Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19910107_regular278 IfIEmTES OF THE REGUIAR HEETING OF "HE EDIHB CITP COUNCIL AT CITY HAIL I JANUARY 7, 1991 . ROUCAU Answering rollcall were Members Paulus, Rice, Smith and Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly. OATHS OF OFFICE TAKEN the City Clerk to Jack Rice and Glenn L. Smith who had been elected for four year terms to January 1, 1995. The oath of office as Council Member was administered by I APPOINTHE3T OF MAYOR PRO-TEK Member Rice made a motion to appoint Member Kelly as Mayor Pro-Tem. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. CONSENT AGENDA ITEPIS ADOPTED Member Rice to approve and adopt the consent agenda items as presented. Motion vas made by Member Paulus and vas seconded by Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. PRE-Y PUT FOR BEI;FBY ADDITION DENIED UPON ADOPTION OF FINDINGS OF FACT Planner Larsen presented Findings, Decision, and Reasons in support for denial of the application of Richard Belfry for the subdivision of Lot 67, Morningside, in response to Council action of December 17, 1990. delivered to Peter Bachman, attorney for Mr. Belfry, with a copy by mail to Mr. Belfry. A copy of the Findings were also delivered to Annette Christianson, 4247 Grimes Avenue South, the contact person for the neighborhood. Planner Larsen noted that neither Mr. Belfry or Mr. Bachman, his attorney, were present and recommended that the opening recital paragraph be amended to indicate that they were present on December 17, 1990, but not on January 7, 1991. Member Smith suggested that the opening paragraph be further amended to indicate that copies of the Findings, Decision, and Reasons had been sent to Mr. Belfry and Mr. Bachman prior to the meeting. five - "wold" should be "would" . Copies of the Findings have been He also noted a misspelled word on line six of page Member Smith made a motion that the Findings, Decision, and Reasons document be amended to reflect the suggested changes. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. Mayor Pro-Tem then called for public comment on the draft Findings, Decisions, and Reasons in support of denial of the proposed subdivision. objections were heard. No public comment or Member Smith made a motion to adopt the Findhgs, Decision, and Reasons as amended (copy attached) and to deny the application of Richard Beif- for the subdivision of Lot 67, Morningside. Motion to adopt the Findings was seconded by Member Rice. Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR 6610 AND 6620 NORHANDALE ROAD (ENGSTROM MARNIE ADDITION1 Motion was made by Member Paulus and vas seconded by Member Rice for adoption of the following resolution: WHEREAS, the following described tracts of land constitute various separate parcels : RESOLUTION Parcel A - Lot 1, Block 1, EHGSTROH HARNIE ADDITION ., CITY OF EDINA Attachment to Council Ninutes of 1/7/91 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF RICHARD BELFRY FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF LOT 67, MORNINGSIDE (S-90-5) FINDINGS, DECISIOH, AND REASONS The above entitled matter was heard before the City Council on December 17, 1990, and January 7, 1991. Richard Belfry ( 81Proponent11) and Peter Bachman ( 'IProponent s Attorney'#,) were present at the December 17, 1990, meeting. Neither the Proponent nor the Proponent's Attorney were present at the January 7, 1991, meeting. Copies of the Findings, Decision, and Reasons were sent by U.S. Mail to the Proponent and Proponent's Attorney on January 3, 1991. A copy of'the Findings, Decision, and Reasons were sent by FAX to the Proponent's Attorney on January 3, 1990. The City Council, having heard and reviewed all of the facts and arguments presented by the Proponent, the Proponents Attorney, City Staff, and property owners in the vicinity of the Proposed Subdivision, and having heard and reviewed the evidence and law adduced by the Proponent, the Proponent's Attorney, City Staff and property owners, and being fully advised, after due consideration, hereby makes the following: 1. I The Proponent FINDINGS OF FACT , on August 15, 1990 submitted an application for subdivision (the I'Proposed Subdivision") of a 20,000 square foot parcel of land located at 4243 Grimes Avenue South. This. tract of land (the I1Subject Property") is platted property, and is described as Lot 67, Morningside. An existing single dwelling unit building is located on the northerly portion of the Subject Property. According to city records the Subject Property is owned by Richard F. Belfry. E 2 The Proposed Subdivision delineated two, R-1, single dwelling unit lots. Lot 1 of the Proposed Subdivision would include the existing dwelling unit building, and Lot 2 is proposed as a new building site. Each of the lots contain 10,000 square feet of lot area. 3. Edina Ordinance No, 825, (the IIZoning Ordinancef1) imposes the