Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout19910617_regular123 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR HEXTING OF TEE EDINA CITP COUNCIL HELD AT CITY HAT.& JUNE 17, 1991 R0I;LCBI;L Answering rollcall were Members Paulus, Rice, Smith, and Mayor Richards. (Member Kelly entered the meeting at 7:05 P.M. after the Consent Agenda was adopted. ) CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS APPROVED Member Paulus to approve and adopt the Council Consent Agenda items as presented with the exception of removal of Item V.A. - Computer and Software for Edina Public Safety . Motion was made my Member Rice and was seconded by Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 3. 1991. AND SPECIAL MEETING OF J[TLpE 10. 1991 APPROVED approve the Council Minutes of the Regular Meeting of June 3, 1991, and the Special Meeting of June 10, 1991, as presented. Motion was made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Paulus to Motion carried on rollcall vote, four ayes. PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON STREET SURFACING WITH CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER IMPROVEMENT NO. BA-294: BIDS TO BE TAKEN: ORDERING OF PROJECT TO BE CONSIDERED WEEN BIDS ARE PRESENTED Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved, and ordered placed on file . Presentation bv Engineer Engineer Hoffman informed the Council that the City had received a petition for curb and gutter with a bituminous overlay on the existing street at the following locations: Wooddale Ave. from W. 70th St. to Belvidere Lane; West Shore Drive from W. 70th Street to Dunham Drive: and Andover Road from Wooddale Avenue to West Shore Drive. the idea of determining the feasibility of the project and also the property owners who had signed a second petition indicating non-support after receiving the public hearing notice. With the exception of two homes on the West Shore/Dunham Drive intersection, no support exists for a project on West Shore Dr. north to Belvidere Lane. On the remainder of the streets, the results are split 50-50. "he proposed project is feasible and consistent with the overall public works goal of curb and gutter which would provide a positive edge for drainage and would help prevent sod damage during snow plowing. If approved, the proposed project is planned for construction in 1991 with assessment to be in 1992 and recommended to be spread over ten years. The assessment ranges from approximately $2,000.00 to $3,000.00 per lot depending on lot size. yard footage,.the assessment would run higher. front yard footage and 1/3 of the sideyard footage. estimated at $97,175.68. foot . Mr. Hoffman referred to a map depicting the-property owners who supported 2 For corner lots with both front and side Total cost for the project is The City policy is to assess full Proposed assessment is estimated at $25.0l/assessable Several concerns voiced involved the cost estimate on a per foot assessable foot bidding process to better determine the assessment rate. appeared that a $20.00/assessment foot was acceptable, whereas $25.00/per foot was not. . .-- basis. If this is the largest single concern, Council may wish to go through the Mr. Hoffman said it I 124 6/17/91 Letters objecting to the proposed project were received from John F. McGuire, 7104 W. Shore Dr.; Stan Selvig, 7113 W. Shore Dr.; and John R. and Bernice J. Hacker, 7108 W. Shore Dr. received from Harold Babb, 4701 W. 70th Street. A letter in support of the curb and gutter installation was Public Comment: . Joe Pagani, 4520 Dunham Dr., said he was one of the circulators of the original petition. presented to the homeowners was acquired from the City Engineering Department as the cost of the last similar assessed project. and Wooddale Avenue are heavily travelled residential streets. He clarified that the $20.00 per foot special assessment they had He stressed that both West Shore Drive Bob Hacker, 7108 W. Shore Drive, said upon receipt of the public hearing notice for the proposed project, he and another neighbor who also objected to the project polled neighbors to gain a consensus from the 45 or 46 residents. Of the 40 - households contacted, 25 signed the petition rejecting the improvement. Shellie Specter, 7000 W. Shore Dr. commented that because of a dip in the street water collects whenever it rains, the traffic is very heavy and without curb it is impossible to keep a nice looking edge. She said there is a strong need for the improvement to be done. Don Gjevre, 7016 W. Shore Dr. said curb and gutter would be of no benefit to him because his home has a h€gh elevation and storm water runoff is no problem. The street is in good condition and curb and gutter installation could be done when the street needs to be repaired. I Dennis Dawd, 7012 W. Shore Dr. said he calculated his assessment spread over 10 years to be about $.90/day, while real estate taxes paid are approximately $5.00/day. feasibility . He said he felt the project merits further investigation as to cost and Lucille McClelland, 7109 W. Shore Dr., noted that vehicles speed the greatest on the portion that already has curb and gutter. very neat without curb and gutter. with sprinkling systems would incur additional cost and questioned if the improvement would result in increased property taxes. Additionally, street edges can be kept She said she was concerned that property owners Maurice Taylor, 4516 Andover Rd., observed that vehicles are driven onto his lawn because there is no curb. improvements to make his area look like the rest of Edina. the street is dangerous to drive through. He said he would be willing to pay the assessment for Further, the ponding on Council Comments Member Paulus inquired as to the City's policy on curb and gutter and what the cost would be to obtain bids for the project. policy is to install curb and gutter when streets are laid to better control storm water drainage and to provide a sharp edge for delineation for snow plowing. bid process would entail preparation of plans and specifications at an approximate cost of $2,000.00. Engineer Hoffman explained that current The Member Rice asked if the water ponding on the street could be corrected without the project and if streets with curb and gutter are safer. --that asphalt could be removed and the surface.could be reshaped to lessen ponding at West Shore Drive and Andover Road. safer within curb and gutter; however, a curb helps to keep moving vehicles on the street. I Engineer Hoffman indicated Statistics do not indicate that streets are any Member Rice then asked Mr. Hacker for the reasons the neighbors were 6/17/91 125 opposed to the project. Mr. Hacker responded that cost was one factor; many felt that the project was not necessary and had said their lawns could be edged to look nice without curbs. consensus in support of the project before he would support it; however, he would be willing to take the next step to obtain bids so that actual assessment costs could be determined. Member Rice commented that he would need to see a stronger Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject to final consideration on the proposed project when bids are presented: RESOLUTION APPROVING PUNS AND SPECIFICATIONS AND DIRECTING ADVERTIS- FOR BIDS FOR CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER WITH BITUMINOUS STREET OVERLAY STaEET IHPROVEMEN!C NO. BA-294 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF EDINA, HIJ9NESOTA: 1. 