hereafter created or approved by the City Council, who fails to attend three (3) consecutive meetings thereof, whether regular or special, or who fails to attend any four (4) meetings, whether regular or special, in the span of twelve consecutive months, may be removed from office by the Mayor vith the consent of a majority of the members of the Council." Sec. 2, Section 2 of Ordinance No. 162 is hereby amended to read as This ordinance shall be in full force and effect immediately on its passage and publication. ATTEST : Mayor Motion for adoption of the ordinance was seconded by Member Paulus. Rollcall: Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Ordinance adopted. I CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS HEBRD Trappine: of Beavers in Nine Mile Creek - Leo Hopf, 6625 Naomi Drive. Jim Zimmerman said he has an office on Ohms Lane and would speak on behalf of Mr. Hopf to express their concern regarding City personnel setting snares to catch beavers in Nine Mile Creek in the vicinity of Ohms Lane. In talking with City staff, it was confirmed that the policy is to trap and kill the beavers that have been cutting down trees and building a dam. alternative, they proposed that the City live trap the beavers for relocation and volunteered to help with relocating the beavers. As an Engineer Hoffman explained that the City policy has been when beavers block a stream or pond that causes flooding upstream staff contacts the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) for a licensed trapper. According to the DNR, it is unlawful in the State of Minnesota to transport live beavers. For the record, Chief Swanson said he had agreed with Mr. Hopf to hold off on trapping until this could be brought to the Council. era when the City banned use of leg hold traps as being inhumane. that ordinance was amended to allow leg hold traps to be used under certain circumstances, e.g. trapper licensed by the State of Minnesota and with the written permission of the City Manager. In this case, the trapper did not get permission from the City. the procedure as required by ordinance. The problem in this case was that the beavers were in a watershed area and if that got blocked there would be damage to the upstream area. Removal of the dam is an alternative, but history has shown that the beavers will rebuild the dam almost as fast as it is removed. The answer to effectively control the damming of Nine Mile Creek is to remove the beavers. The use of live traps would present a hazard to other animals and/or people. The process was developed through the 1977-78 Subsequently, If the trapping were to resume the trapper would follow I Member Paulus asked how many times per year the City receives requests to remove beavers. Chief Swanson so far this year there have been two requests; annually the City gets 3-4 calls. watershed. water areas where the beavers are cutting down trees on their property for food. This has been one of the few that has involved a Most of the time the complaints come from residents that live near 5/7/90 51 Following further discussion, it was suggested that the concerned residents work with the DNR to change the law regarding transporting beavers. Animal Control Ordinance - Roger Dreher, 1 Spur Road, referred to his recent appeal to the Minnesota Court of Appeals stemming from a citation he had received for his barking dog. Ordinance was unconstitutionally vague on the matter of whether a dog's barking disturbed others. review the ordinance with a critical eye because he believed that no dog owner in the city would be in compliance. Laws like that cause people to ignore the law. Given the situation in the Animal Control Ordinance, Mr. Dreher said it would be reasonable to assume that within the various City ordinances there are other equally potentially unwise provisions. ordinances on a regular basis, check what is happening in the courts and attempt to keep the ordinances clear. Finally, an issue like this could easily be avoided if the City had a mechanism in place that would enable people to settle neighborhood disputes in a lot of situations outside of the legal system. The Appeals Court had ruled that Edina's Animal Control He said this would provide an opportunity for the City to He suggested that the City review the Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly commented that the West Suburban Mediation Board would do just that, that the expenses he had incurred was because he chose to appeal the case, that the ordinances are there to insure the quality of life for Edina's citizens and, generally speaking, are enforced on a complaint basis. Further, the City does periodically review its ordinances. mediation services he would have sought to resolve the issue through those means. Location of Dog Kennel - Henry Langer, 7101 Antrim Court, protested a warning notice he had received that the location of his dog kennel was in violation of the Animal Control Ordinance No. 312. He said he had built his home in 1984 and at that time the building plans were checked by the City Building Department, which plans included the location of the kennel. When he constructed a privacy fence the City inspector checked it