following minimum standards for single dwelling unit lots: Minimum Lot Area 9,000 Square Feet Minimum Lot Width 75 Feet Minimum Lot Depth 120 Feet The Zoning Ordinance defines "Lot widtht1 as follows: "The horizontal distance between side lot lines measured at right angles to the.line establishing lot depth at a point 50 feet from the front lot line." The Zoning Ordinance defines "Lot Deptht1 as follows : "The horizontal distance between the midpoint of the front lot line and the mid point of the .I rear lot line." Lots 1 and 2 of the Proposed Subdivision have a lot width of 50 feet. Therefore, Lots 1 and 2 of the Proposed subdivision do not comply with the Zoning Ordinance standard for Lot Width, 4. Lots in this part of Morningside were originally 100 feet wide. Most of those lots were subdivided into 50 foot 2 I lots prior to annexation by Edina of the Morningside area. Since annexation the City of Edina has approved only two subdivisions of lots in the Morningside plat, one in 1972 and one in 1978. On Grimes Avenue, between 42nd Street and Morningside Road, where the proposed subdivision is located, there were originally 22, 100 foot wide lots, and, of those, 12 yet remain as 100 foot wide lots. One of those remaining 100 foot wide lots is the Subject Property. A proposed subdivision of a lot on this same,block was denied by the City Council in 1984. In addition, one of the ten divided lots, thoug_h divided, has been developed as a single dwelling unit site in conformance with Zoning Ordinance standards. 5. The Zoning Ordinance provides for variances from the requirements of the Ordinance, but only upon finding, that, rlstrict enforcement of this ordinance would cause undue hardship because of circumstances unique to the petitioner's property and that the granting of said variances is in keeping with the spirit and intent of this ordinance.Il Undue hardship is defined as meaning "that the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use as allowed by this ordinance, the plight of the petitioner is due to circumstances unique to his property which were not created by the petitioner, and the variance, if granted, will not,alter the essential 3 - 6. 7. 8. character of the property or its surroundings.Il The Zoning Ordinance goes on to state that economic considerations alone shall not constitute undue hardship if reasonable use of the Ordinance. By Section 14 of Ordinance Ordinancell.), the policies of be considered when reviewing property exists under the No. 804 (the "Subdivision the Comprehensive Plan must a proposed subdivision. The Edina Comprehensive Plan, adopted by the City Council on December.12, 1981, states the following general policy: - Allow further subdivision of developed single family lots only if neighborhood character and symmetry are preserved . The Zoning Ordinance was adopted in 1984 and reaffirmed the 75 foot minimum lot width requirement. The Edina Community Development and Planning Commission (the I1Commissionlt) reviewed the proposed Subdivision at its August 29, 1990, meeting. Several property owners were present and spoke in opposition to the Proposed Subdivision citing issues of character and symmetry of the neighborhood, decreased property values, increased crowding, loss of open space, and the negative precedent which would be set if the Proposed Subdivision were 4 'f I I approved. The Proponent submitted that a precedent for subdivision had been previously set, and that his proposed subdivision would not negatively 'impact the neighborhood. The Commission voted unanimously to I recommend denial of the Proposed Subdivision for the following reasons: - The Proposed Subdivision would negatively impact the existing character and symmetry of the neighborhood. - Approving the Proposed Subdivision would set a undesirable precedent for further subdivision along the 4200 block of Grimes Avenue where the majority of lots remain 100 feet wide, as originally platted. - The Proposed Subdivision would create substandard lots. 9. On December 17, 1990, the Edina City Council conducted a public hearing and received the report and recommendation of the Commission regarding the Proposed Subdivision. Pursuant to,applicable City Ordinances notice of public hearing was published in the Edina Sun Current and mailed to property owners within 350 feet of the Subject Property. At said hearing, surrounding property owners testified in opposition to the Proposed Subdivision. A petition signed by approximately 101 property owners who reside in the vicinity and who oppose the Proposed Subdivision was submitted. Among issues submitted in oral and written testimony were damage to the character 1 5 P and symmetry of the neighborhood, loss of open space, loss of property values, and the undesirable precedent for further subdivisions in the neighborhood. The Proponent submitted a petition supporting approval ofthe ProEosed Subdivision signed by approximately 53 residents who reside in the vicinity of the Proposed Subdivision. . 