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 following notice of bids for improvements: The plans and specification for the proposed improvement set forth in the The Clerk shall cause to be published in the Edina Sun and Construction Bulletin (Official Publication) CIW OF EDINA 4801W. 50TH STREET EDINA, MINNESOTA 55424 HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA ADVERTISEMENT FOR BIDS CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER & BITUMINOUS SURFACING CONTRACT 91-16 (ENG] IMPROVEMENT NOS. B-91. B-92 & BA-294 BIDS CLOSE SEPTEMBER 12, 1991 SEALED BIDS will be received and opened in the Council Chambers in Edina City Hall, 4801West 50th Street at 11:OO A.M., Thursday, September 12, 1991. The Edina City Council will meet at 7:OO P.M., Monday, September 16, 1991 to consider said bids. The folloving are approximate major quantities: 6,380 LF B6-18 Concrete Curb & Gutter 973 CY Excavation 565 SY 6" Concrete Driveways 25 TONS Bituminous Driveways 40 SY Concrete Valley Gutter 3,000 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. 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. Plans and specifications are available for a deposit of $25.00 (by check). with a bona fide bid. bid bond or certified check payable to the City of Edina in Othe amount of at least ten (10) percent of all bids. payable to the City of Edina for postage and handling. BY ORDER OF TBE EDINA CITY COUNCIL. Bids received by the City Engineer, either through the mail or Said deposit to be returned upon return of the plans and specifications No bids will be considered unless sealed and accompanied by All plans mailed, enclose separate check for $5.00 Marcella M. Daehn City Clerk Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. 6/17/91 126 Mayor Richards commented that he would not support the project because there was no strong consensus in favor of it and questioned spending the money to go through the exercise of the bid process. to be addressed when the specifications for bids are prepared. Member Kelly said she wanted the water ponding problem . Rollcall: Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice Nays: Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. PETITION DENIF3 FOR SIDEWALK IHPRO- NO. S-54 - DEFiEp HII;L RD FROM DE- BLVD TO CBBII3. RD Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved, and ordered placed on file . Presentation bv Ennineer Engineer Hoffman noted that a petition had been receive'd for a sidewalk on Dewey Hill Road from Cahill Road to Delaney Boulevard on the north side. reviewing the City's sidewalk system and does not support the petition as requested. The estimated cost of the project is $22,512.00-and would be funded by state aid gas tax funds. The sidewalk would be five feet wide and constructed of concrete. The alignment would be varied to protect existing property features and would be constructed in late 1991. Staff has been - Engineer Hoffman said that the City has constructed a pedestrian system through Lewis Park to connect sidewalks on Cahill Road and Dewey Hill Road which both tie into the City's walking system. not exist to build a parallel concrete sidewalk on Dewey Hill Road when a pathway existed approximately two hundred feet north in Lewis Park. the cost to maintain sidewalks and paths, including snowplowing. It did not seem cost effective to have the parallel system. The position of ten years ago was that a need did One of the reasons was The petition received was from Dewey Hill East and Dewey Hill West condominium owners. the.south side of the street, and the appropriate location. continued, it should be on the south side of the street. This walk would then service the abutting property owners In Dewey Hill East and West Estates without having to cross the street to use it. The existing sidewalk on Dewey Hill Road west of Delaney Boulevard is on If it were to be Staff has not received any other requests in the past ten years to construct a sidewalk and concluded the need is to serve the residents on the south side of the street. safety and, clearly, the south side of the street is the better alternative. Staff maintains the position that sidewalks are meant to enhance pedestrian Council Comment In response to Member Smith, Engineer Hoffman said the price of the sidewalk on the south side would be approximately $22,000 and if on the north side would be $4,000 to $5,000 less. The project would include the moving of sprinklers and lights, and some additional berming and retaining walls. concern of his is that, if the project was approved on the north side, residents would have to jay walk to use the sidewalk. south side makes sense as it would be a continuation of the existing sidewalk. Mayor Richards commented that a Member Smith stated the sidewalk on the Public Comment Speaking in favor of the sidewalk being constructed on the north side of Dewey Hill Road were: Dick Reichow, President of Dewey Hill East, 5501 Dewey Hill Road; Vince Lorimer, 5601 Dewey Hill Road; John Kelly, 5601 Dewey Hill Road; Dr. Karl and Ruth Sandt, 5601 Dewey Hill Road; and Dick Langer, 5501 Dewey Hill Road. Comments made in support of sidewalk on the north side were that it would be more 6/17/91 127 cost effective and would enhance the Lewis Park property. Objections to construction of the sidewalk on the south side included disruption of the existing sprinkling system, need for a retaining wall, disturbance of mature landscaping and the topography close to Delaney Boulevard. Mayor Richards commented that supporting the expenditure for a parallel sidewalk to the existing path in Lewis Park, by special assessment or with state aid funds, would not be fiscally responsible. Member Smith made a motion to deny the petition requesting a concrete sidewalk (S-54) to be constructed on the north side of Dewey Hill Road from Delaney Boulevard to Cahill Road. Motion was seconded by Mayor Richards. Ayes: Keily, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. CONDITIOHBL USE PERMIT GRANTED TO ST. PATRICK'S CHURCH. 6820 ST. PATRICKS LANE. FOR BUILDING EXPANSION on file. Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed Presentation bv Planner Planner Larsen advised that St. Patricks Church has applied for a Conditional Use Permit for building expansion. They propose to construct a new entry-drop off on the north side of the existing church served by two new driveways from Valley View Road. part of the building, totalling approximately 6,700 square feet, i.e. administration area, additional office space, music room. The additions will not add to the seating capacity of the church and will not add to parking demand. design and materials of the addition would match and complement the existing structure. All additions, and the church itself, will comply with the Zoning Ordinance standards for a church in the R-1 District. Other additions' are proposed to the office/educational wing on the southerly The proposed The only significant public issue is how storm water from the site is presently handled. Currently, roof drainage is collected in a single 12 inch pipe which discharges on the surface to the south central portion of the site and runs down a steep ravine into the rear yards of homes on Scotia Drive. Staff has asked the church to correct this problem by doing one of the following: 1) Re-direct this runoff directly into the storm sewer system by connecting the on-site pipe to the catch basin in the cul-de-sac of St. Patricks Lane, or 2) In connection with re- roofing that portion of the church, to direct the roof leaders to the north so that runoff will go to existing storm sewers on Valley View Road. church have agreed to both solutions for the storm water system. Representatives of the The Community Development and Planning Commission considered the request at its meeting of May 29, 1991, and recommended approval subject to the conditions recommended by staff. Council Comment Member Smith asked how long the problem of storm water run-off at St. Patrick's Church has existed. and has become worse over the years. conditional use permit request by a church that has brought to light site problems and he was concerned that existing problems are not resolved until a request for a permit is made. close to the adjoining streets. Public Comment Allen Housh, 6120 Scotia Dr., said he was one of the recipients of the stormwater Engineer Hoffman said it began some 8-10 years ago with erosion Member Smith mentioned that this is the third He said he also felt the two new curb cuts would be located too --' 6/17/91 128 run-off and that the some years ago which which drains towards problem has gotten worse since the major addition to the church added the 12 inch tile dumping directly into the flood plain Scotia Drive. Mayor Richards asked Mr. Housh if he felt the staff recommendations would solve the problem. is connected to the storm sewer system it should greatly alleviate the problem. Mr. Housh said if the 12 inch pipe . Rosemary O'Brien, 6909 St. Patricks Lane, asked how this would affect her property and if she would be assessed for any of the storm sewer costs. elaborated that the street is hard surfaced, with curb and gutter, and on a cul-de- sac with an existing storm sewer in place. The cost of connecting the church's on- site system to the catch basin in St. Patricks Lane would be paid by the church as part of their expansion costs. Engineer Hoffman Donald Eyberg, 6600 Dakota Trail, questioned the proposed curb cuts on Valley View Road. level of usage expected would not create a traffic hazard. out that both curb cuts would be one-way inbound only. vehicles on the left side at the church building. They are very close to existing roadways and appear to be awkward as they - relate to the church. Planner Larsen said that, in staff's opinion, the time and Engineer Hoffman pointed Passengers would exit Dan Tideman, Gruders and Associates, St. Cloud, MN, architects for the St. Patrick's Church, explained that they have worked closely with City staff to ensure that the entry drives meet City criteria. The drives have two functions: 1) To drop people off at the front door, and 2) To focus attention on the building upon approach. is difficult to find the existing entrance to the church now. off would enhance the sense of welcome and entry that the church would like to portray. In addition, an exterior courtyard to the north has been proposed. He emphasized that the new curb cuts are important to the design of the building. It The new entry/drop Sally Schaefer, 6124 Scotia Dr., asked for reassurance that the gully and erosion damage that has been caused by the storm water run-off would be corrected. Hoffman said that would be part of the project. Engineer Member Kelly introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption, subject to the following conditions: 1) Connection of the'on-site storm sewer pipe to the public system on St. Patrick's Lane and, 2) Proposed new driveways from Valley View Road shall remain one way, in-hd: RHEREAS, the procedural requirements of Ordinance No. 825 (The Zoning Ordinance) have been met: and VHEBEBS, it has been determined that the Findings as required by Ordinance No. 825 have been satisfied: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Edina City Council hereby grants a Conditional Use Permit to St. Patricks Church, 6820 St. Patrick Lane, Edina, for build3ng expansion. Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Rice. RESOLUTION GRANTING CONDITIONAL USE PERMT Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. PUBLIC €IEARING ON PRETJHINARY PUT APPROVAL CONTINUED TO 7/1/91 FOR VENTANA JYIAND ADDITION (LOT 2. BLOCK 1. MUIRUOODSI Affidavits of Notice were presented, approved and ordered placed on file. ---located on the west side of Valley View Road and south of Dakota Trail. property is a developed single family lot, approximately 4.4 acres in size. An existing house is located in the west-central portion of the lot. The proposed subdivision suggests removing the existing home, and constructing a new public Planner Larsen explained that the subject property is The 6/17/91 129 street cul-de-sac which would serve a five lot subdivision, with all new home sites having access to the new street. square feet to 38,514 square feet in area. Ordinance No. 804 requires that lots in a proposed subdivision meet the median lot width, lot depth, and lot area for all developed single family lots within 500 feet of the proposed subdivision. 60 lots within 500 feet of the subject property. The proposed lots would meet or exceed neighborhood median dimensions as follows: The five lots would range in size from 27,396 There are , 110 square feet - Median Lot Width 152.5 square feet - Median Lot Depth 18,815 square feet - Median Lot Area The dimensions and area of the lots in the proposed subdivision, following Ordinance No. 804 criteria would exceed neighborhood median sizes in all areas: 188 square feet - Median Lot Width 181 square feet - Median Lot Depth 30,839 square.feet - Median Lot Area The subject property is heavily wooded with an inventory of over 500 trees having a caliper dimension of six inches or greater. ranging from 20% to 40% over most areas of the site. The only relatively flat area is at the crest of the hill in the vicinity of Lot 22. The site exhibits slope conditions Impact of development on areas of steep slopes and vegetation would be caused primarily by the proposed construction of the new cul-de-sac street. grade of the street exceeds City standards of 7%. of 8% and 10% grade. The proposed The proposed street has sections In response to the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the proponents have submitted a revised grading plan at 7% grade and also an alternative plan with an 8% maximum grade. The 8% grade plan would allow a reduction in the height of some retaining walls, the cul-de-sac would be relatively flat, and it would provide a higher elevation for the home to be developed for Lot 22. Other changes since the Planning Commission hearing are: 1) Plat name has been changed to Jyland Whitney Addition, and 2) Neighborhood lot size calculations have been reviewed by staff resulting in changes to the lot depth on three lots. median lot depth is now 152.5 feet, down from 165 feet. Originally, Lot 17 required a lot depth variance. Minor adjustments to the lot and the corrected neighborhood median depth eliminated the need for the variance. 