for height and no one said at that point that the kennel location was illegal. to be in compliance. destroying his yard. with the situation. Mr. Dreyer said that had he known of the Now the City is requesting that the kennel be moved Mr. Langer said he had no place to move it to without He asked for a waiver or some financial assistance to deal Mayor Pro-Tem asked for background information on this case. that in the past dog barking was the cause of complaints from the neighbors. the recent past, the location of the kennel was complained about. Control Officer issued a warning notice on May 7, 1990. one day compliance that the dogs be removed and a 30 day compliance that the kennel be removed. Chief Swanson said he had talked with Mr. Langer and suggested a five day process in which he would check with the Planning and Building staff to see if in their reviews they would have caught the illegal location of the kennel. Chief Swanson said In The Animal The notice asked for a Mr. Langer explained that his wife is a piano teacher and a lot of her students enter the studio through the back yard. He said if he removed the door to the kennel it would comply with the ordinance, e.g. the entire yard can be used to keep the dogs. If one dog was leashed within the kennel (that would leave the yard if it were not) it would violate the ordinance. Following some discussion, Manager Rosland suggested that staff investigate the kennel location situation. also be part of the picture. place to deal with Mr. Langer's concern. AWARD OF BID FOR RETAINING WAIL - BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE LESSON AREA CONTINUED TO 5/21/90 Motion was made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Smith to continue the award of bid for retaining wall at Braemar Golf Course Lesson Area to Further, that dog barking is a sincere problem and may He said the City would work with the systems in 52 5/7/90 May 21, 1990, because of the absence of Mayor Richards who had asked for additional information. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. BID AWARDED FOR ELECTRIC GOLF CARS Manager Rosland explained that staff is recommending award to second low bidder because the low bidder did not meet specifications. He said the low bidder, Minnesota Golf Cars, Inc. is aware that he did not meet specifications. Motion vas made by Member Rice for award of bid for 15 electric golf cars to recommended bidder, Golf Car Midwest, at $34,695.00. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. BIDS REJECTED FOR ICE RESURFACER - PHASE I CEHTENNIAL LAKES Member Rice to reject all bids for an ice resurfacer for Phase I Centennial Lakes. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. Motion was made by BID AWARDED FOR GOOSE MANAGEMENT CONTRACT management contract any citizen could request removal of geese. Hughes said it would require a certain concentration of geese to make a drive feasible. part of July when the geese are flightless. Member Paulus asked if under the goose Assistant Manager He said there is only a three week window at the end of June or first Member Rice made a motion for award of bid for a three year goose management contract to sole bidder, University of Minnesota, at $21,000.00. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. *BID AWARDED FOR MI;L POND WEED HARVESTING was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for Mill Pond weed harvesting to recommended low bidder, Minnetonka Weed Eaters, at $7,840.00. Motion was made by Member Smith and Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR RE-WORK OF PEAT - FAIRWAY #2 - BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for re-work of peat at #2 fairway at Braemar Golf Course to recommended low bidder, Perkins Landscape, at $5,808.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. UPDATE GIVEN ON TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS dated April 16, 1990 from Assistant Manager Hughes concerning the tax increment districts approved by the Council on April 1, 1990 (44th & France, Valley View & Wooddale and 70th Street and Cahill Road). Manager Rosland referred to a memorandum Based on the Council's action, it is staff's understanding that projects and proposals associated with these districts should be generated by the property owners and the development community rather than the staff. not initiated any discussions with property owners or developers concerning projects in these three areas. Therefore, staff has Subsequently, there has been some discussion that the Council may wish to consider the continuation of dialogue between the City and property owners through the City's consultant, Peter Meyers, or entertain any proposals by developers. 5/7/90 53 Manager Rosland said staff is looking for direction from the Council as to what staff should or should not do. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly asked for clarification of the additional restrictions on the tax increment financing bill that was passed by the Legislature at the end of the session. Assistant Manager Hughes referred to a letter dated May 7, 1990 from Attorney Jerry Gilligan in which he explained the restrictions. For districts for which the request for certification was filed during April 1990, the bill provided that the amendments are effective for such districts if by June 1, 1991 none of the following actions are taken: (i) a development agreement is entered into by the City for a site in the district, (ii) bonds were issued to finance project costs, or (iii) the City acquires property in the district after April 1, 1990. The effect of this on the three districts recently created is that unless one of the conditions is met for each such district by June 1, 1991, such district will no longer qualify as a tax increment district after such date. After some discussion, it was the consensus of the Council that staff be authorized to retain the services of Peter Meyers, consultant, for approximately a total of 45 hours to facilitate discussion with the property owners on potential development/redevelopment in the three districts and that staff then report back on what progress has been made. DOG LICENSING RENEWAL PROCESS APPROVED for renewal of dog licenses has been under consideration by the Council. had prepared and presented a report at the March 19, 1990 meeting on dog licensing which included facts as to rational for licensing, number of licenses issued, number of renewals, estimates of the dog population and estimated cost for renewal mailout notices which had been recommended by staff. Manager Rosland recalled that a process Staff Member Rice made a motion to approve the dog licensing renewal process as presented and recommended by staff. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. REOUEST FOR VACATION OF PORTION OF DUGGAN PLAZA DENIED Manager Rosland recalled that at the meeting of April 16, 1990, the Council acknowledged receipt of a letter from E. David Reyes, 701 Fourth Avenue South, Minneapolis, requesting the City to vacate a small center island in Duggan Plaza (PIN 04-116-21-34-0061) so that he could purchase the lot and build a home on it. staff for further study and recommendation. The letter was referred to Ownership of that property in the event of vacation has been researched by Attorney Erickson and he has by letter dated April 23, 1990 opined that based on his findings the end result of a vacation and reconveyance by the City would be that the property owner to the north would own two 35 foot strips of land, one north and one south of the island in the middle of the street and the State of Minnesota would own the island in the middle of the street. The County may be willing to sell the island to the adjoining property owner north of the vacated street. adjoining strips of land if the City were to grant the vacation, staff would recommend that the request be denied. Because of the complexity of the ownership of the small island and Member Rice made a motion to deny the request of E. David Reyes for vacation of the small center island in Duggan Plaza (PIN 04-116-21-34-0061) and that staff inform Hr. Reyes of the Council's decision. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus . Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. 54 5/7/90 REPORT GIVEN ON COURT OF APPEALS DECISION - ANIMAL CONTROL ORD. NO. 312 Manager Rosland referred to the Minnesota Court of Appeals decision handed down on April 17, 1990 on the appeal of Roger H. Dreher on a citation for violation of the City's Animal Control Ordinance No. 312. The Court ruled that the ordinance is unconstitutionally vague. alternatives to this decision and will report their recommendations to the Council. Staff and the City Prosecutor are researching various FEASIBILITY REPORT PRESENTED: STORM Sm IMPROVEMENT NOS. STS-204. STS-205 AND STS-206 APPROVED been reviewed for feasibility and were consistent with the City's overall stormwater management program. funded through the stormwater utility fund. Engineer Fran Hoffman advised that the following projects have The storm sewer projects are recommended to be - STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. STS-204 -Location: Easement Line - Parkwood Knolls Addition Description: Replacement of an existing pipe and pond outlet located north of Parkwood Road and east of Westwood Court STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. STS-205 Location: Easement Line - East Sunnyslope Road Description: Replacement of existing catch basin and pipe on East Sunnyslope Road and addition of a backyard drain west of East Sunnyslope Road STORM SEWER IMPROVEMENT NO. STS-205 Location: Easement Line - Dundee Road Description: Extending an existing storm sewer into backyard area which is low point for several backyards. Area was flooded in frozen ground/rain conditions in March; neighbors have petitioned for this addition Estimated Cost $17,801.28 16,327.36 5,885.60 Engineer Hoffman explained that Storm Sewer Improvement No. STS-205 would solve flooding in winter conditions as happened on March 11, 1990 in an unusual rainstorm event. The affected property owners were advised by letter that this would not solve the excessive flooding problems experienced during the 1987 rainstorm. Tony Becker, 5536 Mirror Lakes Drive, said he was in favor of the project and that they need all the help they can get in that low area. In addition, Engineer Hoffman