10. By Minnesota Statutes, Section 462.358, Subdivision 3b., a subdivision application must be preliminarily approved .or disapproved within 120 days following delivery of an application completed in compliance with the City's ordinance, unless an extension of the review period has .been agreed to by the Petitioner. In this case the 120 day period expired on November 13, 1990, however, Petitioner agreed to an extension until January 7, 1991, by which date the City Council must act on the Proposed Subdivision. THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing findings, the City Council does hereby make the following: Decision The application for the Proposed Subdivision by Richard Belfry of Lot 67, Morningside is hereby denied. The above decision is made for the following: 6 I plight is due to circumstances unique to the Subject Property, not created by Petitioner. On the contrary, Petitioners plight is due solely to circumstances created by Petitioner, namely his desire to have two substandard lots. Also, the Subject Property is presently being used as the location for a single dwelling unit.and that is a reasonable use of the Subject Property which will continue to exist under the Zoning Ordinance even if the Proposed Subdivision is denied. Finally, the variances, if granted, would alter the existing character of the property and its surroundings. D.. Property owners in the vicinity have objected to the Proposed Subdivision for reasons of adverse impact on the character and symmetry and property values of the neighborhood and the undesirable precedent for further subdivisions in the vicinity. E. Approval of the Proposed Subdivision could establish a precedent encouraging the replatting of other lots in Grimes Avenue which would adversely alter the character and a Reasons A. The Proposed Subdivision is contrary to policies of the Comprehensive Plan concerning the further subdivision of lots within . developed single family neighborhoods. The policies of the Comprehensive Plan must be considered in deciding whether or not to approve subdivisions. Although many lots in the neighborhood have been subdivided, the character of this block of Grimes Avenue remain that of the original 100 foot side lot. B. Property owners in the vicinity of the Subject Property should have the right to rely upon the recorded plat entitled Morningside and should rightly prAR (hat any modification or replatting of said plat will be compatible with surrounding properties, be in compliance with requirements of applicable ordinances, and that the spaciousness and character of the neighborhood will be preserved. C. Each lot in the Proposed Subdivision would require a variance of 25 feet for lot width. However, Petitioner has not demonstrated the existence of an undue hardship to support the variances. Petitioner has not shown that his 7 I t symmetry of the neighborhood contrary to the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and the requirements of the 8 Zoning Ordinance. 9 .. 1/7/91 ' 279 Parcel B - That part of Government Lot. 3, Section 4, Township 116, Range 21, described as follows: Beginning at a point 230 feet South of North line and 117 feet Uest of East line of said Government Lot 3, in said Section 4, said point of beginning being in Uest line of right of way of State Trrmk Highway No. 100; thence South parallel with East line of said Section 4, a distance of 200 feet, thence West parallel with North line of Government Lot 3, a distance of 350 feet, thence North parallel with East line of said Section 4 a distance of 200 feet thence East 350 feet to point of beginning; and .WHEREAS, the owners of the above tracts of land desire to subdivide said tracts into the following described new and separate parcels (herein called "Parcels"): Lot 1, Block 1, EHGSTROH IIURNIE ADDITION, and the southerly 6 feet of Parcel B as described above and That part of Government Lot 3, Section 4, Township 116, Range 21, described as follows: Beginning at a point 230 feet South of North line and 117 feet West of East line of said Government Lot 3, in said Section 4, said point of beginning being in West line of right of way of State Trunk Highway No. 100; thence South.paralle1 with East line of said Section 4, a distance of 200 feet, thence West parallel with North line of Government Lot 3, a distance of 350 feet, . thence North parallel with East line of said Section 4 a distance of 200 feet thence East 350 feet to point of beginning, except for the Southerly 6 feet thereof. GMEBees, 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 Ordinances Nos. 804 and 825; NOU, THEREFORE, 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 as separate tracts of land but are not waived 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 