3) Developers have submitted a site distance analysis for the new street and an analysis of how storm water would be handled. the findings . The The reports have been reviewed by the City Engineer who concurs with At their May 29, 1991, the Community Development and Planning Commission recommended preliminary plat approval subject to: 1. Final plat approval 2. Developers Agreement covering all public improvements 3. Subdivision dedication 4. Reduction of street grade to 7% maximum 5. A 40 ft. wide conservation easement along Valley View Road. -. Member Kelly commented that the Planning Commission minutes made reference to the Ratelle property and the Peper property and that it is difficult to consider the proposed subdivision without looking at those properties as well. Planner Larsen explained that the Peper property is immediately west of the subject property. Access is up Shawnee Circle and through an outlot between two single family lots to the Peper house on the hilltop. property. -- At present, there is no proposal to subdivide the He pointed out that the outlot abutting the public street shown on the 6/17/91 130 proposed plat under consideration could provide access for future development of the Peper property. A proposed subdivision of the Ratelle property, located to the north between Dakota and Mohawk Trails, is currently under consideration by the Planning Commission. subdivision that would include the Peper property but that did not happen. It is important to not.preclude consideration of future development on another property and he did not consider the subdivision under consideration as s etting a precedent. Planner Larsen mentioned that the developers had pursued a . Member Rice questioned the street grades, the purpose of the conservation easement, and the house footprint on the plat. immediate vicinity with steeper grades. no problem working with the 7% grade and the radius of the cul-de-sac. consemation easement would insure that there would be no clear cutting along Valley View Road. properties along Valley View Road. requirements as to setback and lot coverage; the house footprints are shown for illustrative purposes only. Planner Larsen said there are streets in the Public Works and Public Safety would have The It would also provide a natural screen for the new homes as well as the - All homes would need to meet ordinance Presentation bv DeveloDers Rick Carlson, Jyland Development, advised that they have been working with the Peytons to develop their property. for six lots; four lots to be accessed from Valley View Road, and the remaining two lots by a private driveway. three lots on the Peper property which could be accessed by the public street in the proposed subdivision. After further study of the elevations, it was concluded that a cul-de-sac was the only feasible design for a public road which was preferable to a private driveway because of the owners, safety, width, marketability and potential access to the Peper property. Desire to create a feel of neighborhood and privacy, 2) Did not want to add three driveways onto Valley View Road because of the safety factor, and 3) Potential tree removal. create an interior neighborhood and to preserve the views of the properties across Valley View Road. He briefly explained the original proposal was It took into consideration a potential development of That plan was ruled out for several reasons: 1) Mr. Carlson said they proposed the 40 foot conservation easement mainly to A third proposal had similar lots layouts to what is being proposed; the difference being that the cul-de-sac was located further down and a private drive served the last three lots. That plan met all requirements of Ordinance No. 804 and the 7% street grade requirement. beneficial and it would require a steeper grade which would not serve public safety or fire access. presented and recommended the 7% grade for the public street. would like to propose a 8% grade which would mean less loss of trees, less disturbance of the site, less retaining and would still be maintainable. It was felt that a common drive for three homes was not The Planning Commission did approve the subdivision layout as now Mr. Carlson said they In conclusion, Mr. Carlson observed that in the proposed subdivision the median rot- width is 89% above the neighborhood median, median lot depth is 67% above the median, and the median lot area is 80% above median. If approved, it will raise the subsequent neighborhood medians for future development in the area. Michael Gair, McCombs' Frank Roose Architects, Inc., presented details on the grade for the public street. wall would be required from the road grade of the proposed cul-de-sac to meet grade --at the property line. With an 8% grade, a 10 foot retaining wall would be required. The higher grade would allow for more hill top. prohibit access into the Peper property. He explained that site distance from the proposed entrance onto Valley View Road exceeds state standards (30 mph at 200 feet) He pointed out that at a 7% grade a 12-14 foot retaining In either instance, it would not 61 1719 1 131 to both the north and south. Mr. Gair noted that drainage to the southwest would be improved after grading of the site. There would be a 5/10th acre land reduction from which drainage would flow down to the cul-de-sac and into the City's system and also a 50% reduction in hard surfaced area from which drainage would be redirected. The other area of concern was in the northern sector of the property. A collection system would be built into the proposed cul-de-sac street with catch basins. accumulated in the low area, discharged through the system into another ponding area into a 12 inch pipe and then into the City's system in Valley View Road. Storm water would also be Whitney Peyton, proponent, stated that they had worked with neighbors, engineers and developers to create a justifiable development. concerned about a driveway onto Valley View, and the mass of the proposed houses and their location. Mr. Peyton said what is illustrated is close to what will be built based on today's real estate market. He noted that some neighbors were Public