advised that the City had received a request for an emergency overflow system from the neighbors bordering the Walnut Ridge Park area. The request is to provide an overflow pipe under Vernon Avenue where Nine Mile Creek comes out of Walnut Ridge Park. Watershed District is reviewing this type of improvement in light of the 1987 (Federal disaster) rainstorm event. the Nine Mile Watershed District Board to review and fund this type of project. Staff is aware that Nine Mile Creek Staff would recommend that the City request Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION APPROVING PUNS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS AND DIRECTING ADVEXTISEMIBIT FOR BIDS FOR. STORM SF3ER IMPROVEMENT NOS. STS-204, STS-205 AND STS-206 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA: 1. The plans and specifications for the proposed improvements set forth in the following Advertisement for Bids form, heretofore prepared by the City Engineer and now on file in the office of the City Clerk are hereby approved. 2. The Clerk shall cause to be published in the Edina Sun and Construction Bulletin the following notice of bids for improvements: (Official Publication) CITY OF EDINA 4901 U. 50TH STREET 5/7/90 55 EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS STORM SEWER CONTRACT 90-7 (ENG) IMPROVEMENT NOS. STS-204. STS-205. STS-206 BIDS CLOSE MAY 31, 1990 SEALED BIDS will be received and opened in the Council Chambers in Edina City Hall, 4801 West 50th Street at 11:OO A.M., Thursday, May 31, 1990. The Edina City Council will meet at 7:OO P.M., Monday, June 4, 1990 to consider said bids. following are approximate major quantities: The 711 LF 12 C 15" Storm Sewer Pipe 2 EA Manholes 3 EA Catch Basins 125 TONS C1. 5A 1,232 SY Sod Bids shall be in a sealed envelope with a statement thereon showing the work covered by the bid. Bids should be addressed to the City Engineer, City of Edina, 4801 West 50th Street, Edina, Minnesota 55424, and may be mailed or submitted personally to the City Engineer. Bids received by the City Engineer, either through the mail or by personal submission, after the time set for receiving them may be returned unopened. Work must be done as described in plans and specifications on file in the office of the City Clerk. (by check). specifications with a bona fide bid. accompanied by bid bond or certified check payable to the City of Edina in the amount of at least ten (10) percent of all bids. separate check for $5.00 payable to the City of Edina for postage and handling. BY ORDER OF THE EDINA CITY COUNCIL. Plans and specifications are available for a deposit of $25.00 No bids will be considered unless sealed and Said deposit to be returned upon return of the plans and All plans mailed, enclosed Marcella M. Daehn City Clerk Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Rice. Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Resolution adopted. Member Smith made a motion directing staff to request the Nine Mile Creek Watershed District Board to review and fund a project for an emergency overflow system for Nine Mile Creek under Vernon Avenue where it comes out of Walnut Ridge Park. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. *ON-SALE WINE LICENSE/ON-SALE BEER LICENSE APPROVED FOR SCOTT KEE'S TOUR DE FRANCE RESTAURANT. 4924 FRANCE AV SO Member Rice to approve issuance of an on-sale wine license and on-sale 3.2 beer license for Scott Kee's Tour de France Restaurant at 4924 France Avenue So. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by *RESOLUTION ADOPTED APPROVING NAME CHANGE FROM ROGERS CABLESYSTEMS TO KBL CABLESYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. - DBA PARAGON CAB= Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to adopt the following resolution: RESOLUTION GIVING APPROVAL TO A CHBNGE OF NAME OF GRANTEE FROM ROGERS CABLESYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. TO KBL CABLESYSTEMS OF THE SOUTHWEST, INC. D/B/A PARAGON CABLE 56 5/7/90 VHEREAS, Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. ("RCTSI") is the current grantee under the cable communications ordinance ("Franchise") of the City of Edina, Minnesota ("City"); and UEEREAS, RCTSI desires to change its corporate name to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., c/b/a Paragon Cable ("KBLCSI") and has requested the City's approval of the name change; and WHEEWS,'RCTSI does not intend to make any changes to its ownership structure or to the control of its operations, but desires only to change its name; and VHEREAS, KBL Cable, Inc. ("KBLC") and KBLCOH Incorporated ("KBLCOM") are the guarantors of RCTSI's obligations under the Franchise pursuant to a Consent Agreement and Guaranty of Performance given to the City; and VHEBEBS, the Southwest Suburban Cable Commission ("SnSCC") reviewed the request for approval of RCTSI's name change and found no reason to disapprove of the request, provided KBLC, KBLCOM, and KBLCSI first acknowledge and agree in a writing acceptable to SUSCC's member cities that KBLCSI is the corporate successor of RCTSI for all purposes under the Franchise and that KBLC and KBLCOM reaffirm their status as guarantors of KBLCSI's obligations under the Franchise; and