with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. Resolution adopted on rollcall vote, four ayes. LOT DIVISION APPROVED FOR 5901-5903 VIEU TANE (LOT 30. BLOCK 3. KILLBRNEP SHOReSZ Motion was made by Member Paulus and was seconded by Member Rice for adoption of the following resolution: m, the following described property is at present a single tract of land: WHEREAS, the owners have requested the subdivision of said tract into separate parcels (herein called "Parcels") described as follows: RESOLUTION Lot 30, Block 3, KIIlLBRNEy SHORES DeSCriDtiOn of Southerlv Parcel: All that part of Lot 30, Block 3, KIUUWEY SHORES which lies southerly of a line drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 30 distant 73.78 feet southeasterly of the northwest corner thereof to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 30 distant 92.19 feet southeasterly of the most northerly corner of said Lot 30. DescriDtion of Northerly Parcel: Lot 30, Block 3, SHORES, except that part which lies Westerly of a line drawn from a point on the Northwesterly line of the above described tract distant 32.0 feet Northeasterly of the Northwest corner of said lot, to a point on the Uest line of said lot distant 26.0 feet Southeasterly of the 286 .. 1/7/91 Northvest corner. of said lot 'as measured along said line. Also except that part which lies southerly of a line drawn from a point on the westerly line of said Lot 30 distant 73.78 feet southeasterly of the northwest corner thereof to a point on the easterly line of said Lot 30 distant 92.19 feet southeasterly, of the most northerly corner of said Lot 30. I 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 Ordinances Nos. 804 and 825; NOW, THEREFORE, 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 re-ements and provisions of Ordinance No. 804 and Ordinance No. 825 are hereby vaived to allow said division and conveyance thereof as separate tracts of land but are not waived 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 with the prior approval of this Council as may be provided for by those ordinances. . Resolution adopted on rollcall vote, four ayes. HEBRRJG DATE OF 01/22/91 SET FOR VARIOUS PLANNIMG MA- Member Paul- and was seconded by Member Rice setting January 22, 1991, as hearing date for the following Planning matters: 1) 2) 3) Preliminary Plat Approval - Farrells Parkwood Knolls - Tract A, R.L.S. 1286 - Motion vas made by Conditional Use Permit - Building Expansion - Hennepin County Library - 7001 York Avenue Temporary Conditional Use Permit - Home Occupation - Dr. Joyce Anderson - 7121 Glouchester Avenue 5700 Blee Road. I Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. COUNCIL TO REVIEW AND RESPOND TO HASSING SURVEY massing survey that had been prepared for the Council to review of 21 single family homes which are spread throughout the community. new construction on new lots or previously vacant lots, old homes that have been removed and new homes built in their place, additions and major remodelings that have occurred recently. Planner Larsen presented a Included are examples of Staff is having difficulty addressing the problem of massing and has looked exhaustively at various other approaches to further restrictions, including what other communities have done. For example, in Lake Forest, Illinois, they were attacking a different problem (massive houses built in former fields that were not softened by mature trees and landscaping). lot sizes in Edina, every approach staff has considered seems to fall apart as soon as you move from one neighborhood to the next. With the variety of development and Planner Larsen explained that the homes in the survey are not necessarily examples of good or bad development on which to make judgements, but are cases on which staff would like to get individual Council reaction and how they relate to the rules now in place. It is hoped that, through a consensus, the Council may be able to identify any particular problems and in what specific areas those might be. Staff anticipates that the survey review will be a 2-3 week process. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly said she hoped the Council would be able to review a few of the houses in the survey so that there could be some philosophic discussion on the massing issue at the Council Work Session scheduled for January 12. 1-494 COBBIDOR COMI[ISSION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES APPROVED Planner Larsen -explained that the 1-494 Corridor Commission Joint Powers Organization (JPO) needs . 1/7/91 281 staff help in developing Travel Demand Management (TDM) strategies leading to a TDM Ordinance to be adopted by all five cities. half-time individual for one year to develop the TDM program at a total cost of $15,000. grant and the remaining $7,500 is within the JPO budget. The JPO has recommended hiring a Fifty percent of the cost will be covered by a Metropolitan Council ,I r. Member Paulus introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Minnesota, that it hereby approves the Professional Services Agreement recommended by the 1-494 Corridor Commission Joint Powers Organization, BE IT PUBTHEB resolved that the Mayor and Manager hereby are authorized and directed to execute the Agreement on behalf of the City. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Smith. RESOLUTION Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Re solution adopted . SEFJER BACKUP CLAM OF RICHABD MILLER. 5340 HOLJXWOOD ROAD. ACKNOWLEDGED: MATTER CONTINUED TO 1/22/91 IF NOT RESOLVED Manager Rosland directed the Council's attention to a notice of claim for residence sewer backup at 5340 Hollywood Road, dated December 10, 1990, and a subsequent letter dated January 3, 1991, from Richard R. Miller, the property owner, with additional information. The claim was referred to the City's insurance company who denied the claim. stated that staff would like to review the facts and would recommend that the matter be continued to January 22, 1991, unless it is resolved prior to then. Manager Rosland Richard Miller, 5340 Hollywood Road, was present and agreed to the continuation of the matter. Miller's letter of January 3, 1991. *BID AWARDED FOR CASCADE WE= SEALING PROJECT and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for water well sealing project - Cascade Well, to recommended low bidder, Bergerson-Caswell, at $5,990.00. Mayor Pro-Tem Keily asked that the record acknowledge receipt of Mr. Motion was made by Member Paulus Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR SNOW PLOW AND WING seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for one snow plow and wing to recommended low bidder, Little Falls Machine, Inc., at $7.125.00. Motion was made by Member Paulus and was Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. BID AWARDED FOR SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION AT 6809 NORMANDALE ROAD (BC-12): CONNECTION CHARGES TO BE LEVIED AGAINST PROPERTY house has been moved onto the property at 6809 Normandale Road and the owner has requested the sanitary sewer connection. The property owner, Ronald L. Carlson, has made two digs and has been unable to locate the connection. some relief from the City. Manager Rosland pointed out that the City's policy has been and continues to be that the property owner must bear the cost of water and sewer connection to the tap in the street. The relief offered by the City would be to order the work for the sanitary sewer connection and assess the cost of the project against the property for six years at 9% interest. project to be assessed, the owner must sign an easement, petition, waiver and release form. Manager Rosland explained that a He has asked for In order for the Ronald L. Carlson, 6809 Normandale Road, presented written background information on his request that the City should: 1) additional cost to the property owner because these assessments have.been paid. Provide the lateral sewer connection (#171) to the property line at no 282 . 1/7/91 2) expedite completion of the work and reduce cost to the property owner. 3) the frost season and unproductive digs. Waive the requirement of an "air test" of the pipe to the building so as to Reimburse the property owner an estimated $3,827.00 for added expense due to I . Member Paulus commented that any additional cost may be the responsibility of the seller of the property if the seller had represented to Mr. Carlson that the assessments had been paid and the connections were readily available. discussion and questions relating to the request of the property owner followed. Member Smith then made a motion for award of bid for sanitary sewer connection at 6809 Normandale Road to lov bidder, Hopkins Plumbing & Heating Company, at $3,710.00, subject to the property owner signing an easement, petition. waiver and release form. Further Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject to the property owner signing an easement, petition, waiver and release form: BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina, Mjnnesota, as follows: 1. It is hereby found and determined that a petition has been filed requesting the Council to construct sanitary sewer improvement connection at 6809 Normandale Road and to assess the entire cost of the improvement against the property of the petitioner, and that said petition has been signed by all owners of real property where said improvement is to be located. 2. ordered pursuant to Mhnesota Statutes, Section 429.031(3), (Session Laws of 1961, Chapter 525, Section 1). referred to in all subsequent proceedings as follows: The entire cost of said improvement is hereby ordered to be assessed against the property (PITI 30-028-24-33-0094) described as follows: where said improvement is to be located. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Rice. RESOUPTION The making of said improvement in accordance with said petition is hereby I Said improvement is hereby designated and shall be SANITARY SEWER CONNECTION NO. HC-12 Lot 9 except Hwy, NORMANDAIZ TERRACE Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Resolution adopted . *BID AWARDED FOR CODIFICATION OF ORDINANCES Motion vas made by Member Paulus and was seconded by Member Rice for award of bid for codification of ordinances to recommended bidder, LHC - CLEAR Codification Services, at $5,876.00, plus $28/hr for new material. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. H.R.A. COMHISSIOI!?EBS APPOINTED by Member Rice for consent of myor Pro-Tem Kelly's appointment of the following Edina Housing and Redevelopment Authority commissioners: Motion was made by Member Paulus and was seconded Bernard G. Rice, Jr. 01/02/95 Glenn L. Smith 01/02/95 Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes.' SOD WASTE SOURCE REDUCTION PIAN APPROveD that in order to remain eligible for recycling funding from Hennepin County, cities must have a solid waste source reduction plan. Chandler, Recycling Coordinator, has drafted a proposed plan which lists current City policies which minimize waste, and recommends additional practices to reduce waste. Manager Rosland informed the Council He stated that Janet 1/7/91 283 Member Rice introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Edina, Minnesota, that it hereby approves the Solid Waste Source Reduction Plan for the City of Edina, dated 01/03/91 and as presented by the Recycling Coordinator. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Smith. RESOLUTION Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Resolution adopted. EXPENDITURE OF FORFEITURE MONIES CONTIJ!lUED TO JANUARY 22. 1991 MEETING Manager Rosland advised the Council that forfeiture money has been accumulated over the last several years to a sum of slightly over $40,000. expenditure are quite specific. The Council was referred to a memorandum dated January 3, 1991 from Chief Craig Swanson wherein he recalled that during the 1991 budget hearings, drug forfeiture funds were mentioned as a way of funding new equipment and programs that would enhance police efficiency. Chief Swanson would recommend the planned expenditures of forfeiture funds as listed in his memorandum. Guidelines for its Member Smith made a motion to continue the approval of expenditures of forfeiture monies to the meeting of January 22, 1991, when all Council Members would be present. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith Nays: Kelly Motion carried. EXCUSED ABSENCES POLICY TO BE DRAFTED FOR ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Manager Rosland referred to a letter dated November 14, 1990, from Robert Christianson, Chair of the Park Board, requesting an exception to the attendance policy in order that a board member can continue to serve. The current ordinance provides that any member of an advisory board, commission or'committee who fails to attend three consecutive meetings or who fails to attend any four meetings in twelve months may be removed from office by the Mayor with the consent of the Council. Rosland suggested that in some cases there may be extenuating circumstances regarding absences which should be taken into consideration. Manager Member Smith made a motion directing staff to draft an excused absence policy for advisory board and commissions, to be handled at the board/commission level, to be brought back for Council consideration. In discussing the motion, Member Rice said he would not be in favor of a general excused absence policy because there would be the potential for abuse and, even though there may be unavoidable circumstances that cause a member to miss a meeting, he strongly felt it important that all members be in attendance. To have this handled at the board/commission level would put the chairs in a difficult position. there may be an exception in certain cases. give members an expectation as to exceptions. policy he was suggesting would include notification of the absence to the chair of the board or commission, concurrence of the chair, and then to the Mayor for approval, with the consent of the Council. should be sent to the chair of boards and commissions advising them of the policy and asking them to notify the Council if they foresee an attendance problem. Member Rice suggested that, if there are circumstances whereby a member will miss several consecutive meetings, the member should consider resigning and requesting reappointment after the situation is cleared up. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly said she agreed with Member Rice but felt that Member Smith said a policy would Manager Rosland explained that the Member Paulus said she felt a letter Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. 