Comment Voicing concerns about the proposed subdivision were: Robert Murray, 7037 Valley View Road; Ernie Micek, 6941 Valley View Road; Robert Perkins, 6906 Dakota Trail; Walter Klus, 7017 Valley View Road; Mary Lou Dasburg, 1 Overholt Pass; Steve Richards, 6804 Dakota Trail; Sydney Rebers, 6919 Dakota Trail; Samuel Wetterlin, 6609 Dakota Trail; Daniel Speigel, 7104 Valley View Road; and Mary Cary, 6908 Dakota Trail. In summary, concerns expressed included the following: 1) Safety concerning vehicles from subdivision entering Valley View Road, 2) Height and material for retaining walls, 3) Too many lots for site because of topography, 4) Change of character of Indian Hills neighborhood, 5) Subdivision should be considered in concert with development of Peper property, and 6) Size and type of homes to be built is unknown. Jim Denovick, builder/developer, advised that he has an option to buy the Peper property and his objective and that of Martin Peper is to keep ,it as a one-site parcel. Peyton subdivision, Mr. Denovick affirmed that an 8% street grade would preserve the top of the hill and less trees would be taken out. Gordon Knudsvig, 6920 Dakota Trail, spoke in support of the proposed Subdivision. He agreed there is a need to slow traffic on Valley View Road but the fix is the same whether the subdivision is approved or not. plans presented and was impressed with the integrity of the Peytons and Jyland Development. Mr. Knudsvig concluded that it is not the Council's duty to try to preserve intangibles that neighbors wish to see in the area. They would consider an offer to buy the tennis court site. Regarding the He said he was satisfied with the Council Comment/Action Member Smith remarked that two concerns need to be considered: 1) Retaining walls, and 2) Retention of trees on the site. He concurred with the recommendation of the Planning Commission on the 7% grade for the roadway. Mayor Richards corhmented on the following issues: 1. Character/symmetry of neighborhood - Concerns raised are legitimate; would not support denial of right to develop the property. would support some type of development of the property. Street grade - Would support 7% grade as recommended by Planning Commission. --- 2. Number of lots - Would be open to looking at a four-lot subdivision, but 3. Retaining walls - Should be determined by private sector versus public sector. 4. I 6/17/91 132 5. Control of development - Council has recently gone through an exercise on the issue of massing and determined there is no uniformity or consistency on what is right or wrong. Market will decide building footprint. City has controls as to setback and lot coverage. Curb cut on Valley View Road - One curb cut is reasonable and will not affect the traffic that exists today. I - 6. Member Kelly reiterated her concern that the proposed subdivision would set a precedent for the area if approved. the property or delaying a decision until development plans for the Ratelle and Peper properties are brought before the Council. She suggested either a planned development for Member Rice concurred that the subdivision will not greatly impact traffic on Valley View Road. He asked about the proposed building elevations. Mr. Carlson explained that the existing Peyton house is at 943' and their new house would be at 930'. The -houses would be rear walkouts and the building pads would vary some in elevation because of the topography. Member Rice said he would defer to the recommendation of the City Engineer as to the street grade. He concluded that it may be helpful to wait for other potential development in the area but the Council could not expect that and he preferred to look only at what is before the Council now. Member Paulus commented that subdivisions are market driven and not tax driven as some citizens have inferred. stock does not have 'executive' range houses. There will be large houses because of the price being paid for lots of this size. subdivision. replacenent of trees. recommendation. We are seeing more massing because Edina's housing She would consider a four lot She expressed concern that there are no existing controls concerning - Member Paulus said she would support the staff's 7% grade Mayor Richards summarized that, if preliminary approval is given, concerns such as trees, retaining walls, etc. could be detailed in the developer's agreement. Traffic issues on Valley View Road should be'addressed to the Traffic Safety Committee. The question of density/land use has been raised and should be considered, i.e. four lots versus five lots. Bob Carlson, Jyland Development, stated that it was important to stay at the proposed five lots because of the economics. concerned that everything look natural and that the walls not fail. use large boulders, with a height limit of 6/7 feet and a 3/4 feet stagger to the next tier. As to retaining walls, they are They propose to Member Smith made motion to continue the public hearing on preliminary plat approval for the Ventana Jyland Addition (Lot 2, Block 1, Muir Uoods) to July 1, 1991, to allow the developers to come back with an alternative four lot development. was seconded by Member Paulus. Motion Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *COMJ?REEENSIvE PLAN - LAND USE REVISIONS - TAX INCREMENT DISTRICTS CON!CINUED TO 8/5/91 Motion was made by Member Uce and seconded by Member Paulus to continue the Public Hearing on the Comprehensive Plan - Land Use Revisions - Tax Increment Districts to August 5, 1991. I Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. I- *HEARING DATE OF 7/1/91 SET - APPEAL OF BOARD OF APPEBIS DECISION (ARROU SIGN COMPANY) hearing date of July 1, 1991, for Appeal of Board of Appeals Decision on Arrow Sign Motion was made by Member Rice and seconded by Member Paulus to set 6/17/91 133 Company. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. BID FOR COMPUTER AND SOFTWARE FOR EDINA PUBLIC SAFETY APPROVED Member Smith said he . had asked for this item to be removed from the Consent Agenda so more information could be given on the proposed purchase of a computer and software for Edina Public Safety . Chief Swanson indicated the reason Edina Public Safety is leaving the LOGIS system is primarily a business decision. average budget increase of 31.6 percent, with an actual 24.4 percent increase throughout the period. control over the increases. of the budget on an annual basis. projected out, the cost savings would be over $340,000.00 projected on a 5% inflation rate. The history of LOGIS for 1986 to 1991, showed an The most difficult thing was the fact that the City had no The proposal as recommended would give the City control If the experience over the last six years is Chief Swanson said the new system would provide the following: 1. Better response to calls 2. Safety for Police, Fire and Paramedics 3. Revenue enhancement 4. More accountability for employees delivering service 5. Better analysis of operations. Additions over the current LOGIS system would be: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Fire Department: fire records, hazardous materials system,-pre-plan 7. Control over annual cost increases (guaranteed maintenance rates) Integration of Public Safety Dispatching Billing system for false alarms and EMS Mapping system for dispatch and analysis Double the number of workstations (all areas of department can use system) Direct connection to State and County (eliminates double entry of data) system Motion was made by Member Smith and seconded by Member Kelly for award of bid for Computer and Software for Edina Public Safety to recommended low bidder, Integrated Computer Concepts, Inc., at $339,900.00. Rollcall : Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. *BID AWARDED FOR PUBLIC UORKS VENTILATION MODIFICATIONS Motion was made by Member Rice and seconded by Member Paulus for award of bid for Public Works Ventilation Modifications to recommended second low bidder, Snell Mechanical, Inc., at $42,165.