UHEREAS, the City joins in the foregoing findings of SWSCC. NOW, THEBEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: The city hereby consents to and approves the change of the name of the grantee under the Franchise from Rogers Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. to KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., d/b/a/ Paragon Cable, provided KBLCOM Incorporated, KBL Cable, Inc., and KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. first file vith the City an Achovledgement and Consent in a form and substance acceptable to the City. 2. all agreements entered into by RCTSI in connection therewith shall remain in full force and effect, except that KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc. shall be deemed to have been substituted as grantee and shall be obligated as RCTSI's successor in interest to perform all of RCTSI's duties and obligations thereunder. Passed and adopted this 7th day of Hay, 1990, by the City of Edina. CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA ~ 1. The City declares that as of the time of this Resolution, the Franchise and BY 24.Y && c Its Mayor City Clerk Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. WRDINLllJCE NO. 1120-A5 (TO CHANGE NAME OF GRBNTEE) ADOPTED: SECOND READING WAIVED Motion vas made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to adopt Ordinance No. 1120-85 as follows, with waiver of Second Reading: 0RDI"CE NO. 1120-85 TO CWGE THE NAME OF GRANTF33 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1120 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDINA, MINNESOTA, ORDAINS: amended to read as follows: corporation, d/b/a/ Paragon Cable." This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption and publication, provided that it shall become effective only if all of the Cities of Eden Prairie, Edina, Hopkins, Minnetonka and Richfield adopt an ordinance similar to this Ordinance within sixty (60) days after the adoption of this Ordinance. Section 1. That Article I, Section 2, Paragraph J of said Ordinance be "J. "Grantee" is KBL Cablesystems of the Southwest, Inc., a Minnesota Sec. 2. CITY OF EDINA, lXC"J3SOTA ATTEST : BY QdA si& Its Hayor 5/7/90 Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. REQUEST FROM CITY OF MINNJUPOLIS FOR SUPPORT ON FUNDING PROPOSAL TO STUDY CONTAMINATION RISKS ON UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER CONTINUED TO 5/21/90 Motion w8.c made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Smith to continue the request f;-*z. the City of Minneapolis for support on a funding proposal to study contaxbatis; risks on the Upper Mississippi River to May 21, 1990. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. CONFLICT NOTED WITH 1990 AMM ANNUAL MEETING ON 5/16/90 out that the Futures Commission meeting is scheduled for May 16 which is in conflict with the AMM Annual Meeting on the same date. for the Council Members to attend the Futures Commission meeting and that he would have someone from staff monitor the AMM meeting. IMC 1990 ANNUAL CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 12-15 Council Members that the 1990 League of Minnesota Cities Annual Conference will be held in Duluth, MN on June 12 - 15. He said he would attend with someone from staff and that reservations will be made for any Council Member wishing to go. Manager Rosland pointed He said it was important Manager Rosland reminded the APPROVAL GIVEN TO SUPPORT CITY OF RICEFIELD REGARDING DUAL TRACT AIRPORT STUDY Manager Rosland said he had received a call from Mayor Steve Quam of the City of Richfield advising that the City of Minneapolis is insisting on a one tract study regarding the Minneapolis International Airport (relocation). Richfield is asking for a letter of support from the City of Edina saying we encourage a dual tract study which include keeping the airport at its present location. consensus of the Council that Manager Rosland write a letter of support as reque s t ed . It was the CLAIMS PAID approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated 05/07/90 and consisting of 34 pages: General Fund $410,715.37, Communications $682.73, Art Center $56,674.33, Golf Course Fund $38,604.99, Recreation Center Fund $4,677.18, Gun Range Fund $71.54, Edinborough Park $11,381.12, Utility Fund $254,676.91, Storm Sewer Utility $5,466.57, Liquor Dispensary Fund $5,095.75, Construction Fund $32,231.00, Total $820,277.49 and for confirmation of payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated 03-31-90 and consisting of 18 pages: General Fund $267,085.95, Art Center $1.367.95, Swimming Pool Fund $68.27, Golf Course Fund $15,269.73, Recreation Center Fund $11,533.75, Gun Range Fund $563.01, Edinborough Park $11,699.99, Utility Fund $16,520.86, Storm Sewer Utility $596.04, Liquor Dispensary Fund $205,166.15, Total $529,871.70. Motion was made by Member Smith and was seconded by Member Rice to Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly declared the meeting adjourned at 12:30 a.m. . .. .. . . . . .. . . .. r . .. . ._ .. .-;-.' .*,. . .. . .,-. , . . . . ,. . . .. ,:a' . . , . ~ ;.-:2:..2.s I.:.::: :. ,:. z .- .: .,.. *. . , , .-.:,..:* ,:;..;. :, :.'. . '