1/7/91 284 FINANCIAL HEBLTH PROFILE FOR CITY OF EDIW REVIEWED summary, as requested by the Council, of the Financial Health Profile for the City of Edina compiled by the Minnesota Office of the State Auditor. expenditures per capita for year end 1989 for Edina showed a total of $339.52 as compared with Minneapolis at $885.61 (highest City) and Brooklyn Park at $261.38 (lowest City). Revenues per capita showed a total of $462.59 for Edina (lowest city) as compared with Minneapolis at $1159.21 (highest City). indicate that the City of Edina functions very inexpensively in relationship to other cities in the metropolitan area. It was the consensus of the Council that the citizens of Edina should be made aware of this information and that it be included in the About Town publication. Manager Rosland presented a Current . The figures VACANCY ON UC BOARD OF DIRECTORS NOTED Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly noted that there is a vacancy on the League of Minnesota Cities (LMC) Board of Directors. The LMC Board will consider appointing a new board member to fill an unexpired term at its January meeting. included in the Council packets and if any member of the Council would like to submit hisher name for appointment, staff would assist in that procedure. *RESOLUTION ADOPTED DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES FOR PhLIC FUNDS OF CITY Motion was made by Member Paulus and was seconded by Member Rice for adoption of the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED that the First Bank National Association, Minneapolis, HN, Americana State Bank of Edina, Edina, MI, Southwest Fidelity State Bank, Edina, MN, Marquette Bank Minneapolis, Minneapolis, HN ana Noruest Bank MetroWest, Edina, MN, authorized to do banking business in Minnesota, be and hereby are designated as Official Depositories for the Public Funds of the City of Edina, County of Hennepin, Minnesota, until January 1, 1992. Manager Rosland said that a list of the current board was . RESOLUTION DESIGNATING DEPOSITORIES I Resolution adopted on rollcall vote, four ayes. WIGNATORY RESOLUTION ADOPTED Motion was made by Member Paulus and was seconded by Member Rice for adoption of the following resolution: SIGNATORY RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED that the persons holding office as Mayor, Manager and Treasurer of the City of Edina, be, and they hereby are, authorized to act for this municipality in the transaction of any banking business with First Bank National Association, Americana State Bank of Edina, Southwest Fidelity State Bank, Marquette Bank Hnneapolis and Noruest Bank MetroWest (hereinafter referred to as the "Bank") from time to time and until written notice to any Bank to the contrary, to sign checks against said accounts, which checks will be signed by the Mayor, Manager and City Treasurer. Each Bank is hereby authorized and directed to honor and pay any checks against such account if signed as above described, whether or not said check is payable to the order of, or deposited to the credit of, any officer or officers of the City, including the signer or signers of the check. ~ Resolution adopted on rollcall vote, four ayes. WACSIMLE SIGNATURES RESOLUTION ADOPTED seconded by Member Rice for adoption of the follouhg resolution: Motion was made by Member Paulus and was RESOWTTION ADOPTED AUTHORIZING USE OF FACSMILE SIGNATURES BY PUBLIC OFFICIBIS RESOLVED that the use of facsimile signatures by the following named persons: I FREDERICK S. RICHARDS - MAYOR KE"E!lH- E. ROSIAHD - CITY MANAGER JOHH WAILIN - CITY TREASURER on checks, drafts, warrants, warrant-checks, vouchers or other orders of public funds deposited in First Bank National Association, Americana State Bank of Edina, Southwest Fidelity State Bank, Marquette Bank Hixmkzapolis and Norwest Bank 1/7/91 285 MetroWest, be and hereby is approved, and that each of said named persons may authorize said depository banks to honor any such instrument bearing his facsimile signature in such form as he may designate and to charge the same to the account in said depository bank upon which drawn as fully as though it bore his manually written signature and that instruments so honored shall be wholly operative and binding in favor of said depository bank although such facsimile signature shall Motion carried on rollcall vote; four ayes. I have been affixed without his authority. I I-494/169 LAND ACOMSITION COUNTER OFFER APPROVED at the meeting of December 17, 1990, the Council had authorized staff to make a purchase offer of $200,000 for acquisition of the vacant land at the northeast quadrant of 1-494 and Highway 169. The Metropolitan Federal Bank has responded that they would accept $375,000 with no contingencies, warranties, or liabilities to the bank. $290,000. estimated at $50,000 which is a factor for them. Manager Rosland recalled that Staff would recommend that the City counter with an offer of The City's offer was conditioned upon the seller paying all specials Member Rice said that he was most concerned about environmental issues. Planner Larsen responded that a Stage I environmental assessment on the property has been done which concluded that a Stage I1 assessment is not required. Staff is in the process of reviewing the assessment and that warranty would not be bargained away. Member Paulus made a motion that the City make a counter offer of up to $290,000 with the understanding that the seller would pay all special assessments, and that the Mayor and Manager be authorized to executelthe purchase agreement if the offer is accepted. Motion was seconded by Member Smith. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Kelly Motion carried. (Member Rice left the meeting at this point on the agenda) IIENNEPIN COUNTY REPORT "IS THE SHARE FAIR" DISCUSSED: RESOLUTION ADOPTED IN SUPPORT OF COUNTY'S POSITION ON FISCAL DISPARITIES report from Hennepin County entitled "Is The Share Fair" which 'speaks to the Fiscal Disparities Program. commercial/industrial property value in taxes is transferred out of Edina and also out of Hennepin County which results in higher property taxes to Edina residents. Because the Hennepin County Board is concerned about the recent growth in the Fiscal Disparities program, it has taken the position that the size of the tax base contribution pool should be limited to its 1991 level of $291 Million and has asked the Council to adopt a resolution supporting the County's legislative initiative. position. Manager Rosland referred to a He said that under the program a great deal of Manager Rosland recommended that the Council support the County's Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly noted that the Edina school district also suffers through the Fiscal Disparities Program. Member Smith said the County's proposal to lower the target is not the greatest solution and that, personally, he would rather support doing away with the program. Manager Rosland suggested that could be conveyed in the cover letter. Member Smith introduced the folloving resolution and moved its adoption: WHElWS, the Fiscal Disparities Program was enacted by the 1971 Legislature and implemented in 1975, WHElWS, the goal of Fiscal Disparities is to allow all communities in the metro region to share in the region's growth, regardless of where that growth occurs, WEEREAS, the growth of the Fiscal Disparities pool is tied directly to the growth of conrmercial/industrial property value in the metro area, RESOLUTIOEI 288 1/7/91 WHERJW3, about two-thirds of the pool comes from inflation on properties that have had no physical development since the program vas enacted, WEEWLS, about 75% of all municipal tax base losses in 1991vere experienced by IJHENUS, approximately $7 million of commercial/industrial property value in taxes is transferred out of the City of Edina requiring higher property taxes as a result of Fiscal Disparities, WHERJW3, the Hexmepin County Board of Commissioners has endorsed a proposal to limit the size of the tax base contribution pool to its 1991 level of $291Million by adjusting the contribution rate; NOW, TBEBEPOBE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edina that it hereby supports the position of the Hexmepin County Board of Commissioners and urges the Legislature to consider limiting the size of the tax base contribution pool as proposed. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Paulus. - cities in Hexmepin County, Charles Hansing, 4741 Hibiscus Avenue, commented that in Minnesota the property taxes for commercial property is too high. the fiscal disparities would be less and less and would force local governments to address expenses. leading the cause over the past ten years with regard to the homestead credit, fiscal disparities and local government aids. Mayor Pro-Tem Kelly then called for rollcall vote on the motion: If the rates for commercial went down Manager Rosland responded that the City of Edina has been Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Smith, Kelly Resolution adopted. *CLAIMS PAID to approve payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated 01/01/91 and consisting of 17 pages: General Fund $53,818.28, Communications $32,345.93, Art Center $3,126.50, Capital Fund $3,182.15, Swimming .Pool Fund $4,598.75, Golf Course Fund $87,557.01, Recreation Center Fund $860.41, Edinborough Park $4,015.83, Utility Fund $235,664.44, Storm Sever Utility $298.86, Liquor Dispensary Fund $2,165.48, Construction Fund $1,274.14, TOTAL $425,907.78. Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. Motion vas made by Member Paulus and was seconded by Member Rice for There being no further business on the Council Agenda, motion of Member Paulus vas seconded by Mayor Pro-Tern Adjournment at 9:22 p.m. Kelly for adjournment and carried unanimously. G-dL City Clerk