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR SENIOR CENTER RELOCATION - AIR CONDITIONING Motion was made by Member Rice and seconded by Member Paulus for award of bid for Senior Center Relocation air conditioning to recommended lov bidder, Environmental Systems, at $53,800.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR SENIOR CENTW RELOCATION - JUUWAY AND DOOR CONSTRUCTION Motion was made by Member Rice and seconded by Member Paulus for award of bid for Senior Center Relocation - Hallway and Door Construction to recommended low bidder, 6/17/91 134 Environmental Systems, at $16,500.00 Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FORRECONSTRUCTION OF #3 TE AT BRBeplIBR GOLF COURSE Motion was made by Member Rice and seconded by Member Paulus for award of bid for reconstruction of #3 tee at Braemar Golf Course to recommended low bidder, Perkins Landscape Contractors, at $11,821.75. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BID AWARDED FOR HANDICAP EANDRULING AT ARNESON ACRES HUSEXM Motion was made by Hember Rice and seconded by Heniber Paulus for award of bid for handicap handrailing for Arneson Acres Ueumto recommended lov bidder, Hinnetonka Iron Works, at $6,960.00. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. *BIDS REJECTED FOR INDTJSTRIBL FMOR -PER Motion vas made by Member Rice and seconded by Hember Paulus to reject all bids for an industrial floor sweeper and to re-bid the equipment with a specification change. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. REPORT ON VETCH AT 4404 WEST 58TH STREET GIVEN: HATTER CONTINUED TO 7/1/91 In a report submitted by the Assistant Weed Inspector, he informed Council that City Ordinance No. 1031, Section 2, Sub, (e) declares as a nuisance: All noxious weeds and other Rank Growths of Vegetation, including any grass or weeds standing over one foot high. This Ordinance, in Section 5, Sub. (b), provides that the weed inspector or assistant weed inspector of the City may enter upon property to cut, remove, destroy and eradicate Rank Growths of Vegetation. The Ordinance does not define the word "rank". However, the dictionary defines "rankt1 as llgrowing profusely, and "strong and offensive", and "indecent or disgusting. The subject Crown Vetch has reached a general height of 24 inches, and is invading neighboring lawns. In the fall it mats down and could become a health and fire hazard. Therefore, staff believes the Crown Vetch to be a "rank growth of vegetation" and a nuisance. Staff recommends the Crown Vetch be cut to, and maintained at, a height of 8 inches. Crown Vetch is spread by underground runners, is an invasive plant and difficult to eradicate. Precautions must be taken to insure its confinement to the intended area. These precautions must be in the form of a metal shield driven at least 10 inches into the ground at the property line or a cultivated strip at least 10 inches deep at the property line. The recommendation is that staff be directed to give notice to the owner pursuant to the applicable City ordinance to cut and maintain the Crown Vetch at 8 inches, and contain the Crown Vetch by the above or other means. Further, that if the owner does not comply with the above standards, that City staff be directed to cause such compliance under and pursuant to applicable City ordinances. Diane Lindgren, owner of the property at 4404 W. 58th Street, explained that she had planted the Crown Vetch on 30 percent of her backyard because she found the elevation made mowing, fertilizing, etc. intimidating. During the drought of 1988, the grass burned out. Through conversations with Bachman's and the University of Minnesota she found that the least expensive way to cover the barren slope was to plant Crown Vetch. She paid a landscaper $550.00 to seed the area with Crown Vetch. Ms. Lindgren mentioned that the down side of Crown Vetch is that it takes three years-to mature. Pluses of the Vetch are that it is drought resistant, is not an allergen, rodents do not live in it or eat it, and it chokes out weeds. it is 90 percent in, some weeds are evident and it now needs cutting. In response to concerns of the neighbors about resale of homes in the area, Ms. Lindgren noted I At present, 6/17/91 135 that one home sold in 6 weeks in 1989 and another in 1990 in 7 weeks - both times the Crown Vetch was not attractive. Ms. moc cut met SPI rec thr a1 Lindgren said the Crown Vetch is now two years old. It will have an uneven Irish effect with pink flowers when mature,. : to a height of 8 inches in compliance with the Ordinance. Also, to install a :a1 barrier between her yard and the neighbors' yard to keep the growth from reading. She had asked advice from the University and from Bachman's and their :ommendation was not to cut it any shorter that 8 to 10 inches or it will be reatened. ,order as recommended by the University and Bachman's. She proposed to keep the Crown Vetch To'retard the spread of the Crown Vetch, she had planted day lilies as Public Comment Speaking in opposition to the Crown Vetch were: Donald Swanson, 4408 W. 58th Street, and Pearl Nelson, 4328 Philbrook Lane. Concerns voiced were that the Crown Vetch is 30 inches or more in height, is a nuisance, will decrease property values, cutting with a weed whip makes it unsightly, must be'cut and picked up more during the growing season, City of Edina should set rules to control a weed like Crown Vetch, day lilies will not control the spread of the Crown Vetch, and eradication is recommended. It was noted that a letter was received in opposition to the Crown Vetch at the subject from Catherine Sheehan, 4308 Philbrook Lane. In response to the Council, Assistant Weed Inspector Davis explained that if an order is issued to cut the Crown Vetch within 7 days, and if it not complied with, the City could cut it with and the cost would be the responsibility of the property owner. assessment. If the mowing charge is not paid, it would be added to her property tax Member Kelly made a motion that the Crown Vetch at 4404 W. 58th Street be cut to a height of 8 inches in compliance with Ordinance No. 1031, and if the property owner does not comply, that City staff be directed to mow the Crown Vetch with the cost charged to the property owner. Member Rice seconded the motion. Following discussion on the motion, the question was called. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus Nays: Rice, Smith, Richards Motion failed. Member Rice then made a motion that the matter be referred to Uest Suburban Mediation Services. Motion was seconded by Member Kelly. Following discussion on the motion, the question was called. Ayes: Kelly, Rice Nays: Paulus, Smith, Richards Motion failed. Mayor Richards made a motion to continue the matter to July 1, 1991, to give the property owner at 4404 Uest 58th Street an opportunity to determine the cost for removal of the Crown Vetch. Member Kelly seconded the motion. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. !CRAFF'IC SAFETP COMMITTEE MINUTES OF JUNE 11. 1991. APPROVED Engineer Hoffman briefly reviewed the discussion that occurred at the Traffic Safety Committee meeting on June 11, 1991, concerning items in Section A of the Minutes. Member Kelly made-a motion to approve the following recommended action listed in .-, * I 6/17/91 Section A of the Traffic Safety Committee Minutes on June 11, 1991. 1. a) To remove parking restrictions on Lakeview Drive; b) To modify the parking restriction on the vest side of Shervood Avenue to read "NO PBBKIL(;G MONDAY - FRIDAY, 8:OO A.M. to 6:OO P.M." and add a "BO PARKING ANYTIME" sign near the vicinity of the "STOP" sign on Shewood Avenue; c) To remove parking restrictions on the west side of St. Andrews Avenue; and d) To reme parking restrictions on the west side of Dalrymple Road from 5608 Dalrymple Road north to Iakeview Drive, and modify restrictions from 5610 Dalrymple Road to South View Lane, to read "NO PARKIHG MONDAY - E'RIDAY, 8:OO A.M. to 6:OO P.M." To install a "YIEIJ)" sign on Post Lane southbound to reinforce State law at T- intersections with through traffic and that owners of the lot comply with the Clear View ordinance. To upgrade the intersection of Lincoln Drive and Londonderry Road to a 4-uay "STOP", 2) 3) and to acknovledge sections B and C of the Mbutes. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. Ayes: Kelly, Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Motion carried. C- IAKES PARK FEES AND CHARGES ADOPTED Member Smith introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOI;[pTION SETTING PARK & REGBEATION DEPARTME" RFXLYiL FEES BND CHARGES FOR C- LAKES FOR 1991 BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina Citp. Council that the following fees and charges for Centennial Takes Park, as submitted by the Park Board be approved: Centennial Lakes Centrum Buildinn &Adjacent Areas Weekdav Rental Fees Category #1 Ciq of Edina & City Boards/Commissions Salon "A" no/charge Salon "B" n/c Both Salons n/c Centrum Terrace n/c Urban Wl n/c Category #2 Ciq of Edina & Athletic Associations Salon "An no/charge Both Salons not available Centrum Terrace $35/use Urban Hall Salon "B" n/c fee based on use Category #3 Edina Organizations & Non-Profit Salon "A" s25/honr Salon "B" $25/hour Both Salons not available Centrum Terrace $35/use Urban Mall fee based on use Category x4 Edina Organkations & School District Salon "A" s25/hour Salon "B" $25/hour Both Salons not available Urban Mall --- Centrum Terrace $35/use fee based on use Category #5 Edinborough Groups & Home Associations 6/17/91 137 Salon "A" 8alon "Bn Both Salons Centrum Terrace Urban Mall Category #6 Edina Based & Resident/Business Salon "An Salon "B" Both Salons Centrum Terrace Urban Mall Category #7 Non-Edina Based & Resident Business Salon "Ar Salon "B" Both Salons Centrum Terrace Urban Mall no/charge not available $35/us e fee based on use n/c $50 ma^ - 3 hours $50 IMX - 3 hours not available $50/use fee based on use $75 ma^ - 3 hours $75 IMX - 3 hours not available $75/use fee based on use Centennial Iakes Centrum Building & Adiacent Areas Weekend Eveninp & Sunday-Day Rental Fees (Evening Rental Period is 6:OO P.H. to 1:00 PA.) (Sunday Rentals will not begin before noon) Category #1 City of Edina & City Boards/Commissions Salon "An no/charge Salon "B" n/c Both Salons n/c Centrum Terrace n/c Category #2 City of Edina &Athletic Associations Salon "An not available Salon "B" not available Centrum Terrace $35/use Both Salons $15O/ma~ - 7 hours Category #3 Edina Organizations & Non-Profit Salon "A" not available Salon "B" not available Centrum Terrace $35/use Both Salons $200/ma~ - 7 hours Category #4 Edina Organizations h School District Salon "A" not available Salon "Bn not available Centrum Terrace $3 5/use Both Salons $200/ma~ - 7 hours Category #5 Edinborough Groups & Home Associations Salon "A" not available Salon "BW not available Both Salons $200/ma~ - 7 hours _. Centrum Terrace $25/use Category #6 Edina Based & Resident/Business Salon "An not available I 138 6/17/91 Salon wBw not available Centrum Terrace $50/use Both Salons $350/ma~ - 7 hours Category #7 Non-Edina Based & Resident Business Salon "Aw not available Salon wBw not available Centrum Terrace $75/use Both Salons $450/ma~ - 7 hours Motion for adoption of the resolution was seconded by Member Rice. Rollcall : Ayes: Paulus, Kelly, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. ADDITIOWLL DATA REQUESTED FOR PROPOSED BRAEMAR GOLF COURSE IHPR0-S Recreation Director Kojetin presented the Park Board's recommendation to approve expenditures for: 1) Architect's feasibility report on Braemar Clubhouse expansion and 2) Replacement of the old maintenance building. Richards said that the Council would need a more comprehensive report before taking action on the proposed recommendation. Park and After a brief discussion, Mayor RACCOON CONTROL PROGRAM PRESENTED Assistant Manager Hughes reported that in accordance with the Council's request, staff has solicited a proposal for a raccoon control program in the City. The first program involves responding to nuisance complaints on a case-by-case basis. Upon receiving a complaint, the contractor would place a live trap on the complainant's property to trap nuisance animals, The second program involves a demonstration project which would attempt to reduce population levels in a particular neighborhood. program which would cost $6,950.00. The program would last for 40 days and would take place in the fall if approved by the Council. The proposal includes two programs. The cost per successful trapping is $60/animal. I The attached proposal outlines the The Council should be aware of several issues concerning these programs. programs are not budgeted - costs would be charged to the contingency budget. Second, the relocation of trapped animals is not feasible. Animals would be live trapped, but would be destroyed later. experimental in nature. raccoons repopulate the demonstration area. First, the Third, the demonstration project is The success rate cannot be predicted or the rate at which If the Council wishes to proceed with the demonstration project, the suggestion is that residents of the neighborhood be invited to an information meeting conducted by staff and the contractor. prior to authorizing the project. Additionally, Council would need to conduct a hearing After brief discussion, the consensus was not to use public money for the control of raccoons but to allow residents to handle the problem on an individual basis. *RESOLUTION ADOPTED SETTING PURCHASING POLlcCY FOR RECYCLED PRODUCTS Member Rice introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTIOR ESTABLISHING A POIJCY TO PROHO!IZ THE USE OF m- mTJ3 BECPCLED C0"T --- ILP H"ICIPLLT;Lp FUNDED BUILDING OR REMODELING PROJECTS Uhereas, the Edina City Council wishes to promote the use of products containing recycled materials and thus encourage the development of markets for recyclables; and 6/17/91 .. 139 Whereas, the City of Edina has established a policy to purchase recycled paper for use in all City offices; and Whereas, the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners passed Resolution No. 90-11- 842R-1, requiring cities, in order to be eligible for 80% recycling funding, to adopt comprehensive procurement and specification policies for publicly funded construction and remodeling projects which give reasonable and appropriate consideration to materials with recycled content; Therefore, Be It Resolved, that the Edina City Council adopts the following policy regarding the use of materials with recycled content in construction or remodeling of municipal buildings: 1. Standards and specifications for products used in construction or remodeling of municipal facilities will not prohibit the use of products with recycled content. 811 bid specifications for improvements or construction of municipal facilities will contain the following statement: "The City of Edina encourages the use of recycled building materials wherever practical and appropriate, provided the product with recycled content meets the required performance specifications." 3. The City will cooperate with neighboring City, County, and State governments in an effort to develop consistent and effective procurement efforts which promote the use of recycled products in construction materials wherever practical and appropriate. All City departments and agencies will cooperate to achieve the purposes of this policy and'khe goal of promoting the use of recycled material. Ciw departments shall forward reports of their activities in support of this policy to the City Manager of his designee. These reports shall be incorporated in an annual report to the Clerk of the Hennepin County Board. 2. 4. 5. Adopted this 17th day of June, 1991. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. *RESOLUTION ADOPTED ASSESSING CHARGE FOR WATERMArN CONNECTION - 6000 ARBOUR LANE The Council was advised that a letter was received from Thomas and Sandra Maloney, 6000 Arbour Lane, requesting that the City assess the charges for connection to,the City's Watermain Lateral No. 206, with assessment to be spread over six years at the current rate of interest. for connection when requested by residents. Member Rice introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Edina City Council that it hereby authorizes the assessment of the connection charge to Watermain No. 206 in the amount of $875.34 to be levied against Lot 4, Block 2, COUNTRYSIDE (PIN 32-117-21-43-0013) Fer a six year period at the rate of 9.0%, payable starting in 1992. Paulus . It has been the policy of the City to assess such costs Motion was seconded by Member Ayes: Paulus, Rice, Smith, Richards Resolution adopted. RESOLUTION ADOPTED OPPOSING MCAL OPTION SALES TAX Mayor Richards recalled that the Local Option Sales -Tax had been discussed at the June 3, 1991, meeting and the Special Meeting of June 10, 1991. Member Kelly said she believed that although Edina may not get back one-half cent in dollars, we will benefit from the services provided by the County if this sales tax option passes. Member Kelly made a motion.to support the Resolution in favor of the Local option Sales Tax. Motion was seconded by Member Paulus. Ayes: Kelly Nays: Smith, Richards .-- I 6/17/91 140 Abstaining: Paulus, Rice Motion failed. Member Smith then introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: WHEREAS, the mesota Legislature has adopted legislation providing that county boards may vote to enact a local option one-half cent sales tax; and WEEBEAS, under this law the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners must vote to implement the local option sales tax in Hennepin County; and VHEBEBS, the Hennepin County Board has asked the cities to present a resolution stating their preference on the local option sales tax; and WHEREAS, there has been no projection made as to the impact of potential program cuts if the one-half cent sales tax option is not adopted by Hennepin County; NOU THEBEFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that, given the uncertainty of the impact on the citizens of Edina of the local option sales tax, the Edina City Council would urge the Hennepin County Board of Commissioners to not qse the local option one-half cent sales tax. Motion was seconded by Member Rice. Ayes: Paulus, Smith, Richards Nays: Kelly Abstaining : Rice Resolution Adopted. RESOLUTION OPPOSING LOCAL OPTION SALES TAX METROPOUCTBN COlR?CIL REGI0HBL”BREAKFAST MEETING DATES SET Manager Rosland explained that a letter had been received from Mary Anderson, Chair of the Metropolitan Council, that Hennepin County Regional Breakfast Meetings would be held June 25, and July 1, 1991, and encouraged attendance. *CTATnS PAID Motion was made by Member Rice and was seconded by Member Paulus to approve payment of the following claims as shown In detail on the Check Register dated 6/17/91 and consisting of 31 pages: General Fund $867,754.55, Communications $1,806.83, Art Center $3,313.67, Capital Fund $18,538.58, Swimming Pool Fund $8,921.99, Golf Course Fund $162,915.80, Recreation Center Fund $85,430.55, Gun Range Fund $575.64, Edinborough Park $35,569.90, Utility Fund $51,405.13, Storm Sewer Utility $846.47, Liquor Dispensary Fund $131,350.95, Construction Fund $625,530.37, IMP Bond Redemption #2 $38,625.00, TOTAL $2,032,585.43 and per pre-list dated 6/17/91 and consisting of 3 pages: General Fund $12,327.55, Art Center $191.40, Utili- Fund $1,653.32, TOTAL $14,172.27, and for confirmation of payment of the following claims as shown in detail on the Check Register dated 5/31/91 and consisting of 17 pages: General Fund $223,098.91, Art Center $2,090.03, Capital Fund $319,000.00, Swinnn€ng Pool Fund $11.52, Golf Course Fund $10,334.28, Recreation Center Fund $787.60, Gun Range Fund $91.20, Edinborough Park $382.31, Utility Fund $331.36, Liquor Dispensary Fund $309,242.56, TOTAL $865,369.77. Motion carried on rollcall vote - four ayes. There being no further business on the Council Agenda, Mayor Richards declared the meeting adjourned at 11:55 P.M. - City Clerk